MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by toast0 | 2025-11-19 01:12:29+00:00
> American's think it is explicitly fair, that our system makes sure people from all over the world come and join us, not just immigration dominated by the highest populous countries.

I'm an American, and I don't understand how it is explicitly fair that India and China with areas of very large and populations of very large have the same immigration caps as Belize. Especially when something happens and Sudan becomes Sudan and South Sudan and the same people and the same area now have twice the cap; how is that explicitly fair? If India reorganized as the Union of Indian Republics (which I hope is not an offensive hypothetical name), where each state became a full country with an ISO-2 code and an ITU country code, would it be fair that each of the 36 member states have the same cap as any other country? Also, I'm not sure why the overall caps haven't changed since 1990. It feels like they should be indexed to something.

I think this version of quotas/caps is better than the previous version, but that doesn't make it explicitly fair.

I would be interested in knowing what the priority dates would look like if we adjusted the overall caps every ten years after the census to some percentage of overall US population (the 1990 cap was set at approximately 0.3%) or annually based on estimates works too, and also adjusting up the per country caps a bit too.
by mapontosevenths | 2025-11-19 01:13:16+00:00
Your implied theory only applies to actual free market capitalism.

Most/many CEO's don't get the gig thanks to an efficient market or being the best. There are others equally or better qualified who would do the job for much less.

The typical justification for their high salaries is that it encourages the rest of the executives to buck harder for the role. In practice, far less pay could achieve that goal.
by windexh8er | 2025-11-19 01:13:55+00:00
If we've learned anything so far it's that the parlor tricks of one-shot efficacy only gets you so far. Drill into anything relatively complex with a few hundred thousand tokens of context and the models all start to fall apart roughly the same. Even when I've used Sonnet 4.5 with 1M token context the model starts to flake out and get confused with a codebase of less than 10k LoC. Everyone seems to keep claiming these huge leaps and bounds, but I really have to wonder how many of these are just shilling for their corporate overlord. I asked Gemini 3 to solve a simple, yet not well documented problem in Home Assistant this evening. All it would take is 3-5 lines of YAML. The model failed miserably. I think we're all still safe.
by mercnz | 2025-11-19 01:14:08+00:00
i think that is data rather than code which is where it falls short, in a way you need stringent code and more safeguarded code; it's like if everyone sends you 64k posts as that's all your proxy layer lets in, someone checked sending 128kb and it gave an error before reaching your app - and then someone sends 128kb and the proxy layer has changed - and your app crashes as it was more than 64kb and your app had an assert against that. to actually track issues with erraneous data that overflows well and stuff isn't so much code test but more like fuzz testing, brute force testing etc. which i think people should do; but that's more like we need strong test networks, and also those test networks may need to be more internet like to reflect real issues too, so the whole testing infrastructure in itself becomes difficult to get right - like they have their own tunneling system etc, they could segregate some of their servers and make a test system with better error diagnosis etc potentially. but to my mind, if they had better error propogation back that really identified what was happening and where then that would be a lot better in general. sure, start doing that on a test network. this is something i've beeen tihnking about in general - i made a simple rpc system for being able to send real time rust tracing logs (it allows to just use the normal tracing framework and use a thin rpc layer) back from multiple end servers but that's mostly for granular debugging. i've never quite understood why systems like systemd-journald aren't more network centric when they're going to be big and complex kitchensink approaches - apparently there's dbus support, but to my mind something inbetween debugging level of code and warning/info. like even if it's doing things like 1/20 of log info it's too much volume if things like large files getting close to limits is increasing etc and we can see this as things run, and can see if it's localised or common etc it'd help have more resilient systems. something may already exist in this line but i didn't come across anything in a reasonably passive way - i mean there's debugging tools like dtrace etc that have been around for ages.
by Defletter | 2025-11-19 01:14:11+00:00
You keep repeating that Core has no rights to that data, which is true, but it's a refutation to an argument no-one in this thread has made. What we're saying is that Rebble has no rights to that data either.

Rebble's theft of that data was 'allowed' in the same way that Nickelback allow those "look at this graph" memes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7aqZyRuP1Q): it's copyright infringement but they don't care so they don't enforce their rights. It's not like trademarks with its use-it-or-lose-it clause. What I'm claiming here is that people who made apps and watch faces for Pebble didn't care (assuming they knew at all) because it was for preservation purposes.

But now that Rebble is hoarding it to themselves, to the exclusion of Core, a revived Pebble company, those copyright holders may become less willing to tolerate the copyright infringement. And let's be clear: their rights do not begin and end with just getting it taken down.
by scoofy | 2025-11-19 01:14:53+00:00
So, is this what we are doing? Downvoting and non sequiturs that amount to deflection and whataboutism?

Not caring about democratic results — when human rights are not at issue — is a very dangerous precedent. I absolutely hate the current administration. They are not responsible you the laws on the books. They were successful last election, in some part, exactly because this is a very relevant political issue.
by ethmarks | 2025-11-19 01:15:12+00:00
By 'fair', I mean 'all parties have access to the same information'. The stock market is supposed to give everyone the same information. Trading with privileged information (insider trading), is illegal. Publicly traded companies are required to file 10-Qs and 10-Ks. SEC rule 10b5-1 prohibits trading with material non-public information. There are measures and regulations in place to try to make the stock market fair. There are, by design, zero such measures with prediction markets. Insider trading improves the accuracy of prediction markets, which is their whole purpose to begin with.
by stinkbeetle | 2025-11-19 01:15:48+00:00
I drive an old car with dull yellow headlights and a dull green glow from the analog instruments, just the way I like it. I was recently driving around a hire car that had this enormous screen that became blindingly bright after sunset on unlit carriageway. I couldn't believe how terrible it was. The whole thing was a pile of unintuitive garbage, but the screen brightness was egregious. I had to pull over and spend minutes navigating through a maze of menus to turn the thing down... I might have even had to google for how to do it. Then of course when I turned the car off later and started it again, the brightness setting was back to "surface of the sun".
by nixosbestos | 2025-11-19 01:16:37+00:00
> why should we believe someone that it's a bubble based on "feel"?

because leaders in the space also keep saying it? And then making financial moves that us pleebs can't even dream of, which back that up?

This whole "the media keeps reporting it" as a point against the credibility of something is utterly silly and illogical.
by grepfru_it | 2025-11-19 01:16:48+00:00
There was a comment on another GitHub thread that I replied to. I got a response saying it’s absurd how unreliable Gh is when people depend on it for CI/CD. And I think this is the problem. At GitHub the developers think it’s only a problem because their ci/cd is failing. Oh no, we broke GitHub actions, the actions runners team is going to be mad at us! Instead of, oh no, we broke GitHub actions, half the world is down!

That larger view held only by a small sliver of employees is likely why reliability is not a concern. That leads to the every team for themselves mentality. “It’s not our problem, and we won’t make it our problem so we don’t get dinged at review time” (ok that is Microsoft attitude leaking)

Then there’s their entrenched status. Real talk, no one is leaving GitHub. So customers will suck it up and live with it while angry employees grumble on an online forum. I saw this same attitude in major companies like Verio and Verisign in the early 2000s. “Yeah we’re down but who else are you going to go to? Have a 20% discount since you complained. We will only be 1% less profitable this quarter due to it” The kang and kodos argument personified.

These views are my own and not related to my employer or anyone associated with me.
by mitthrowaway2 | 2025-11-19 01:17:00+00:00
I actually did the same thing so that I could figure out how to lay out my workshop!

What I'd do is:

- Spreadsheet workbench --> Create spreadsheet (name it "measurements"). (This is optional)

- Switch to Part design workbench --> Create body (name it "layout") --> select XY plane --> Create sketch --> Create Polyline

- Zoom out, start drawing the rooms in your house, approximately to scale.

- Before going into too much detail, add a dimension (select line --> "Constrain Distance") to the first line you draw, so that you can do the rest of your drawing approximately to scale. Then the general shape won't get messed up when you add dimensions to everything else.

- (If you have a photo or picture, you can import that to sketch over).

- Add constraints to match your room measurements, mostly vertical or horizontal distance constraints. Be careful not to overconstrain the sketch. (You can put the measurements directly into the sketch constraints, or you can put them into the top-level spreadsheet, create an alias for each cells, and then set the dimensions to reference those cells).

- Once the rooms are drawn, close the sketch and create a new sketch on the xy plane called "furniture".

- Draw some rectangles for your sofas / tables / etc, delete any horizontal and vertical constraints that get automatically added (they look like little | and _ icons), and instead apply perpendicularity constraints. Dimension your rectangles using only the "constrain distance" tool. Now you can drag them around the room and rotate them freely.

- If you want to make 3D models for these too, create new Part Design bodies for each room and each piece of furniture, create a shape binder referencing the master sketches in the Layout body, and then extrude the sketches using the "Pad" operation.

That's about as much tutorial as it makes sense to pack into a HN comment. If you give it a try, I hope it works out for you!
by Aurornis | 2025-11-19 01:17:15+00:00
> The word "developer" is doing a lot of work there spec-wise.

Visual Studio Code is a developer tool, so there’s no reason to complain about that.

I run multiple Electron apps at a time even on low spec machines and it’s fine. The amount of hypothetical complaining going on about this topic is getting silly.

You know these apps don’t literally need to have everything resident in RAM all the time, right?
by antonvs | 2025-11-19 01:17:23+00:00
They’re fantastic learning tools, for a start. What you get out of them is proportional to what you put in.

You’ve probably heard of the Luddites, the group who destroyed textile mills in the early 1800s. If not: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite

Luddites often get a bad rap, probably in large part because of employer propaganda and influence over the writing of history, as well as the common tendency of people to react against violent means of protest. But regardless of whether you think they were heroes, villains, or something else, the fact is that their efforts made very little difference in the end, because that kind of technological progress is hard to arrest.

A better approach is to find ways to continue to thrive even in the presence of problematic technologies, and work to challenge the systems that exploit people rather than attack tools which can be used by anyone.

You can, of course, continue to flail at the inevitable, but you might want to make sure you understand what you’re trying to achieve.
by ehnto | 2025-11-19 01:18:00+00:00
This is a hard one for me to ballpark because all my gaming friends are gym rats, so my view is probably skewed. Some of them game hours every day and make time for gym and nutrition. Unsure of there other health needs though.

I think it's much harder to be healthy when 6+hrs of your day is gaming. Especially if you also have work. It takes time to eat healthy, excercise, get out into the sun and be social. At some point you must be making compromises to game 6hrs a day.
by vlovich123 | 2025-11-19 01:18:32+00:00
To be fair, this failed in the non-rust path too because the bot management returned that all traffic was a bot. But yes, FL2 needs to catch panics from individual components but I’m not sure if failing open is necessarily that much better (it was in this case but the next incident could easily be the result of failing open).

But more generally you could catch the panic at the FL2 layer to make that decision intentional - missing logic at that layer IMHO.
by lovich | 2025-11-19 01:19:12+00:00
I don’t, libertarian ideals like that book die the first time they meet an organized group of bears[1]

Also if I recall they were in underground cities in that book and not clinging to the edge of a mountainside like invaders would be doing in regards to the content of the original post

[1] https://newrepublic.com/article/159662/libertarian-walks-int...
by penwielder | 2025-11-19 01:19:33+00:00
We might be in pretty similar spots with respect to a solver, then. For one with no conscious linear algebra or deep programming background, as long as XOR or modular addition is familiar (which I suppose narrows it), I think a possible sequence of realizations is:

1. The flippable regions need be flipped at most once, in any order. So, one could think of a solution as a collection of boolean variables, one for each region, indicating whether to flip it (true/1 if so, false/0 otherwise, feels natural).

2. A tile needs to be flipped an even number of times if it starts in the desired state, and an odd number of times otherwise. So: Give each tile an equation by forming the XOR (or addition modulo 2) of the variables for all the regions it inhabits, and then setting that expression equal to 0 if the tile starts out in the desired state, otherwise 1.

3. Observe that such equations are always easy to rearrange so as to solve for any desired variable.

4. Observe that we can therefore run through a familiar substitution process, and good things will happen.

What I find elegant here is that the resulting algorithm is known to many from early algebra and has a much more clearly bounded runtime than the backtracking searches that suit other logic puzzles. Of course, as you've evinced, the fuller representation with linear algebra opens many doors to both implementing this well and exploring its other properties.

Finding par, on the other hand, I'll have to consider further. I suspect that, after representing the solution space succinctly, you could get a fair way with a backtracking search therein (where to make a forward step is to concretely assign a value to a variable), with the search tree trimmed via the best par observed so far. If you have something drastically better than that, I'm sure that would be interesting!

Looking forward to seeing what you do next, also perhaps the potential blog post you mentioned elsewhere in this thread, etc.
by cweagans | 2025-11-19 01:20:15+00:00
> Why would they voluntarily give themselves federal tax exposure if they were able to avoid it?

Right. That wouldn't be particularly smart, even to someone who doesn't fully understand the ins and outs of tax/corporate law. Is it possible that perhaps they _do_ have their 501c3 designation and are just communicating it poorly?

Lack of positive confirmation that they are a 501c3 != positive confirmation that they are _not_ a 501c3
by crote | 2025-11-19 01:20:50+00:00
> I wonder what will be the next category of open source to pull ahead?

KiCad, for PCB design. They have been making massive improvements over the last few years, and with proprietary solutions shutting down (Eagle) or being unaffordable (Altium) Kicad is now by far the best option for both hobbyists and small companies.

With the release of KiCad 5 in 2018 it went from being "a pain to use to, but technically sufficient" to being a genuine option for less-demanding professionals. Since then they've been absolutely killing it, with major releases happening once a year and bringing enough quality-of-life improvements that it is actually hard to keep track of all of them.

From the type of new features it is very obvious that a lot of professional users are now showing interest in the application, and as we've seen with Blender a trickle of professional adoption can quickly turn into a flood which takes over the entire market.

KiCad still has a long way to go when it comes to complex high-speed boards (nobody in their right mind would use it to design an EPYC motherboard, for example), but it is absolutely going to steamroll the competition when it comes to the cookie-cutter 2/4/6 layer PCBs in all the everyday consumer products.
by mercnz | 2025-11-19 01:20:54+00:00
just before this outage i was exploring bunnycdn as the idea of cloudflare taking over dns still irks me slightly. there are competitors. but there's a certain amount of scale that cloudflare offers which i think can help performance in general. that said in the past i found cloudflare performance terrible when i was doings lots of testing. they are predominantly a pull based system not a push, so if content isn't current the cache miss performance can be kind of blah. i think their general backhaul paths have improved, but at least from new zealand they used to seem to do worse than hitting a los angeles proxy that then hits origin. (although google was in a similar position before, where both 8.8.8.8 and www.google.co.nz/.com were both faster via los angeles than via normal paths - i think google were doing asia parent, like if testing 8.8.8.8 misses it was super far away). i think now that we have http/3 etc though that performance is a bit simpler to achieve, and that ddos, bot protection is kind of the differentiator, and i think that cloudflare's bot protection may work reasonably well in general?
by howenterprisey | 2025-11-19 01:20:57+00:00
Since my work is vaguely related to superconductors, I saw this comment and was excited to dig into all the errors in the article, but actually couldn't find any in the parts discussing the superconductors specifically. (I don't know data centers and can't comment on that bit.) 77 K is indeed an appropriate temperature for LN2 coolant for high-temperature superconductors like they're using. What errors did you see?
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-11-19 01:20:59+00:00
> We could take the difference from the CEO's pay

This is California going after golf courses to solve its water problem.

Ford spends about $3bn a year on dividends [1]. That's a quarter of their entire SG&A.

[1] https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/37996/000003...
by tux3 | 2025-11-19 01:21:02+00:00
Usually you'd want to write almost all your slice or other container iterations with iterators, in a functional style.

For the 5% of cases that are too complex for standard iterators? I never bother justifying why my indexes are correct, but I don't see why not.

You very rarely need SAFETY comments in Rust because almost all the code you write is safe in the first place. The language also gives you the tool to avoid manual iteration (not just for safety, but because it lets the compiler eliminate bounds checks), so it would actually be quite viable to write these comments, since you only need them when you're doing something unusual.
by sponnath | 2025-11-19 01:21:31+00:00
How is a compiler and an LLM equivalent abstractions? I'm also seriously doubtful of the 10x claim any time someone brings it up when AI is being discussed. I'm sure they can be 10x for some problems but they can also be -10x. They're not as consistently predictable (and good) like compilers are.

The "learn to master it or become obsolete" sentiment also doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Isn't the whole point of AI as a technology that people shouldn't need to spend years mastering a craft to do something well? It's literally trying to automate intelligence.
by bigyabai | 2025-11-19 01:21:48+00:00
I think Mastodon will survive. Other fedi projects (eg. Pleroma-fe) have been through all nine circles of FOSS hell and somehow still ship usable builds to a sizable community.

Eugen's presence is felt and appreciated in the community, but I can also understand why he stepped down. It's hard to represent so many people who don't always agree with you. I think back to Jack Dorsey's final days at Twitter with the NFT profile pictures and crypto tickers - he truly did not understand that his leadership had passed it's prime. The honorable thing for him to do was pass on control to someone responsible, but instead he spent his final days polarizing Twitter and guaranteeing it's own critical insolvency.

Eugen took the honorable route - I hope he remains vocal and influential in the community. It sounds like he knows himself extremely well and I applaud his honesty about the temptation for ego to ruin big projects. Most of us can't imagine the pressure in his shoes.
by MichaelBurjack | 2025-11-19 01:22:15+00:00
I'm not here to debate the scientific evidence; labelling well-researched peer-reviewed studies as "paranoia" (your words, before editing your reply) because you don't like the outcome is absolutely your choice, and tells me there's little chance any reasoned reply will be meaningful as you've made up your mind.

For others that might be curious:

Your anecdote around acute infection recovery makes the common mistake of confusing acute infection (the period where you "feel sick") with long-term systemic (post-acute) symptoms.

The typical influenza (flu) only has an acute phase; once you're done "feeling sick", the virus has been eradicated from your body. And unfortunately, many talking heads keep repeating "Covid is now just like the flu" which ignores long-term consequences of repeated Covid infection, which does not behave like the flu (it is not an acute-phase only illness).

And this isn't unique to Covid, viruses with post-acute phases are well known and well studied:

- HIV is the acute phase that (years later) leads to AIDS;

- Epstein-Barr virus (EBV, or "mono") is a herpes-family virus that goes dormant after the acute phase and often later triggers ME/CFS

- Herpes virus in the form of chickenpox goes dormant after the acute phase and frequently later leads to shingles;

- and many others; Google is your friend.

Distinguishing between viruses that have acute-only vs. post-acute phases is a key input to my personal risk assessment stance. I value having as long and healthy a life as I can.

And just as I have, you're free to decide what risk tolerance you're comfortable with for your lifestyle and longevity goals. If you require the extra adrenaline kick of feeling morally superior by publicly passing judgement upon others' choices, have at it — genuinely! — and I hope you find all the missing joy you need.