MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by erlkonig | 2025-11-21 03:26:52+00:00
The general movement of UI paradigm has been from one tech to the next with a focus on backwards compat. Almost amusingly so at times, but this is how all the earlier users and use cases can most easily progress. E.g.

* hollerith cards and sundry + printer * printing teletype * dumb (video) terminal * smart (cursor addressable) terminal * images of smart terminals * images of smart terminals with color (businesses resisted color for years) * ... ?

And in the meantime we have an evolution of support for modelling things visually and working with more descriptive protocols - or even function-defining protocols to raise the abstraction chatting with the display server in realtime. In this, "abstracted" means something that can be sent over the network instead of using a local buffer. These are in a less strict order than foregoing...

* text, color plotters, VDST, and all that other old slow stuff * [skipping a bit up through bitmapped greyscale graphics] * bitmapped color graphics * abstracted 2D graphics (-> W and X) * abstracted 3D graphics (OpenGL + GLX) * dynamically client-extendable remote graphics servers (NeWS, mostly 2D) * ... ?

So here I am, waiting for the next stage in these. Hypothesizing that finally we'll get something with 3D abstracted, network graphics (display lists in GLX but accelerated with something like XCB?), where the primary display coördinate space is (x, y, x) instead of (x, y), where the client can push some code to the remote server and raise the abstraction on the fly, finally. Where maybe we'd be able to permission the objects in that space and share it among users live. Where the 2D apps would be inside the 3D space instead of the other way around. Something for the 2000s instead of familiar abilities provided in 1990.

But instead, Wayland. Wayland, which is not backwards compatible with X. Wayland, which is 2D at its heart. Wayland, another 1990 era graphics system with a super thin offering of features for actual end users (not devs) which come at substantial cost in lost X features. Wayland, which resists the one user doing things we've long thought of as normal - in the name of "security".

Wayland is not what I've been waiting for.
by camel_gopher | 2025-11-21 03:27:00+00:00
Nearly all time series databases store single value aggregations (think p95) over a time period. A select few store actual serialized distributions (Atlas from Netflix, Apica IronDB, some bespoke implementations). Latency tooling is sorely overlooked mostly because the good tooling is complex, and requires corresponding visualization tooling. Most of the vendors have some implementation of heat map or histogram visualization but either the math is wrong or the UI can’t handle a non trivial volume of samples. Unfortunately it’s been a race to the bottom for latency measurement tooling, with the users losing.

Source: I’ve done this a lot
by tylervigen | 2025-11-21 03:27:29+00:00
It only requires that one parent has enough free hours to assign coursework. They don't have to exit the workforce, and don't necessarily need to directly supervise learning (but of course some of this is necessary for K-5).

I think a lot of how homeschooling can work, along with much of median/lower household income life in general, is misunderstood.

Source: Was homeschooled by a mom who worked.
by 827a | 2025-11-21 03:28:55+00:00
My point is to state that one of two things must be true: Either IQ does not really measure Intelligence, or Intelligence (being the thing IQ measures or correlates to) isn't much of a desirable quality for agentic systems to have. I suspect its a mix. The people on the upper end of the IQ spectrum tend to lead wholly uninspiring lives; the 276 guy isn't the only example, fraud or not, there's a couple university professors with relatively average publishing history, a couple suicides, a couple wacko cult leaders, a couple self-help gurus... and the goat, Terrance Tao, he's up there, but its interesting how poorly the measure correlates with anything we'd describe as "success".

The apologists enter the chat and state "well, its because they're frauds or they're gaming the system" without an ounce of recognition that this is exactly what we're designing AI systems to do: Cheat the test. If you expect being able to pass intelligence evals as being a way to grow intelligence, well, I suspect that will work out just about as well as IQ tests do for identifying individuals capable of things like highly creative invention.
by awesome_dude | 2025-11-21 03:29:05+00:00
It looks (to me) like they're saying that the margin (amount that firms can charge clients less the cost of the employee's compensation package) is what's at stake.

As employees rise up the corporate ladder, their compensation packages increase, but the amount that the company can charge for that employee's work is limited (clients will be wanting to keep a certain margin for themselves too)
by amitav1 | 2025-11-21 03:29:15+00:00
TL;DR When workers start out, the firms know a lot more about their abilities than the clients do (they have an "information advantage") as the worker has very few ways through which to prove their abilites. Over time, though, as the employee's public performance increases (through successful cases, good investments, etc.) the information advantage the firm has becomes lower. Eventually, the firm lets the employee go in order because the worker now has proof of their competencies that they can show to clients to demand higher wages directly.
by nvahalik | 2025-11-21 03:30:34+00:00
You're right. It's _one_ of the prime places.

I don't know a single homeschooler that sits at home all day long. They work in family businesses, participate in bands, sports, and co-ops. Many belong to churches where families come from all different strata: our church has surgeons, line cooks, programmers, self-employed handymen, disabled vets. They interact with everyone—including kids. They do things like "kid markets" where they have a business. They watch their parents learn how the house works and how to manage finances.

There is no forced engagement—in fact the peer pressure is often completely gone. They are in an environment (their family) where they are much freer to be themselves.
by mbreese | 2025-11-21 03:31:11+00:00
It feels like you're telling me that I'm holding my phone wrong.

I don't like sourcing things into my environment. I've worked this way for years. I think the idea of 'activating' and 'deactivating' an environment is an anti-pattern. But I also work on HPC clusters where all of the configuration about paths is handled by the environment. Because of this, I've learned the hard way that for my workflows, it's far too easy to have the wrong environment loaded with venvs and modules that it's often better to keep things explicitly defined. I don't like magic, so I explicitly state which venv my code (or occasionally other people's code) is loading from.

I sometimes will have to run multiple programs (that have their own venvs) and pipe data between them. If I have to source and deactivate different venvs for each tool, it just doesn't work right.

I think that's part of the power of virtualenv as a tool -- it's flexible in how it works. I can still use my explicit workflows with the same tooling as everyone else, and you can source your environments and keep happily coding along. For me, that's why I keep using them...
by Jensson | 2025-11-21 03:31:30+00:00
> An LLM is a Markov process if you include its entire state, but that's a pretty degenerate definition.

Not any more degenerate than a multi word bag of words markov chain, its exactly the same concept: you input a context of words / tokens and get a new word / token, the things you mention there are just optimizations around that abstraction.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-11-21 03:32:10+00:00
Almost but not quite.

For most people, they never directly interact with government regulations because somebody else does it. They work for a large corporation and then the corporation requires them to do wasteful or nonsensical things which they ascribe to management incompetence, but it's really because the corporation's lawyers made it a requirement.

Then there are the people who are actually doing the compliance paperwork, but they don't object because it's the thing that pays their salary. Moreover, it's their occupation so all the time required to figure out how to do it is now a sunk cost for them and the last thing they want is to get rid of it and make all that time they invested worthless.

The people who object are the people trying to start a new business, because nobody is paying them to do things that don't make sense and all they want is to get on with what they're actually trying to accomplish instead of paying one fee after another or waiting on unaccountable regulators who have no reason to say no to something but still take excruciatingly long to say yes.
by sometimes_all | 2025-11-21 03:32:28+00:00
You might be interested to know your comment caused Gemini 3 to go meta on this question. This is what I found in its thinking:

``` Evaluating Date Discrepancies

I've just uncovered a significant discrepancy: a "Hacker News" result flags a date error originating from the very format of parenthetical dates. The system appears to be misinterpreting these, leading to demonstrably false information. This warrants further investigation to understand the root cause and ensure data integrity.

Analyzing Date Ambiguity

I'm now grappling with the user's date. The Hacker News comment suggests the user's prompt might be flawed, as it contradicts the actual date of an event I've indexed. Specifically, the conference referenced occurred in October 2024, not September 2025 as the prompt implies. This leads me to question the user's understanding of the timeline or if the prompt refers to an unrelated event in September 2025. This inconsistency demands further clarification.

...

Investigating User Prompt Intent

I've just realized that the Hacker News snippet reveals this might be a specific problematic test prompt. My strategy is to focus on the October 2024 forum, a strong match, organized by Kattia Cambronero and CCT. I'll verify if there was a 2025 event, but the 2024 event fits the described "crisis" and "NGO coordination". If the user says "approx Sept 2025," they likely mean a recent event. ```
by popalchemist | 2025-11-21 03:32:34+00:00
With regard to Cartman, that critique is valid. With regard to Calvin, he is there to be the foil to Hobbes, who dispenses the wisdom. Calvin and Hobbes is a transmission of wisdom. Moreso in the later years, admittedly, but even early on. There is such a thing as the fool archetype. Frodo in LOTR, Emmet in the LEGO movie, and so on. These characters who know nothing, and are demonstrably unfit for the tasks that life demands of them, are not meant to be admired for their ignorance, rather it is their ignorance that allows the writer to send them on a journey to learn a lesson that is valuable to the audience. This is a bit harder to pinpoint in Calvin and Hobbes due to the episodic nature of a weekly strip, where the plot resets each time and the punchline almost invariably involves Calvin reverting to some stubborn point of view or refusing to learn a lesson. Yet if you read the works from beginning to end in the anthology, you can see a progression in both Calvin's attitude and the subject matter on Watterson's mind. The theme is maturation. To critique Calvin for being all that you said is to miss the point. Which, if you were a child reading them at the time (as I was!) nobody can blame you for. It might have been recieved better if your parents had been party to the reading of the strips, so they could bring forward the subtext. But anyway, it is not accurate to say that Calvin and Hobbes glorifies the anti-hero, sarcastic, childishness. Calvin is constantly lampooned and presented as being the cause of his own suffering for refusing to learn.
by austin-cheney | 2025-11-21 03:32:38+00:00
That misses the point. There is a massive difference between writing code and actually learning to write an application. When you talk about the best way you completely miss the point because it implies there is only one best way.

When you are less restricted you can let the business requirements drive the design of the application. With a large framework the framework determines the application’s requirements. There was an article on the front page yesterday about this very thing regarding Zig compared to React.
by inkyoto | 2025-11-21 03:33:07+00:00
Okta and auth0 are, fundamentally, two distinct products – conceived, designed, and engineered by entirely separate entities.

auth0, as a product, distinguished itself with a modern, streamlined architecture and a commendable focus on developer experience. As an organisation, auth0 further cemented its reputation through the publication of a consistently high-calibre technical blog. Its content goes deeply into advanced subjects such as fine-grained API access control via OIDC scopes, RBAC, ABAC and LBAC models – a level of discourse rare amongst vendors in this space.

It was, therefore, something of a jolt – though in retrospect, not entirely unexpected – when Okta acquired auth0 in 2021. Whether this move was intended to subsume a superior product under the mediocrity of its own offering or to force a consolidation of the two remains speculative. As for the fate of the auth0 product itself, I must admit I am not in possession of definitive information – though history offers little comfort when innovation is placed under the heel of corporate, IPO driven strategy.
by txrx0000 | 2025-11-21 03:33:15+00:00
There's no single mastermind. This current wave of authoritarianism around the world is a consequence of not designing the Internet with democratic principles in mind. Online content discovery and moderation mechanisms are centralized and authoritarian in nature. And since most communication nowadays happens on the Internet on large platforms with millions of users (this is especially true after smartphones and social media were invented), the structure of human society in the real world is mirroring the Internet.

This can be solved, though. We have to move moderation and ranking mechanisms to the client-side, especially for search engines and social media. Each person should be able to decide what they post and see, but not what anyone else posts or sees.
by linguae | 2025-11-21 03:33:59+00:00
I think the hard part about the Linux desktop ecosystem and its development pattern is the cobbled-up-parts nature of the system, where different teams and individuals work on different subsystems with no higher leadership directing how all of these parts should be assembled to create a cohesive whole. We have a situation where GUI applications depended on X.org, yet the X.org developers didn't want to work on X.org any more. If the desktop Linux ecosystem were more like FreeBSD in the sense that FreeBSD has control over both the kernel and its bundled userland, there'd be a clearer transition away from X.org since X.org would have been owned by the overall Linux project. However, that's not how development in the Linux ecosystem works, and what we ended up with is a very messy, dragged-out transition from X to Wayland, complete with competing compositors.

Bazaar-style development seems to work for command-line tools, but I don't think it works well for a coherent desktop experience. We've had so much fragmentation, from KDE/Qt vs GNOME/GTK, to now X11 vs Wayland. Even X11 itself didn't come from the bazaar, but rather from MIT, DEC, and IBM (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Window_System).
by jmyeet | 2025-11-21 03:35:25+00:00
I think Blue Origin's biggest problem is they don't currently have a planned or real Falcon 9 competitor.

These expected and incremental updates (to a years late system that still needs to be proven) are putting the payload capacity in the Falcon Heavy range and there's roughly 1 Falcon Heavy launch per year.

There are over 100 Falcon 9 launches per year. Yes a bunch are Starlink so you can exclude those when estimating demand from external customers but the point remains that there isn't currently a commercial demand for bigger payloads and/or higher orbits than what Falcon 9 can do.

SpaceX has the same problem: Starship is a superheavy lifter where Falcon Heavy has little demand and Starship is even bigger. At least SpaceX has Starlink as induced demand. Blue Origin doesn't.

Defenders will argue the greater volume and payload weights will create new possibilities because payloads can only be designed for available launch systems but satellites don't really seem to be getting any bigger and there are only so many geosynchronous military payloadcs and interplanetary probes that need to be launched.
by rramadass | 2025-11-21 03:35:39+00:00
A voice of sanity. The submitted article has zero meaningful content.

This comment i posted in an earlier thread rehashing Inheritance vs. Composition for the gazillionth time is highly relevant here - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45943135

OOD/OOP has not gone away, has not shifted etc. but is alive and well; just packaged under different looking gloss. The meta-principles behind it are fundamental to large scale systems development, namely; Separation-Of-Concerns, Modularization, Reuse and Information-Hiding.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-11-21 03:35:55+00:00
> Depending where that is one could read it as "fuck you, you haven't bribed us enough".

This is often fully formalized, i.e. you're not bribing a specific government official, instead you're paying a huge certification fee hundreds of times because it's a source of revenue generation for the government and whoever passed the bill gave zero fucks that it's a heavily regressive tax on new and small businesses.
by Fischgericht | 2025-11-21 03:36:07+00:00
I assume that someone has been mighty proud about the website. But I am sorry, it is terrible. Loading my "experience" took over a minute. An my "experience" is not even cached, it was loaded from scratch on the second visit.

Also, while it looks visually stunning, it is really not helping much introducing the product. I find it rather confusing, really.

The first thing I noticed - when you searched for "upcycling", all results that you have shown hat the exact match keyword "upcyling" in their filename. If this is just a text grep, then the product is redundant: "everything" exists.

In case you really would get results for "upcycling" based on an internal LLM-based summary of disk content, that would be great - but your live demo does not show that.

Also, later down my "experience" you try to show how user input is handled. But as the "experience" is fixed size and can not be zoomed in, it is impossible to read any of the blurry text.

Again, I understand that this "experience" looks impressive. But it is a complete distraction and does not help at all to introduce your product.

I spent 5 minutes looking at this, one of that looking at a loading spinner like it's 2005 again, and I have no clue what your USP is.

And to be honest: Your HN post here also is not helping. Think "Dropbox + NotebookLM + Perplexity" - what? That makes no sense. It is a complete distraction. Explain what your product/service is, what it's USP is, and what value it provides to me.

Instead after a wall of text you are explaining me that one can select files by clicking on them.
by protocolture | 2025-11-21 03:36:26+00:00
Theres a lot of that. Its just people need a first exposure to the thing to realise its terrible. Like the other commenter says, most people are completely shielded.

I know a few local people who have only been impacted for the first time by regulations preventing the sale of vapes, and local regulations preventing the resale of used tyres to motorsport enthusiasts. Its the first spark for a lot of people.
by tjwebbnorfolk | 2025-11-21 03:37:35+00:00
Even the anti-government types don't want big companies pouring cyanide in the river they fish in.

I think you're continuing to mischaracterize the other position in order to feel like there's some daylight between you and the "anarcho-capitalists". If you stop erecting strawmen, you might find you agree on more than you think.
by esafak | 2025-11-21 03:38:41+00:00
It feels like an LLM wrapper in search of a problem. Cloud search plus already exists: https://www.glean.com/product/workplace-search-ai

I do not find the idea of bringing my data to your search engine attractive. The data should stay put and you should merely index it.

And since LLMs let you generate things, you also have a feature to do that. But who is going to want to create things -- armed with only a text prompt -- while they are searching? Rarely have I wanted to combine images like in your demo. And on the rare occasion I did -- like today! -- I used a GUI to do it in. I suppose creatives would find this feature more.
by aetherspawn | 2025-11-21 03:39:41+00:00
The issue is that these power banks are often cheapo corporate gifts or bought out of vending machines, catering to the cheapest possible price and not certified to anything.

In this case they have crappy BMS that doesn’t have thermal sensors or even make sure the cells are balanced during charging, and no mechanical integrity so the cell can just get crushed and explode.

The solution is to require all consumer electronics with batteries to be certified (if carried on a plane or in the post), and part of that certification process needs to be mechanical; including crushing with normal levels of in-transit forces, and electrical testing; including charging the device at a high temperature.
by SchemaLoad | 2025-11-21 03:40:04+00:00
Linux software is notorious for spewing crap all over the user's home directory. Delete everything inside your /home/name and see how well the system still works. On iOS/iPadOS nothing happens other than not having the documents you saved in there.

I'm not sure there even is a good place where programs can store their internal system files without requiring root other than mixed in with the user Home.
by rl3 | 2025-11-21 03:40:21+00:00
>But which was it? Was “aviation instrumental in containing the disaster” ...

I just naïvely assumed dumping 5,000 tons of material over a burning reactor probably did help significantly given the fire went out around days 10-12.

In retrospect, that assumption appears incorrect despite being congruent with the narrative of virtually every documentary I saw on Chernobyl in the late 90s/early 2000s:

"But I'm surprised that at Vienna they would have claimed that the core was smothered. It turns out, at least from my investigations, that the core froze by itself, solidified by itself, and stopped releasing." [0] (1994)

I was even able to find some research suggesting the aerial drops acted as an insulator, worsening subsequent radiation releases. At least they covered the glowing red target, which was thought to be a piece of the core ejected from the explosion and not the core itself as originally thought.

The divers at least appear to have saved the day from complete catastrophe, not to detract from the air crews' heroism.[1]

[0] https://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=94-P13-000...

[1] https://www.history.co.uk/article/the-real-story-of-the-cher...
by vunderba | 2025-11-21 03:40:28+00:00
Alright I think it's time to concede defeat! Seedream has been summarily demoted to a failure and I've added in the following minimum passing criteria to that particular test:

- The giraffe's neck should be noticeably shorter than in the original image, while still maintaining a natural appearance.

- The final image cannot be accomplished by simply cropping out the neck or using perspective changes.