MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by QuaternionsBhop | 2025-11-01 11:45:07+00:00
Since the CPU is doing cache coherency transparently, perhaps there should be some sort of way to promise that an application is well-behaved in order to access a lower-level non-transparent instruction set to manually manage the cache coherency from the application level. Or perhaps applications can never be trusted with that level of control over the hardware. The MESI model reminded me of Rust's ownership and borrowing. The pattern also appears in OpenGL vs Vulkan drivers, implicit sync vs explicit sync. Yet another example would be the cache management work involved in squeezing out maximum throughput CUDA on an enterprise GPU.
by technothrasher | 2025-11-01 11:45:55+00:00
This whole discussion is weird. For the majority of the world's population, dropping $3K on a computer is a non-starter, if even possible. Over six hundred million people cannot even afford proper food and shelter. But there are also sixty-two million millionaires in the world. So there are a large number of people who can buy a MBP without even blinking. We've just discovered income disparity. What the heck does that obvious truth have to add to a review of a MBP?
by mnky9800n | 2025-11-01 11:46:10+00:00
Yes I’ve been playing a lot of civ4 and sim city 2000. It’s so much more enjoyable because it’s simply about playing a game where complex simulations put together interesting problems to solve. As opposed to figuring out how to unlock the next whatever skin, weapon, armor, card set, fake money gems, other fake money coins, etc.

Edit: btw if anyone is looking for a civ4 game hit me up
by kiba | 2025-11-01 11:46:10+00:00
It's easy to tax certain assets, such as land. LVT is actually the ideal tax in many ways, since a LVT is undodgable. Actually it doesn't matter whose name is on the title.

Sufficiently high LVT will deter speculation, leading to collapse in land price and encouraging efficient usage of land and drastically affecting our political landscape.
by Telaneo | 2025-11-01 11:47:09+00:00
If you copy-paste the first paragraph or the whole text of a Wikipedia page, then absolutely. If you have to dig in to a decently log page to find a small blurb, highlight the text you believe to be germane to whatever point is being made, and also provide the reference listed on Wikipedia, and/or provide some reasoning as to why you believe that to be correct, then no.

One of these courses of action is helpful, while the other one very much isn't. Copy-pasting 5 paragraphs of ChatGPT is equally not helpful. If however find one small blurb in that ChatGPT output that's germane to whatever point is being made, and copy and paste that, along with a source and/or your reasoning as to why that is correct, then you're probably back to being helpful again. This however is not what most instances of 'chatGPT said' are. Most of those are 'chatGPT said [insert word salad here]' or '[chatGPT said [thing obvious from even the most cursory knowledge about the subject at hand]'.
by rfoo | 2025-11-01 11:49:09+00:00
> Why can't the stock ROMs use these features and be more secure also?

Some of the features may hurt user experience in some way and people made different trade-off.

For example, GrapheneOS disables USB before unlock so that there's no chance that some driver codes in Linux kernel run in response to a device being plugged in, for attack surface reduction. Then, say, if you have a cracked screen, the touchscreen no longer works and you don't want to fix it, if not for this mitigation, you can use an USB-C OTG cable to connect a mouse / keyboard to the phone, unlock it and export all your data. With this mitigation the keyboard won't work so you are forced to fix the screen first just to get your data out.
by graemep | 2025-11-01 11:51:15+00:00
> In fact, looking at the news this week, the same question applies to Microsoft and Apple as well. Are they too big and distracted to care about security?

Yes, of course they are, but its more rational than just being distracted. If not caring does does not lose you a significant amount of revenue why should you care? The same applies to big players in the industry with regard to security and quality in general.

In this case they have something to gain by keeping phones open to software used by government agencies.
by andsoitis | 2025-11-01 11:51:17+00:00
One of my favorite arguments against the simulation hypothesis is the exponential resource problem.

To simulate a system with N states/particles with full fidelity, the simulator needs resources that scale with N (or worse, exponentially with N for quantum systems). This create a hierarchy problem:

- Level 0 (base reality): has X computational resources

- Level 1 (first simulation): needs X resources to simulate Level 0, but exists within Level 0, so can only access some fraction of X

- Level 2: would need even more resources than Level 1 has available

The logical trap is that each simulation layer must have fewer resources than the layer above it (since it is contained within it), but needs MORE resources to simulate that layer. This is mathematically impossible for high-fidelity simulations.

This means either:

* we're in base reality - there's no way to create a full-fidelity simulation without having more computational power than the universe you're simulating contains

* simulations must be extremely "lossy" - using shortcuts, approximations, rendering only what's observed (live video games), etc. But then we face the question of why unobserved quantum experiments still produce consistent results. Why does the unifier render distant galaxies we'll never visit?

* the simulation uses physics we don't understand - perhaps the base reality operates on completely different principles that are vastly more computationally efficient. But that is an unfalsifiable speculation.

This is also sometimes called the "substrate problem"; you cannot create something more complex than yourself using only your own resources.
by kasabali | 2025-11-01 11:54:08+00:00
If perfect isn't needed, we might as well stick with the 20+ years old mature codebase, there's no need to move to another language. I mean the "code to parse .deb, .ar, .tar," is done and whatever memory bugs should've been already fixed .

Use Rust for evergreen projects by all means, just leave mature tested systems alone, please.
by frumiousirc | 2025-11-01 11:54:46+00:00
I had tried this with the previous versions of sonnet and gemini pro. Sonnet's context, back then, could not hold the full source I was working on. Reducing the context did allow it produce a graph. Both LLMs produced graphs with enough omissions and errors to make the result not useful. In the end, I wrote an interpreter based on libclang to provide the semantics I needed for my particular case. That was not trivial for me (I have decades of experience with s/w dev, working with graphs, etc - but not compiler development). And I used LLM's help to do the development. The new type of semantics would require hard-coding new AST interpreter and graph construction. Repeating that all today with the better LLMs and after more practice driving them might produce something with less effort / more flexibility.

In any case, this experience gave me a new appreciation for compiler developers!
by laurmaedje | 2025-11-01 11:55:55+00:00
The backslashes are not really relevant to the problem discussed in the post. The ambiguity between symbols and argument-taking macros exists just the same in LaTeX. Consider:

$ f_\abs{x} $ $ f_\pi{x} $

LaTeX just happens to do what the post calls "runtime parsing" because LaTeX doesn't really distinguish between different compiler stages at all. If you look at a macro, you can't know whether it will eat up the following braced argument.

In fact, not using backslashes for symbols can actually give an _edge_ with this problem because it would allow distinguishing `pi` and `#abs` (option E in the post).
by bawolff | 2025-11-01 11:57:54+00:00
> Some peple are doing that[1]. It's not a matter of desire, but of the amount of effort and resources required to build and maintain the insanity of the modern web stack.

People say that, but i don't think that's true. The web stack was always insane, the only difference is its documented now. I think now is a much easier time to build a web browser than the past was.

Not to mention the irony of complaining the web stack is insane while insisting a really difficult to support feature that never saw much use should be kept forever because reasons.

> Eh, no. Google Chrome won because it is backed by one of the largest adtech corporations with enough resources and influence to make it happen

Google won because nobody else really tried.

Firefox has been a dumpster fire of bad management decisions and has reduced itself to basically just copying google's every decision sacraficing any unique identity of its own.

Safari is never going win when it is mac only and apple doesnt seem to fund it very hard.

Most of the rest are just chrome reskins that dont deserve to be called a separate browser.

Maybe something interesting might come out of ladybird. Its still quite early to tell.
by _heimdall | 2025-11-01 11:59:28+00:00
The whole point of browser standards is to avoid every browser picking and choosing features their own features, its a terrible end user experience.

No one should fork chrome and maintain it with XSLT still baked in. Not only would it go unused, it doesn't help anyone wanting to ship XSLT on a site because users would literally have to install a different browser just to see that page.
by sleirsgoevy | 2025-11-01 11:59:55+00:00
The issue with government IDs is that they are, for all we know, not trustworthy, but everyone treats them like they are. And you know, I am not going to "verify" myself with Google with this kind of toilet paperwork.

If Google decides to pull this off, then I guess reflashing to a custom ROM with this crap patched out will be a very first step I'll be recommending to anyone who cares.
by weiliddat | 2025-11-01 12:00:53+00:00
Major difference is one you're watching something without interacting with it and the other is responding to your action; one you have your gaze relatively still, taking in the entire frame, the other your eyes are tracking an object as you interact with it via some sort of input device.

In tracking motion your eyes/brain can see improved motion resolution (how clear the details are in an object moving across the screen) up to 1000Hz.
by mexicocitinluez | 2025-11-01 12:01:34+00:00
What an absurd intro.

> One of the weirdest “debates” I seem to perpetually have with framework-enthusiastic developers is whether or not a <div> is “just as good” as a <button>.

How does one's desire to use a framework have any impact on their ability to recognize the usefulness of a button? Did I miss something? Is there some portion of any of the major framework documenation that suggests it's better to use divs instead of buttons?

> Among the React crowd, and also among people who seem to enjoy HTMX, I see a lot this…

Lol This has been a problem since way before React hit the scene. And people not using frameworks aren't magically immune to using divs instead of buttons.
by saagarjha | 2025-11-01 12:02:31+00:00
Perfetto is kind of a weird tool because it seems to be designed around tracing Linux and Android but overwhelmingly it gets used because of their integration with the exceptionally simple JSON tracing format that takes like 2 seconds to implement in whatever tool you are using. This alone is profoundly useful and I greatly respect the impact they have had towards commoditizing "trace viewing". I've gotten so much mileage out of it because of that.

I understand that Google maintains and uses this tool for their own thing but I kind of wonder if the UI should just get split off into its own thing, because I get the impression that they don't even really particularly like supporting what everyone else is using it for. I know the maintainers are around here is around so perhaps they have more context but it's just very strange to me that the UI will always be showing things like "syscall trace" or "connect a device" when I am looking at GPU kernels or network spans. And I get the impression that the JSON format is considered to be kind of grandfathered in and not really what they like supporting. I guess in a sense it's a little weird that most of the people I know use it like the flamegraph viewer tool for traces but it views itself as the one-stop-shop for your Android performance profiling that just happens to have good import for recorded profiles.

Also, I repeat this a lot, but I think a lot of profiling tools could stand to learn things from Apple's Instruments. I don't really know what they are doing over there but their UI is almost always the best for actually finding what the problem is rather than just dumping data at you like what a lot of profiling tools do (especially for Linux). Notably it's had the "bottom up" view for a very long time because I assume the Apple engineers who work on like malloc use it a lot. It's even weirder and more proprietary in the ways I mentioned above while also not having any sort of import feature, so I understand why nobody seems to know about it or steal design ideas from it, but it's slept on. Arguably I don't even think people should be using it for general-purpose use because it's ironically slow and laggy in ways that Perfetto definitely isn't, but it is exceptionally good at common tasks like "zoom into this region" or "let me quickly jump to the part of this call stack that is a problem" that I have not seen anywhere else.
by Anamon | 2025-11-01 12:02:34+00:00
What controls do you suggest?

Saying that a handful of mass copyright infringers with billion dollar investors are simply part of the "public" like every regular visitor is seriously distorting the issue here.

Sites with a robots.txt banning bots are only "unrestricted" in a strictly technical sense. They are clearly setting terms of use that these rogue bots are violating. Besides, robots.txt is legally binding in certain jurisdictions, it's not just a polite plea. And if we decide that anything not technically prevented is legal, then we're also legitimising botnets, DDoS attacks, and a lot more. Hacking into a corporate system through a malconfiguration or vulnerability is also illegal, despite the fact that the defenses failed.

Finally, we all know that the only purpose these bots are scraping for is mass copyright infringement. That's another layer where the "if it's accessible, it's fair game" logic falls apart. I can download a lot of publicly accessible art, music, or software, but that doesn't mean I can do with those files whatever I want. The only reason these AI companies haven't been sued out of existence yet, like they should've been, is that it's trickier to prove provenance than if they straight up served the unmodified files.
by bawolff | 2025-11-01 12:02:47+00:00
> FTP was never integrated: it just so happened that some platforms shipped a protocol handler for it, and some browsers included an FTP protocol handler themselves. But I don’t believe you could ever, say, fetch("ftp://…").

I never tried, but i believe the relavent spec said it should work, until it was deprecated and removed from the standard https://github.com/whatwg/fetch/pull/1166

With flash - that might all be true, but there was a time when many websites required it. It might not have been a de jure standard but it was a de facto standard. To the point where a browser not supporting it was considered broken. Apple refusing to support it was incredibly controversial at the time.
by mexicocitinluez | 2025-11-01 12:03:21+00:00
And React. Using divs for buttons has absolutely nothing to do with whether you're using HTMX, React, or just plain Javascript.

Maybe they're a younger developer and weren't around pre-React, but the idea that using a div instead of a button for a clickable element is somehow new or only pertinent if you're using a framework makes me think the author is confused about these things work.
by Macha | 2025-11-01 12:03:22+00:00
This is often my pain as a senior dev. If the more junior members of my team propose something, and it's perfectly acceptable, if I just rubber stamp it then it looks like I didn't read it or do anything. So with some of the past managers I've had, I felt like I had to find something to point out, so best to find something that doesn't inconvenience the proposal author too much.

I could see the same dynamic in reverse when I had to propose stuff to the central tech team at that employer.
by mustyoshi | 2025-11-01 12:03:39+00:00
I politely disagree. I spent maybe 8 hours over a week rightsizing a handful of heavy deployments from a previous team and reduced their peak resource usage by implementing better scaling policies. Before the new scaling policy the service would scale out and new pods would remain idle and ultimately get terminated without ever responding to a request quite frequently.

The service dashboards already existed, all I had to do was a bit of load testing and read the graphs.

It's not too much extra work to make sure you're scaling efficiently.
Ask HN: Do professional photographers need hardware-level image authentication?
by sryanpdx | 2025-11-01 12:05:09+00:00
With deepfakes becoming increasingly convincing, I've been exploring camera-native image authentication: using a camera's hardware to cryptographically hash images at capture and immediately record to a blockchain for tamper-proof traceability.

Technical approach: Camera firmware pipes raw image data directly to a secure element (tamper-proof chip) before any processing. SHA-256 hash is signed with camera's private key and broadcasted to public blockchain. Any post-capture modification becomes instantly detectable via hash mismatch.

Two questions I'm trying to validate:

1. Do professional photographers (photojournalists, legal/insurance work, forensics) face authentication challenges that current methods (EXIF, C2PA content credentials) don't adequately solve?

2. Is this the right technical approach, or are there better alternatives for establishing tamper-proof provenance at the point of capture?

Trade-offs I'm considering: - Camera cost increase (secure element + wireless) - Battery impact from blockchain transactions (batching possible but introduces verification delay) - Privacy (public ledger, though camera ID could be anonymized) - User experience (always-on vs optional)

I've published the architectural design here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/invention-disclosure-camera-native-blockchain-digital-ryan-m-sc--dc3zc/

It's architectural-level rather than implementation-ready - covers system design, component requirements, and process flow.

This was published as prior art to prevent monopolization. Any meaningful improvements suggested here will also be documented publicly to keep the entire design space open. My goal is solving the problem, not controlling the solution.

I'm curious about both market validation and technical critique. Is this solving a real problem, or solution looking for a use case?
by pauljolly | 2025-11-01 12:05:12+00:00
Thank you for the kind words and for being a part of the CUE community!

You've perfectly captured the vision: "elevated... sane user experience and engineering driven principles" is exactly what we're building the Configuration Control Plane to provide, building on the capabilities of open source CUE.

We completely agree that "YAML and friends will stay." That's a core design principle of CUE: its ability to easily consume existing formats and export back to them, so upstream and downstream tools and workflows don't need to change.

Thanks again for the great comment!
by le-mark | 2025-11-01 12:05:44+00:00
This article is less about assembly programming and more a tour de force on retro game development for the Atari ST. The author talks about using inline assembler to optimize gfx and game rendering inner loops. Oh and the author ported Doom to the Atari ST.

Some people are drawn to assembly and that’s great. Me personally, after a course in undergrad studying MIPS assembly, I learned to appreciate what all the compiler does for us and moved on!
by mexicocitinluez | 2025-11-01 12:07:23+00:00
> But this is not a new problem or one "among the react crowd".

I'm really struggling to understand how the author connected using frameworks with using divs for clickable elements. And yes, this problem predated React and HTMX.

One of my biggest pet peeves is throwing shade at a certain tech or group of people who use that tech and the proceeding to demonstrate that they don't know anything about said tech.
by andai | 2025-11-01 12:07:37+00:00
I was thinking the only option that makes economic sense for Nisus writer is a subscription.

If the market is saturated and they're not going to sell any new copies, then they're just going to go out of business.

If they have existing customers which want the software to continue to exist on an operating system designed to make existing software stop working every few years... then customers paying for the privilege of keeping the thing working on Mac OS seems like the only option.

(For reference, on Windows you can just run stuff from 1995 with basically no problems.)

I hate subscriptions as much as the next guy, but if something is mission critical and irreplaceable, the $15/month for "I need this to keep working" seems pretty reasonable. If there's a non-trivial number of people in a similar situation, maybe they could work something out.
by throwaway31131 | 2025-11-01 12:08:44+00:00
Which lawsuit was that?

I think it’s been a while since there was a MBP MLB lawsuit but maybe I’m forgetting about one.

This is the last one I recall.

“Apple faces class-action lawsuit over 2011 MacBook Pro GPU issues“

https://9to5mac.com/2014/10/28/apple-class-action-lawsuit-20...
by embedding-shape | 2025-11-01 12:09:39+00:00
Not parent, but frequent user of GPT-OSS, tried all different ways of running it. Choice goes something like this:

- Need batching + highest total throughoutput? vLLM, complicated to deploy and install though, need special versions for top performance with GPT-OSS

- Easiest to manage + fast enough: llama.cpp, easier to deploy as well (just a binary) and super fast, getting ~260 tok/s on a RTX Pro 6000 for the 20B version

- Easiest for people not used to running shell commands or need a GUI and don't care much for performance: Ollama

Then if you really wanna go fast, try to get TensorRT running on your setup, and I think that's pretty much the fastest GPT-OSS can go currently.
by kibwen | 2025-11-01 12:09:48+00:00
Async Rust is as complex as it needs to be given its constraints. But I wholeheartedly agree with you that people need to treat threads (especially scoped ones) as the default concurrency primitive. My intuition is that experience with other languages has led people astray; in most languages threads are a nightmare and/or async is the default or only way to achieve concurrency, but threads in Rust are absolutely divine by comparison. Async should only be used when you have a good reason that threads don't suffice.
by tomjen3 | 2025-11-01 12:10:26+00:00
May I suggest just requiring people to register what how much they want to gamble and then be locked into that. If you want to gamble for 100 usd per month, then you can't bet more than that. You should be able to set your own amount, but any changes should only be active from the next month.

This has minimum impact on personal liberty, and will almost eliminate problem gambling.
by andai | 2025-11-01 12:10:49+00:00
At this point it sounds like there's no one left at the company who still cares.

That would be a death sentence, even if the company had good financials, which it also sounds like it does not.

Open sourcing it sounds very unlikely in that condition.

The only thing I can think of is to switch to a subscription model. If there's enough people who rely on it and need it to keep working despite Mac OS updates. Then it seems fair to continue paying for development?

(If there's enough people like that, maybe they could organize something and contact the company... maybe)