MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Arch-TK | 2025-11-08 09:07:15+00:00
YouTube claim these were not automated actions. This explicitly rules out "algorithm/LLM makes a stupid mistake" but also seems to rule out "hits a threshold of community reports and gets automatically taken down pending manual review".

Also, it doesn't even need to be collusion between Microsoft and Google, but to pretend like that's never a thing is to be ignorant of history.

Stop defending these big companies for these things. Even if your version of the story is true, the fact they allow their platform to be abused this way is incredibly damaging to content creators trying to spread awareness of issues.

But also, do you seriously think there is a massive amount of competition at the scale of a 330k subscriber channel for people to bother pulling off this kind of attack for two videos on bypassing Windows 11 account and hardware requirements?

Regardless of what happened here, Google is to blame at least for the tools they have made.

As for Microsoft, I don't think there's anything disagreeable with saying that they've tried hard to get people to switch to hardware with their TPM implementation and lying about the reasons. Likewise for forcing Microsoft accounts on people. I am not certain they were involved in this case, but they created the need for this kind of video to exist, so they are also implicated here.
by p0d | 2025-11-08 09:09:26+00:00
To love God and love your neighbour as yourself.

Life is not a formula. There is a squirrel climbing a tree in my garden as I look out the window. I could dedicate the rest of my life to squirrel study and still not know everything about squirrels.

Life is spiritual and physical. I trust in the ancient wisdom of the Bible which will be here after you and I, to understand life's meaning. I teach Tech and love learning. I find meaning through my faith and knowledge through my learning.
by bob1029 | 2025-11-08 09:09:27+00:00
I think you have to ask yourself what you're trying to get out of this, strategically. I know it's probably a "forbidden" option, but Unity is really good at hitting all the platforms at the same time and giving you the ability to deeply understand why things might be running like shit.

I'm working with a partner on a steam game and it was the most rational choice we could arrive at. Our goal is to make enough revenue from the this project to justify another one. We seek to make a living doing this.

I struggle with the lack of advocacy for effective tools on this platform. If we are being honest about the overall engineering proposition, the trade of moderate, unknown capitalist exploitation risk for platform targeting stability might actually be worth it if the goal is to get the game into the hands of as many players as possible.

Electron/Tauri/whatever is just the start of the battle. You also have to consider different input, storage, etc., systems if you want to hit targets like Steam Deck - which is a huge deal for visibility these days. The web is a nasty abstraction layer once we start talking about things like Xbox controllers.
by gogomoon | 2025-11-08 09:10:12+00:00
Don’t downplay your position. You might be behind in technical knowledge compared to people in this community but you are in an excellent plance otherwise:

- You have identified a real life problem.

- You are a domain expert.

- You can iterate and test your solutions quickly in a real world environment.

- you are making sane technical choices: keep it simple, use what your user want, use what works.

- you are patient.

- most importantly, your motivation is deeply rooted in yourself.

I share your frustration with change resistance and insane level of complexity in the health care industry, it’s not just nursing. But if you can show people that you are improving their life, they won’t look back. Proof by the demo is what works.

Keep up the good work, keep being patient and change will happen.
by brabel | 2025-11-08 09:10:48+00:00
You probably know it, but Common Lisp May be a bit dated but it’s extremely modern in terms of features since you can add almost any feature to the language in libraries! I use it exactly because it’s old and battle tested and I don’t need to wait years for a language designer to give me a feature , I can just add it myself, though these days it has everything done already!
by lm28469 | 2025-11-08 09:11:47+00:00
> It seems equally likely to me that conditions in the Universe just weren't amenable to life until relatively recently.

It's at least 4b years old on earth, that's not "relatively recently"

We've been technologically capable for less than 200 years, that's nothing in the grand scheme of things.

We could have just missed them by a few millions years and we would have no ideas at all. There might be 10 ancient Egypt tier civilisations out there right now that might develop radio tech by the time we're extinct or back to low tech.
by noir_lord | 2025-11-08 09:12:02+00:00
They are using it as a proxy for "people with low technical skills" (which is a specious argument since it was a friend of my parents who got me into programming and he remains one of the best I've ever known) and making the usual argument that we should limit control of our devices to make it safe for them.

I actually don't have (much) of an issue with walled garden approaches as long as the wall has a gate that is easily opened, give me an OS level toggle with a warning of "Here be dragons" and I can live with it - it's not ideal but it's not a terrible trade off.

It's something Android has had previously (but they seem to be trying to lock that gate) and iOS less so.
by DeathArrow | 2025-11-08 09:12:03+00:00
The problem for me is that instead of focusing on the problem at hand and the business logic, I have to focus on the Rust memory model and the borrow checker. And seems very verbose.

Thing is, if I sketch something in pseudocode, I should be able to translate it to any mainstream programming languages. With Rust I can't just do that, I have to bend the problem to fit the way the language works.
by Raph_Koster | 2025-11-08 09:12:53+00:00
Remember, it's about prediction (point 1 of the 12). Pure random cannot be predicted. From a prediction point of view, it is therefore ironically, an already determined result. So it is solved, and therefore not interesting.

In Theory of Fun, I phrased this as "everything has patterns, but if you are not equipped to see the pattern, it becomes noise, and therefore boring."

But it's the same underlying point.
by Arainach | 2025-11-08 09:12:56+00:00
> think they are very self centered and don't want to make sacrifices

How dare they not want to spend decades doing something they don't want at enormous personal and financial cost just to keep your favorite economic pyramid scheme running. So selfish.

Here's an idea: if you want kids so much, pay for them. Provide universal healthcare, childcare, education. Provide food stamps for everyone under 18. Put your money where your mouth is.
by scosman | 2025-11-08 09:13:26+00:00
Notarization is completely optional when building any OSS software on a Mac, and not part of any default build process I know. A Mac can sign builds for running locally, a process which is fast, completely local, and does require building test binaries or anything like that. Even a Mac building for an iPhone in developer mode has a local cert it can use, and doesn't require notarization.

Notarization is only needed when distributing binaries to others. Personally I do it once a month for the Mac app I distribute.
by globular-toast | 2025-11-08 09:15:55+00:00
But I don't have a button that corresponds to "unicode arrow" and I don't particularly want one. I have only 10 digits and they're all accounted for with ubiquitous, regular keyboards that have been around for decades.

Having to use some app that converts two characters inserted in sequence into the correct character is a terrible idea. It makes me think of the Dvorak trend among geeks. I very nearly learnt Dvorak myself, but then a wise elder dissuaded me, reminding me how amazing it is to be able to type fast on any keyboard you come across, even if it might only be 90% of your theoretical maximum on the perfect keyboard. Sometimes local optima are good enough.

> The suggestion was about literally 1 char

It's never "just one more".
by Raph_Koster | 2025-11-08 09:16:07+00:00
They're not stupid -- they're feedback. You get them as a reward for having done something, usually.

But they are also not gameplay, obviously.

https://www.raphkoster.com/2012/01/20/narrative-is-not-a-gam... https://www.raphkoster.com/2012/01/26/narrative-isnt-usually...

...and maybe https://www.raphkoster.com/2013/03/13/why-are-qtes-so-popula... since you dislike QTE's. :)
by exmadscientist | 2025-11-08 09:16:35+00:00
What BOM flow? It doesn't bloody well have any!

At no point in the entire design process within KiCad does this design ever get part numbers assigned for its resistors or capacitors (to pick one thing). That's not acceptable for professional work. A Bill of Materials ABSOLUTELY MUST DESCRIBE THE MATERIALS used in the assembly of the PCBA. Internal part numbers are perfectly acceptable: assigning a generic RES-0402-10k or WIDGETCO-PN987654321 or whatever would be OK by me. KiCAD does not really do this, as evidenced by how this design reaches "design complete" without being... complete.

EVERYTHING MUST HAVE AN ORDERABLE PART NUMBER OR INTERNAL PART NUMBER.

But the resistors are the easy parts. SMD thick film resistors are basically all interchangeable. Things like the ceramic capacitors (MLCCs) cannot be substituted for each other because they all bloody well behave differently so good luck getting the same behavior if you randomly pick a capacitor vendor on LCSC each time you build boards! That's how EEs get fired, and deserve it.

When I generate a build package in Altium, it has complete lists of every part in the design, its MPN, at least one supplier to purchase it, and the SPN for that MPN. (Sometimes internal parts don't have suppliers assigned, but then they're tracked elsewhere in the project or company organization.) There are also assigned alternates in many cases, though they are typically inadequate. Larger projects should use entirely internal part numbering, but that's a real headwind for smaller stuff. All of this comes from a single master part database, plus a project part database, and never gets touched by hand after a library entry's birth.

KiCad is so crap at doing this that last month a client literally paid me thousands of dollars to fix up a garbage KiCad design package that didn't have this information properly stored. There are several add-ins for KiCad that claim to do BOMs better... but it's not standard, so if you don't document what you did and how (which you do not have to do in real CAD software, because it is built in and the CAD vendor documentation plus the years of built-up lore will cover you!) it may as well not exist. Certainly it didn't exist in any sort of usable form for this project.
by tim333 | 2025-11-08 09:16:57+00:00
I'm with you on that - people use the wrong terms. Bailouts are supporting things like GM or failing banks because the government is worried about GM workers losing jobs or bank depositors losing money.

Altman's 1.4T isn't like that - it's a proposed new investment in stuff that doesn't exist yet and there would be no job losses or the like if it fails to exist. They have been talking about potential government support for the new ventures, partly to keep up with China which uses similar government support. I'm not sure if it's a good idea but it would not be a bailout, more a subsidy.
by StopDisinfo910 | 2025-11-08 09:17:20+00:00
No offense but the only time I have encountered objects in Ocaml was while using LablGTK a long time ago and the object syntax was pretty clean and not far from the module one. They are also structurally typed which is very handy.

Considering it only impacts a fairly small subset of the language, could you explain how it supposedly ruins everything?
by aborsy | 2025-11-08 09:20:02+00:00
Chomsky says it well.

>> The meaning of life is what you make of it. Life does not have any meaning apart from that, for a human, a dog, a bacterium, or anything else. It is up to you what the meaning of your life is. So, it is partially under your control. If someone were to say “Life is just a bowl of cherries?” If that is the way you want to look at life, fine. If you decide your life is maximization of goods, then that is the meaning of life. We can have sympathy for you, but that is what it is. If you decide that your life is friendship, love, mutual aid, mutual support, a community of people who try to increase their own and other people’s happiness and welfare, then that is the meaning of life. But there is no external force that decides.

If a person decides I’m going to be a hermit, I’ll get myself a piece of land in Montana, I’ll farm it, I’ll live by myself, I won’t pay any attention to other human beings, I’ll have no form of communication with others, okay, that is the meaning of your life. I know people who have become hermits. I met one climbing a mountain once. The guy was living in a mountain hut and he just wanted to be alone. That is a choice you can have. For most people, life means warm, supportive social relationships. But you don’t know it in advance.

—-

That said, when you look at the state of the world, particularly political world, the amount of malice, nastiness, crime, scam, .. you wonder what is the meaning of life for the majority of population!
by Raph_Koster | 2025-11-08 09:21:06+00:00
1. As the article says, "People will be willing to go along with pretty simple and pretty familiar problems as long as the feedback is great."

2. For arbitrary n x m boards, Candy Crush (and Bejeweled, it's predecessor), has been shown to be NP-complete. That means as a general class of problem, it's officially hard. This is why I said that "A lot of very good problems seem stupidly simple, but have depths to them." If you look at some of the ones I examine in this talk: https://www.raphkoster.com/games/presentations/games-are-mat... you'll see they are often what seems very simple!
by tome | 2025-11-08 09:22:27+00:00
So is Haskell not functional? Or an imperative language with some functional features?

-- ghci> example -- Triangular number 1 is 0 -- Triangular number 2 is 1 -- Triangular number 3 is 3 -- Triangular number 4 is 6 -- Triangular number 5 is 10 example = runEff $ \io -> evalState 0 $ \st -> do for_ [1..5] $ \i -> do n <- get st let msg = "Triangular number " <> show i <> " is " <> show n effIO io (putStrLn msg) st += i where st += n = modify st (+ n)

(This is not a trick question. Simon Peyton Jones described Haskell as "the world's finest imperative language" [1], and I agree. This code is written using https://hackage.haskell.org/package/bluefin)

[1] Tackling the Awkward Squad: monadic input/output, concurrency, exceptions, and foreign-language calls in Haskell
by skotobaza | 2025-11-08 09:22:30+00:00
I think directly reducing the games' prices will not have the same effect as with traveling, since games are digital and non-mandatory goods, so less people will be swayed by reduced price; unless we are talking about 50% less, of course, which is why people use key reselling sites, because there it is noticeable (and people don't care about legality in that case).

That said, Epic is indirectly competing "on price" by paying publishers and developers for their store exclusivity, for free giveaways and even for just using Unreal Engine. But it's the price for developers, not customers. Tim Sweeney said multiple times that he thought supporting developers was more important than customers, and that customers would follow developers. I don't know how whether it worked though.
by kalleboo | 2025-11-08 09:23:50+00:00
Motorola wanted to replace the 68000 series with their RISC design, the 88000, so it was probably always going to end there. Their customers were also all in full RISC hype fever and were looking for RISC chips to move to.

In Apple's search for a RISC chip, didn't want to be stuck being single-sourced again so they had IBM and Motorola work together to launch PowerPC instead, so Motorola gave up on the 88k.
by Razengan | 2025-11-08 09:24:04+00:00
Using apps made with Electron or those so-called "universal" UI frameworks I wish nothing more than for everything to be native.

They always have to give up some basic or hidden conveniences that native controls get for free, so they always feel slightly different and "off" in a weird way which induces a constant vague annoyance while using them, like walking with a little pebble in your shoe, or a sitting in an chair that isn't balanced right.

It's funny how even after 50 years UI still isn't "solved" ..before writing a universal API, we don't even have universal consensus, or at least some kind of standards authority, on how controls should behave.

Hell not even users can’t agree, as would be seen on any comments about this topic, on stuff like whether lists should scroll up when swiping down, or scroll down when swiping up :')
by Raph_Koster | 2025-11-08 09:24:47+00:00
No, it's not a very local definition at all, it's actually a generalized definition for all forms of game and entertainment -- and art, even!

You seem to be assuming I have a reductive definition of game, when the definition given in the article is basically "anything people choose to play." See https://www.raphkoster.com/2013/04/16/playing-with-game/ which is linked in there.

I strongly disagree with lumping "intelligence" into the question though, so I am with you on that.
by scosman | 2025-11-08 09:26:07+00:00
I try this every decade. Love the first few months for speed. Then I end up paying the price later when I want to integrate "new OS feature X" or make a system gesture/style/animation feel native.

Lack of swipe for back on iOS is usually the easiest way to tell I'm looking at a web view.

But it's been about a decade so I'm due...
by laidoffamazon | 2025-11-08 09:26:22+00:00
For those unaware or may find her name familar, Rona is known for her plagiarism scandal. She blocks anyone on Twitter who asks about it or the book she got a substantial advance for but didn’t publish after this scandal came to light. She seems to have walked away from it - this utter elite impunity makes me sick.

https://www.halfmystic.com/blog/you-are-believed
by lloeki | 2025-11-08 09:26:22+00:00
> Nitpicking your nitpick

That's not a nitpick, that's paraphrasing ;)

> It used to not be part of the standard library, but it has been since Ruby 1.9, released in 2007.

That's the mention of 1.8 I made, but it's a bit more complex: it still can be excluded, in two ways:

- at build time via `configure` (and then it's not even there)

- at run time via `--disable-gems`

The interaction between rubygems and ruby core is surprisingly small.

> Rubygems is a default gem

It is not! See `lib/ruby/gems/3.3.0/specifications/default` in any Ruby install, or in source the absence of _any_ gemspec for `rubygems` while there is for bundler[0].

Instead it's, as you mentioned, a default library.

The very principle of gems is that you can have multiple versions of a gem separately installed (to the point of allowing only one to be visible at any one time, activated by `rubygems`-provided `Kernel.gem`). The implementation of that is done by `rubygems` itself so if it were a gem, one would not be able to activate `rubygems` without `rubygems` itself...

This is also why it can be special-case upgraded only via the very special `gem update --system`, which downloads a "gem" named `rubygems-update` (not `rubygems`); scare quotes because it's using the gem format and infrastructure mostly as a delivery mechanism, not by being an _actual_ gem[1] in the traditional sense (well it is a gem, but a gem of an updater, not of `rubygems` itself).

When updated, the new copy of rubygems is installed in `site_ruby`, because the load path is the only mechanism available to define location priority (`ruby --disable-gems -e 'p $LOAD_PATH'`).

Fun fact: the only thing that "prevents" a file present it `${PREFIX}/lib/ruby/3.4.0/rubygems` to not be `load`ed or `require`d is merely that new code in `${PREFIX}/lib/ruby/site_ruby/3.4.0` shall not make reference to it, but it's all perfectly visible otherwise.

docker run --rm -it ruby:3.4 /bin/bash gem update --system ls -ld /usr/local/lib/ruby/3.4.0/rubygems /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/3.4.0/rubygems echo 'p __dir__' > /usr/local/lib/ruby/3.4.0/rubygems/foo.rb ruby -e 'p $LOAD_PATH; require "rubygems/foo"'

[0]: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/v3_4_7/lib/bundler/bundler...

[1]: https://github.com/ruby/rubygems/blob/v3.7.2/hide_lib_for_up...
by Culonavirus | 2025-11-08 09:27:59+00:00
> Admin interfaces in particular are a great fit – lots of CRUD, mildly interactive, very repetitive. Adding `hx-get` to a button or div is way way quicker than writing all that boilerplate javascript yet again for the hundredth time.

Yes. Then imagine you have a massive legacy codebase and a control panel of something has a ton of data and buttons and inputs and all kinds of nonsense. Say you have a weight and dimensions of a package of a product... you'd like to make it so you can edit these in-place and when you do, a package volume (and/or volume sum of all packages) gets updated somewhere else on the page (along with some other info... I don't know, an estimate of product delivery cost based on volume, which delivery methods are now un/available etc.)

Like... you already have ways to calculate and show these in your server side logic. With HTMX you reuse these, add a sprinkle of hx-get and add some OOB updates and you're done. You can do the same with ajax, but not nearly as fast as with HTMX and much more annoyingly...
by Raph_Koster | 2025-11-08 09:28:02+00:00
No, I added all the images after writing the article.

But the images ARE from the many many presentations I have given on game design, which can be found here: https://www.raphkoster.com/games/presentations/

Many of the links are to those presentations, and many of them are deep dives on single sentences in the article.
by zjp | 2025-11-08 09:28:12+00:00
>What policies did the Democrats actually implement over the years?

Roughly in order: Don't Ask/Don't Tell repeal. Dodd-Frank. Lily Ledbetter (extends the statute of limitations on equal pay suits). Making it clear that sexual orientation and gender identity are equal to race in hate crime law. Banning lifetime coverage caps so your insurer cannot simply decide your life is not worth living and banning the practice of excluding pre-existing conditions from healthcare coverage so that you are not enslaved to whatever employer you happened to be working for when you got the worst news of your life. Establishing the CFPB to end unfair credit practices like medical debt reporting. Capping the cost of insulin at $35 per month for Medicare. Allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices. ACA subsidy expansion. People our normie centrist presidents put on the bench decided Obergefell. People our normie centrist presidents put on the bench are protecting human expression.

You have to engage in motivated reasoning not to recognize these things as making life better. If you want to make life even better, consider voting for Democrats. When you don't vote for them, they become the minority party. When they are the minority party, no amount of impotent screaming or saying please can turn 49 votes into 61 votes, nor can it force Republicans to help them help you.

Bernie is a loudmouth with almost no legislative accomplishments that spent his life building his own brand and ratfucking the party. Of course the party leadership doesn't like him. When you get a rock in your shoe, do you like the rock?

Actual leaders are in the trenches right now embarrassing the GOP with this shutdown to force them to make COVID-era healthcare subsidies permanent. What's Bernie doing except derailing news events to complain that party leadership isn't supporting his faction in comparatively irrelevant local races?