MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by landr0id | 2025-11-30 21:28:36+00:00
I read the same complaint about the language from people I follow who love and actively promote Nix. So it's not just you.

Sorry for adding to your frustration of "just follow what someone else did" but I recently went all-in on managing my Mac (programs, dotfiles, configs, etc) via Nix* when setting up a new machine recently. https://github.com/landaire/config/tree/main/modules

*Nix + homebrew, mostly because Homebrew packages more macOS applications.
by dayjah | 2025-11-30 21:29:05+00:00
This is all great feedback, thanks!

I got here through devenv, I was fully bought in on its proposal and once I found its edges I started peeking under the covers to understand how it worked.

At that point I was pretty deep in mise for everything that wasn’t using devenv. This perhaps help frame why I see them solving the same problem.

I definitely had my “aha!” and ditched mise because nix seemed it had solved my problems. But now, in a new gig, I’m running into lots of edge cases that mise could solve at the drop of a hat and nix (/ my poor understanding of the fundamentals) struggles with.

So, with that all said, I suppose my point is that you get a lot of overlap between the two, and mise is easier to use and get buy-in on. There are certainly elements I find appealing about nix which mise doesn’t touch (promise of repeatable builds, the entire package ecosystem, etc), however.
by skhameneh | 2025-11-30 21:29:24+00:00
At first glance, it appears to have lower negative pressure and a much higher filter surface area than most air purifiers.

AFAIK PC fans are designed to move air at low pressure while quality air purifiers are designed to handle more pressure.

Other than that, it’s a neat writeup. Would like to see a follow-up with static pressure considerations.
by vunderba | 2025-11-30 21:29:31+00:00
From the article:

> We recommend keeping task-specific instructions in separate markdown files with self-descriptive names somewhere in your project. Then, in your CLAUDE.md file, you can include a list of these files with a brief description of each, and instruct Claude to decide which (if any) are relevant and to read them before it starts working.

I've been doing this since the early days of agentic coding though I've always personally referred to it as the Table-of-Contents approach to keep the context window relatively streamlined. Here's a snippet of my CLAUDE.md file that demonstrates this approach:

# Documentation References - When adding CSS, refer to: docs/ADDING_CSS.md - When adding assets, refer to: docs/ADDING_ASSETS.md - When working with user data, refer to: docs/STORAGE_MANAGER.md

Full CLAUDE.md file for reference:

https://gist.github.com/scpedicini/179626cfb022452bb39eff10b...
by Arainach | 2025-11-30 21:29:32+00:00
When full disclosure of the truth means that people will panic and cause bigger harms, you have to take the good of society into consideration.

"Ducking and covering" isn't going to do anything in a nuclear strike, but if telling people that it will do something means they stay calm and don't go into a panic stockpiling guns and food (or abandoning all civilized principles altogether in a nihilistic fit), then telling them that is justified.
by staticassertion | 2025-11-30 21:29:38+00:00
SELinux and Apparmor are typically configured by admins. They require root privileges and are designed with human interfaces. It is certainly atypical for a program to say "hey kernel, apply this apparmor profile to me" and they're not designed for incrementally dropping rights either.

On Windows and MacOS programs are free to sandbox themselves programmatically and without privileges. Linux is the odd one out, basically every way of reducing your privileges programmatically requires already being root or at least having an admin preconfigure the system in a way that would allow it.
Show HN: Tracktrip, Travel Expense Tracker
by fuegoio | 2025-11-30 21:29:58+00:00
Hello HN!

I'm a European traveler, and during my last 6 months of travel I created an app to keep track of my expenses. I made it open-source and started to build a website and a documentation for other people to use it!

It's a fairly simple PWA that you can install on mobile that can help you set a budget, keep track of expenses and analyse what you spend.

Thanks for any feedback and keep traveling guys!
by bitbasher | 2025-11-30 21:30:05+00:00
I think you're on the right track-- it's alright to want to create and for your creations to be enjoyed by others (why else would one create?).

Personally, I create and share via my own domain. I take full ownership of what I share and how I share it. There's less of a chance people "stumble" upon it, but the few who do enjoy it.
by dwaltrip | 2025-11-30 21:30:24+00:00
Everything has always been "shit"...

Things might be shit in interesting and scary new ways, but there is no such thing as "the good ole days". Our mind wants to believe that things could go back to "how they used to be", "when it was better" but it's a fantasy.

It's an inability to face the cognitive dissonance and accept things as they are -- which is different than what we wanted! Boo hoo.

We all do this constantly everyday, some more than others :)

That said, humans are quite good at getting by even when things are shit. We've been doing it for untold eons.

Perhaps the only thing more impressive is how good we are at complaining about it all! Heh.
by filoleg | 2025-11-30 21:30:36+00:00
> It reminds me of people in BigTech that don’t sell their RSUs as soon as they vest and diversify. I make just as much now in cash as I did in BigTech with the difference being 40% was in RSUs. Why would I keep 40% of my income in AMZN any more than I would take 40% of my cash income and put in AMZN?

I mean, I didn't sell my RSUs as soon as they vested, because I worked for a BigTech company that I believed was on the upswing, and I was willing to take that risk of not selling.

Sure, it is an equivalent of buying those shares on your own, but again, it still felt way safer (and way more flexible/liquid, as I could sell my shares at any moment) to me than working at a startup with extremely illiquid equity. And I was already pretty much broke with no safety net (my internship over the summer back then made me more than my entire family combined earned in ~6 months; this is not an internship flex, there were plenty that paid more, this is just to illustrate the gap between some bigtech internship salaries and what my family was making), so I was willing to take the risk.

The risk ended up paying off, and that BigTech company went from ~$60/share to $300+/share in barely 5 years, turning my initial stock grant into a lifechanging amount for someone in my position. No, it isn't even close to being enough to buy a house outright or retire, but it is my (and my family's) safety net now. I can afford to help my sister pay rent with zero "can i actually afford it" thought in my mind.

TLDR: yes, not diversifying is risky. However, you cannot make lifechanging money without taking risks, whether it is through joining a promising startup or not diversifying your investments or anything else. I am not advocating anyone to do what I did, as I agree with you that selling RSUs on vest is the most safe option. There are no totally safe options for making lifechanging (whatever that means for you) amounts of money, so you gotta pick your poison, if that's something you want. For me personally, making bigtech salary at a company that I believed was on the upswing (and saving a good amount of it), while keeping all vested RSUs in my account (and selling no more than 5% of it each year), was an acceptable level of risk (that I wouldn't regret doing, even if the price of those shares ended up dying significantly).
by integralid | 2025-11-30 21:30:39+00:00
>It's probably an unpopular stance, but I've never done Advent of Code for the competitive aspect

Is this an unpopular stance? Out of a dozen people I know that did/do AoC every year, only one was trying to compete. Everyone else did it for fun, to learn new languages or concepts, to practice coding, etc.

Maybe it helps that, because of timezones, in Europe you need to be really dedicated to play for a win.
by RealityVoid | 2025-11-30 21:30:48+00:00
I have less trust in their good intentions. I think OEM's want to lock down their platforms in order to squeeze extra revenue streams. And I tend to be quite charitable with my interpretations.

As an aside, I checked out your GitHub. Cool projects, the vag flashing tool looks super useful, might actually give it a spin in sive development projects.
by measurablefunc | 2025-11-30 21:32:20+00:00
What's alien about arithmetic? People invented it. Same w/ computers. These are all human inventions. There is nothing alien about them. Suggesting that people think of human inventions as if they were alien artifacts does not empower or enable anyone to get a better handle on how to properly utilize these software artifacts. The guruism in AI is not helpful & Karpathy is not helping here by adopting imprecise language & spreading it to his followers on social media.

If you don't understand how AI works then you should learn how to put together a simple neural network. There are plenty of tutorials & books that anyone can learn from by investing no more than an hour or two every day or every other day.
by alexpotato | 2025-11-30 21:33:23+00:00
Highly recommend reading Atul Gawande's "Checklist Manifesto" [0] if you are interested in the operational results of adding something like checklists to medical care.

Case in point: requiring everyone in the operating room to say their name, specialty and reason for the operation (and their part in it).

You might ask why the above is necessary?

Well:

- everyone is wearing a mask, cap and possibly glasses which makes them hard to recognize

- the patient is often draped in such a way that you can't tell who they are

- many Operating Rooms(ORs) look the same

- there are apparently COUNTLESS stories of medical personnel going into the wrong OR and not realizing until the surgery has started

Another fascinating point about checklists since the OP article mentions doctors vs nurses: checklists give nurses the power to challenge doctors. e.g. "Dr, I believe the next step on the checklist we agreed on is to do X".

If you have no checklist, the Dr can just say "No, we don't need that, I know what I'm doing. Shut up, Nurse!" (this is a real example from the book btw).

He also has an article comparing the Cheesecake Factory to health care that I also highly recommend [1]

0 - https://amzn.to/3KyLK1x

1 - https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/08/13/big-med
by hnlmorg | 2025-11-30 21:33:54+00:00
> There is no secure notion of "correctly" that goes both directly against specs and de facto standards.

That's clearly not true. You're now just exaggerating to make a point.

> I am struggling to even imagine how one could make an L7 balancer that should take into account possibilities that someone would go against HTTP spec and still get their request served securely and timely

You don't need application-layer support to load balance HTTP traffic securely and timely.

> Running PostgreSQL on any non-privileged port is a feature, not a deviation from a standard. If you want to run PostgreSQL on a port under 1024 now that would be security vulnerability as it requires root access.

I didn't say PostgreSQL listening port was a standard. I was using that as an example to show the range of different risk appetites I've worked to.

Though I would argue that PostgreSQL has a de facto standard port number. And thus by your own reasoning, running that on a different port would be "insecure" - which clearly is BS (as in this rebuttal). Hence why I called your "de facto" comment an exaggeration.

> There is no reason to "build up a risk assessment and judge each deviation on its own merit" unless it is an unavoidable technical limitation.

...but we are talking about this as a theoretical, unavoidable technical limitation. At no point was anyone suggesting this should be the normal way to send GET requests.

Hence why i said you're looking at this far too black and white.

My point was just that it is technically possible when you said it wasn't. But "technically possible" != "sensible idea under normal conditions"
by soulofmischief | 2025-11-30 21:34:47+00:00
I'm not sure how I am supposed to interpret your comment, what did you mean by that?

My aim was to start a positive dialogue with zppln about why the book didn't land with him or why it was off-putting. I'm happy to discuss it with you as well, but if your comment was just meant to be negative then I'll pass.
by smt88 | 2025-11-30 21:35:13+00:00
You're trying to make it sound like a corporation's right to force AI on us is equivalent to an individual's right to speech, which is idiotic in its face. But I'd also point out that speech is regulated in the US, so you're still not making the point you think you're making.

And as far as I'm concerned, as long as Google and Apple have a monopoly on smartphone software, they should be regulated into the ground. Consumers have no alternatives, especially if they have a job.
by reactordev | 2025-11-30 21:35:28+00:00
This is the current conundrum. It’s perfectly legal (and politically recommended) to support this genocidal regime in the name of some guy who lived and died 2000 years ago. Can’t have the dark skinned terrorists perform their cult like rituals on the floor of their beloved sacred holy sites (shared by all three might I add).

It’s faith-based warfare disguised as a terrorist fight and the AI is in full force flooding feeds of aid when the reality is it’s a god damn wasteland.
by m463 | 2025-11-30 21:35:46+00:00
I tried this with a wifi setup on a car charger. I connected a 50-ohm dummy load in place of the antenna using the mmcx connector.

It didn't work - there was an on-module antenna that it switched to. Might not have worked as well, but it did work and the wifi access point still showed up.

On the other hand, some cars have a self-contained telematics module like you said and you can just unpower the whole thing.

I remember looking at a ford owners manual for a 2019. The fusebox section had a fuse with description "Telematics control unit - modem." I assume you can just pull that fuse.
by smokel | 2025-11-30 21:35:46+00:00
For those who think this is a typo, uiua [1] (pronounced "wee-wuh") is a stack-based array programming language.

I solved a few problems with it last year, and it is amazing how compact the solutions are. It also messes with your head, and the community surrounding it is interesting. Highly recommended.

[1] https://www.uiua.org/
by MinimalAction | 2025-11-30 21:35:48+00:00
I have heard this ever so often that kids (read society) will figure it out and this-is-all-part-of-the-evolution song. Not to be a pessimistic parade on this outlook, but this attitude is not helpful at all. It feels as if the burden of proof is left on someone who has no mental model of this emerging world to figure their livelihood on.

Sure, people say this is how they felt in their teens too, but the wealth inequality now makes many avenues of income less worthwhile.

Kids might still figure out after all; but do not make it sound as if it is no big deal.
by integralid | 2025-11-30 21:36:47+00:00
Why is that strange? Competitive programming, as the name suggests, is about competing. If the rules allow that, not using LLM is actually more like running tour de France.

If the rules don't allow that and yet people do then well, you need online qualifiers and then onsite finals to pick the real winners. Which was already necessary, because there are many other ways to cheat (like having more people than allowed in the team).
by electroly | 2025-11-30 21:36:57+00:00
I use MCP for two things only:

- My own "execute bash command" tool, adding output pagination, forcing the agent to choose a working directory, and working around some Cursor bugs on Windows. This avoids context explosion when a command unexpectedly returns a huge amount of text, and avoids a common agent failure mode where it misunderstands what directory it is currently in.

- SQL command execution. This can be done perfectly fine with "execute bash command" but the agent struggles to correctly encode multi-line SQL queries on the command line. You can force it to write a file, but then that's two MCP tool calls (write file, execute command) which increases the chances that it goofs it up. I simply accept an unencoded, multi-line SQL query directly via the MCP tool and encode it myself. This, again, is simply avoiding a common failure mode in the built-in tools.

I haven't needed a third tool, and if the built-in tools were better I wouldn't have needed these two, either. Everything else I've ever needed has been a bash script that both the agent and I can run, explained in the agent's global rules. It's really unclear to me what other use case I might encounter that would be better as MCP.

In theory I can see that an MCP server only launches once and is persistent across many requests, whereas bash scripts are one-and-done. Perhaps some use case requires a lot of up-front loading that would need to be redone for every tool call if it were a bash script. Or perhaps there are complex interactions across multiple tool calls where state must be kept in memory and writing to disk is not an option. But I have not yet encountered anything like this.
by LogicFailsMe | 2025-11-30 21:37:12+00:00
The difference was that Google Plus was actually kind of cool. I'm not excusing them shoving it down your throat, but at least it was well designed.

Most of the AI efforts currently represent misadventures in software design at a time when my Fitbit charge can't even play nice with my pixel 7 phone. How does that even happen?
by alexfoo | 2025-11-30 21:37:36+00:00
Looking forward to it but also sad that it is "only" 12 puzzles, but I completely respect Eric's decision to scale it back.

I've got 500 stars (i.e. I've completed every day of all 10 previous years) but not always on the day the puzzles were available, probably 430/500 on the day. (I should say I find the vast majority of AoC relatively easy as I've got a strong grounding in both Maths and Comp Sci.)

First of all I only found out about AoC in 2017 and so I did 2015 and 2016 retrospectively.

Secondly I can keep up with the time commitments required up until about the 22nd-24th (which is when I usually stop working for Christmas). From then time with my wife/kids takes precedence. I'll usually wrap up the last bits sometime from the 27th onwards.

I've never concerned myself with the pointy end of the leaderboards due to timezones as the new puzzles appear at 5am local time for me and I've no desire to be awake at that time if I can avoid it, certainly not for 25 days straight. I expect that's true of a large percentage of people participating in AoC too.

My simple aim every day is that my rank for solving part 2 of a day is considerably lower than my rank for solving part 1.

(To be clear, even if I was up and firing at 5am my time every day I doubt I could consistently get a top 100 rank. I've got ten or so 300-1000 ranks by starting ~2 hours later but that's about it. Props to the people who can consistently appear in the top 100. I also start most days from scratch whilst many people competing for the top 100 have lots of pre-written code to parse things or perform the common algorithms.)

I also use the puzzles to keep me on my toes in terms of programming and I've completed every day in one of Perl, C or Go and I've gone back and produced solutions in all 3 of those for most days. Plus some random days can be done easily on the command-line piping things through awk, sed, sort, grep, and the like.

The point of AoC is that everyone is free to take whatever they want from it.

Some use it to learn a new programming language. Some use it to learn their first language and only get a few days into it. Some use it to make videos to help others on how to program in a specific language. Some use it to learn how/when to use structures like arrays, hashes/maps, red-black trees, etc, and then how/when to use classic Comp Sci algorithms like A* or SAT solvers, Djikstra's, etc all the way to some random esoteric things like Andrew's monotone chain convex hull algorithm for calculating the perimeter of a convex hull. There are also the mathsy type problems often involving Chinese Remainder Theorem and/or some variation of finite fields.

My main goal is to come up with code that is easy to follow and performs well as a general solution rather than overly specific to my individual input. I've also solved most years with a sub 1 second total runtime (per year, so each day averages less than 40msec runtime).

Anyway, roll on tomorrow. I'll get to the day 1 problem once I've got my kid up and out the door to go to school as that's my immediate priority.
by jbreckmckye | 2025-11-30 21:39:09+00:00
> David was successfully treated in this way: his motivation levels went back up after taking a drug that stimulates dopamine receptors in the brain. Because of this, he was able to get a new job, become independent and even find a partner

I've always wanted to hear the stories of patients like David. What happens when you can tell your family and friends - I'm not a screwup, this has a physical cause? How do people interact with you who've previously only seen you in your decline?

A long time ago I read an account by a financial journalist who'd had some kind of brain injury and temporary lost his faculties. It damaged his professional relationships and the implication was, most of his former colleagues remained unduly sceptical - even after years of normal functioning.
by gorgoiler | 2025-11-30 21:40:02+00:00
Lots of things in life seem to be the majority having to go along with the decisions of the minority. I remember in 2012 when Facebook put white chevrons for previous- and next-photo in the web photo gallery product and thinking how this one product decision by a handful of punks has now been foisted on the world. At the time I was really into putting my photography on FB and, somewhat pretentiously, it really pissed me off to start having UI elements stuck on it!

Car dashboards without buttons, TVs sold with 3D glasses (remember that phase?), material then flat design, larger and larger phones: the list is embarrasing to type because it feels like such a stereotypical nerd complaint list. I think it’s true though — the tech PMs are autocrats and have such a bizarrely outsized impact on our lives.

And now with AI, too. I just interacted with duck.ai, duck duck go’s stab at a bot. I long for a little more conservatism.
by atleastoptimal | 2025-11-30 21:40:12+00:00
Boomers in the manager class love AI because it sells the promise of what they've longed for for decades: a perfect servant that produces value with no salary, no need for breaks, no pushback, no workers comp suits, etc.

The thing is, AI did suck in 2023, and even in 2024, but recently the best AI models are veering into not sucking territory, which when you look at it from a distance makes sense, eventually if you throw the smartest researchers on the planet and billions of dollars at a problem, something eventually will give and the wheels will start turning.

There is a strange blindness many people have on here, a steadfast belief that AI just will just never end up working or always be a scam, but the massive capex on AI now is predicated on the eventual turning of the fledgling LLM's into self-adaptive systems that can manage any cognitive task better than a human. I don't see how the improvements we've seen over the past few years in AI aren't surely heading in that direction.