MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by toomuchtodo | 2025-11-26 20:57:58+00:00
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/visualized-u-s-inflation-by...

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/inflation-chart-tracks-pric...

https://www.axios.com/2025/09/22/the-american-dream-will-cos...

https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/

Related: (others?)

Why Millennials and Gen Z Are Going Gray Early, According to Experts - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45738730 - October 2025 (0 comments)

American Millennials Are Dying at an Alarming Rate - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44963675 - August 2025 (9 comments)

Millennials were priced out of capitalism - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43808835 - April 2025 (9 comments)

Millennials –The Unluckiest Generation–Became the Most Economically Divided - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42020355 - November 2024 (1 comment)

Millennials to feel biggest burden of fixing Social Security, report finds - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40505200 - May 2024 (0 comments)

Deeply Unhappy Gen Z and Millennials Cause U.S. Drop in Global Happiness Ranking - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39767329 - March 2024 (46 comments)

Millennials Have the Children, but Boomers Have the Houses - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39295239 - February 2024 (12 comments)

HN Search: Millennials - https://hn.algolia.com/?q=Millennials
by logsr | 2025-11-26 20:57:59+00:00
Google may very well be the Google of this era. They have demonstrated the ability to maintain parity on the engineering side, they have a long running advantage on OpEx with TPU, they have the most data, and the most trusted brand.

AI collapses the value of IP across the board, because AI trends towards being the only IP, which means that the marketplace will be defined by operational efficiency, ability to build and run systems at massive global scale, access to capital, and government connections, so Microsoft, Amazon, and Google probably stay on top.
by BrandoElFollito | 2025-11-26 20:58:13+00:00
On the other hand when Google mail gies down, I am happy to be in yhe same boat as 2 B people, waiting for the page to refresh.

As opposed to be with the small provider round the corner who is currently having a beer and will look at that tomorrow morning.

Now - I am in the phase where I ap seriously considering to move my email from Google to a small player in Europe (still not sure who) so this is what may ultimately be my fate :)
by liamconnell | 2025-11-26 20:58:22+00:00
Yes that's what I meant. But Amazon will fight for its life to stop this. So OpenAI will have to go to other retailers, which don't have the same product catalogue size as Amazon. Best case scenario: Target or Walmart. But there is a reason that OpenAI announced deals with Etsy and Shopify rather than those.

And OpenAI doesn't have as much product insight as the retailers so they have to rely on the retailer to choose which is the "best" mechanical keyboard for this person. And at that point, pretty much all of the shopping value is being provided by the retailer rather than ChatGPT, so why would they get much money?

There's a market for this but its not going to be trivial for OpenAI to win it. And it probably wont be a cashflow monster like AdWords or Amazon.
by jsheard | 2025-11-26 20:58:32+00:00
That's pretty shaky ground too, even if you can overlook the foundation being closed source, Valve aren't really known for supporting their engines very well beyond their own internal needs. They're not trying to be Epic or Unity.

The most obvious aspect to that is that Source 2 doesn't support consoles. Valve don't need it, so they didn't implement it.
by ssl-3 | 2025-11-26 21:00:16+00:00
We may have a difference of opinion.

It is my own opinion that a creator who deliberately creates a bad thumbnail and a baited title is a bad creator, and that (by extension) I do not wish to consume their content.

There's plenty of other fish in the sea that aren't introducing themselves to me with one or more damned lies. I'm pleased to go watch what they're doing, instead.
by alexose | 2025-11-26 21:00:48+00:00
Just spitballing, but maybe it would be possible with relatively modest advances in ion thrusters, and one (admittedly less-than-modest) breakthrough with fusion.

It's maybe too speculative to even matter, but I don't think it's _crazy_ to imagine a handful of AI-fueled advances in materials discovery during the next decade or two. Possibly enough to unlock laser fusion, or something that could be crammed onto a spacecraft.
by isolatedsystem | 2025-11-26 21:02:08+00:00
I don't care, simple as that. I'm also in an adversarial relationship with LTT, and with Google.

I realised over the last years that my weariness with the internet was born mostly out of Youtube and Reddit. Reddit I've successfully cut out of my life, Youtube is more difficult to do because much of modern culture happens there. But I've drawn the line at the worst offenders. In tech, people like Dave2D and Marques Brownlee have managed to avoid having stupid thumbnails, so I'd rather watch them. Thereafter, I have a CalmYoutubers.md file that has the (few) channels that I find are not idiotic, so I stick to them.
by embedding-shape | 2025-11-26 21:03:38+00:00
> Valve aren't really known for supporting their engines very well beyond their own internal needs.

Valve has a long history of supporting the modding community and outside users of Source, not sure where you're getting your information from but I don't think they've worked with the Source engine before. One of the biggest and most popular mods of all time was built on Source, and took the world by storm, with pretty big support by Valve through the years as well. Eventually they even bought the whole IP.
by dlisboa | 2025-11-26 21:03:43+00:00
> The road out of “developing country” took forever but now I see them producing great products in basically every industry.

Did it? We're talking 1949 up to a few years ago. 70 odd years from mass starvation to having their own space station. One could even say it's less than that, starting with the reforms in the 80s.
by tzs | 2025-11-26 21:04:00+00:00
In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46061943 danishSuri1994 said that if others like China and ESA did not also develop reusable rockets they would be priced out of orbit access entirely. I have a question about that, but their comment got killed faster than I could type and submit my question so I'll ask it a level up.

Why would not having reusable rockets price someone like China or ESA out of orbit access?

I can see how it could price them out of the business of selling orbit access to other parties, but I don't see how it would stop them from accessing orbit for their own purposes.
by agreeahmed | 2025-11-26 21:04:38+00:00
Yes, we have similar compliance things we consider to Stripe and PayPal. We believe the best experience will only need one onboarding, which would mean we need to process the payments (even if we use Stripe under the hood to do so for now). That’s why we decided not to build a BYOK flow.

This thread has been eye opening for revealing how much more clearly we could be explaining the funds flow story. Thank you for your feedback!
by the_af | 2025-11-26 21:04:50+00:00
Brush your teeth three, four or as many times as you like! As I said, beyond the minimum it's just a cultural habit. I knew one person who wouldn't consider her tooth-brushing complete if she didn't also brush her tongue, then removed "stuff" from her inner cheeks with a spoon... each time. (It's not a common practice, before you ask). She wasn't a dentist or a doctor either, I think she was a school teacher.

The overreaction thing is just your own baggage. Seems like a lot to extrapolate from so few words.
by zimpenfish | 2025-11-26 21:05:07+00:00
As well as the leap year stuff people have mentioned, there was something else that I've got a vague memory of (from an old SciAm article, IIRC, which was about using March as the first month for calculations) which pointed out that if you use March as 0, you can multiple the month number by (I forget exactly what but it was around 30.4ish?) and, if you round the fraction up, you get the day number of the start of that month and it all works out correctly for the right 31-30-31 etc sequence.
by jsheard | 2025-11-26 21:05:15+00:00
That was then, in 2025 they don't have a public Source 2 SDK, nor do they generally license the engine to third parties, S&box being the sole exception. They barely have their toes in the middleware game anymore.

Even when they were more open with their tech it was on the basis of "you can play with the tools we used to make Half Life and if your idea is sufficiently Half Life shaped then it will probably work", not trying to be a general purpose toolkit a la Unity.
by hamdingers | 2025-11-26 21:05:33+00:00
Hogwash! We can do it much faster than that. With a machine in Alpha Centauri capable of flinging rocks full of rare earth metals back towards the solar system at 1/10th the speed of light, we could be up and running in <150 years.

This feels about as realistic as most of the spacetech proposals I hear.
by georgefrowny | 2025-11-26 21:06:43+00:00
I also spend far too much time wondering about sending out swarms of probes and if you could somehow rendezvous them and add fuel midjourney and so on!

The problem I see is that lasers are still subject to diffraction, and this is worse the smaller the aperture is relative to wavelength. Due to the small probe mass which you need to split with observation equipment, support systems and presumably some microscale nuclear power supply, you could maybe with a few breakthroughs in engineering manage a wispy affair on the order of a metre at most. It it scales with diameter and mass scales with diameter squared.

So the beam divergence of a visible light laser end with a diameter of over 18 million km over 4 light years. With 100W of transmission power, that's 0.1pW per square kilometer of receiver. Which isn't nothing, but it's not huge either.

I really don't see how the Starwisp type microprobes will actually work on a practical level at any time in the foreseeable future, even if the propulsion works. Not only is the communications a problem, but so is power, computational resources, observation equipment, radiation shielding and everything in between. But anything massier than that requires mindboggling amounts of fuel. And the problem is so much worse if you want to stop at the destination rather than scream past at a modest fraction of c and hope to snap a photo on the way past.

It really seems (sadly, in a way) that building gigantic telescopes will be a lot more instructive than any plausible probe for quite some time. An gravitational lens telescope would be a far better, and probably almost as challenging, project for learning about exoplanets. Not least it would be about 3 times further from Earth than Voyagers.
by uticus | 2025-11-26 21:06:44+00:00
> legally obligated...then...costs are covered

Costs aren't covered. They are obfuscated. Which is why in the US, socialistic health care is not a good alternative to our current insurance situation.

Money goes from patient (or patient's employer), to government, to insurance, to health care provider. With a lot of opaque mechanisms and transfers in between.
by grvbck | 2025-11-26 21:07:55+00:00
> current vehicles traveling about 10x the speed of voyager

As I understand it, not really. Parker Solar Probe is crazy fast, but only because it has that trajectory, and is unable to just change course and keep that speed in other directions.

If you want to launch something for deep space, the Jupiter-Saturn slingshot is still the most powerful trajectory we know of.

Today's rocket engines would give the probe a higher initial speed, but the final velocity would not differ dramatically. A fair bit higher, but not orders of magnitude.
by Analemma_ | 2025-11-26 21:08:16+00:00
This was Amazon's huge bet on Alexa: that if you made a frictionless way to buy products by saying "computer, buy me [thing]", then people would use it and then you could sell favored placement on it.

It was a total failure. I know lots of people-- both technical and non-technical-- who have Alexa devices, and not one of them has ever bought anything with it. You can read various comments from Amazon insiders confirming that the rate of buying things with Alexa was close to zero. And why not? It's the shittiest possible way to shop, like buying a lottery ticket except where the RNG is knowingly gamed. This is why Amazon is writing off Alexa entirely.

I've commented to this effect before, but "what if people could shop sight unseen" is a PM fantasy, not a thing anybody actually wants. LLMs might be useful for helping with research and comparison shopping, but the "one-click [or one-prompt] buying" workflow is not gonna happen.
by GMoromisato | 2025-11-26 21:08:19+00:00
Past colonization happened because individuals made choices they felt would benefit them.

Even if the only goal of colonization is getting resources (which I dispute), some individuals will risk colonization to get resources that they can't obtain at home. Resources are not evenly distributed across a population and, and every piece of land is owned by someone, but not everyone owns land.

The cost of space travel will continue to drop, and at some point it will make sense for people to seek their fortune there.

Moreover, we didn't land on the moon in 1969 to get resources, and we're not going to land in the 2020s for resources. The reasons are complex, and not always logical, but they are definitely not about resources. I don't see any reason why that would change in a hundred years.
by sershe | 2025-11-26 21:08:26+00:00
Not pro monopoly as such, but in the recently posted article on UK shipbuilding they mentioned that a major reason for it's decline was it didn't build out capital capacity after being repeatedly burned by cyclical nature of the industry, with some quote even claiming they thought they would be best positioned for the next bust explicitly.

What choice do these companies have, even assuming the demand doesn't crash? They can build out and cause a glut in a few years. They can not build out and then what? Barriers to entry are high but not insurmountable; long term they'll go the way of UK shipbuilding. It might take a while, though. Also one defector building out would have massive advantage, so it doesn't seem like a stable equilibrium. See also constant bickering in the OPEC, an explicit cartel.
by dap | 2025-11-26 21:08:28+00:00
I hear that, but it feels kind of empty because I haven't seen much discussion of that cost/benefit analysis (both of poisoning itself and of the change to the default behavior, which has its own costs and benefits).

I take it as uncontroversial that an important function of Mutexes is to ensure that invariants about data are maintained when the data is modified and that very bad things can happen when a program's data invariants are violated at runtime and the program doesn't notice. Maybe folks disagree about whether a program should always panic when invariants are violated at runtime (though there's certainly plenty of precedent in Rust itself for doing this, like with array bounds checking). Probably the bigger question mark is that panicking with a Mutex held doesn't necessarily mean an invariant is violated. But it does mean that the mechanism for ensuring the invariant has itself failed. I can see different choices about what to do here. For myself, the event itself is so rare and the impact of getting an invariant wrong so high that I absolutely do want to panic -- the false positive rate is just too small to matter.
by super256 | 2025-11-26 21:09:02+00:00
I am currently trying to sell a brand new DDR5 6000 64GB CL 28-36-36-96 kit for 100€ below market prices with warranty (I purchased it 3 months ago, and never opened it as I figured I don't need 128GB in my PC.)

But it's just not selling. I guess most people don't even check ebay, and go straight to hardware online retailers.
by burntsushi | 2025-11-26 21:09:24+00:00
I've presented examples. They haven't. They haven't even bothered to engage with the examples I've provided. I want to read code they've written using this philosophy so that I can see what it looks like in real world usage. Otherwise, the only code I've seen that does something similar uses formal methods. So I simply do not believe that this is practical advice for most programming.

Insisting on examples and evidence to support an argument isn't combative. It's appropriate when extraordinary claims are being made.

If you've published code using this philosophy that is used by real people in real systems, then I would be happy to take a look at that as well. If it exists, I would bet it's in a niche of a niche.

I've had these arguments before about this very topic. Some people have taken me up on this request and actually provided examples. And in 100% of those cases, it turned out there was a mismatch between what they were saying and what the code was doing.
by spit2wind | 2025-11-26 21:09:51+00:00
Termux isn't required, unless you want other applications (e.g. git, python, or GCC).

If you do want Termux, a signed and compatible version is provided by the Emacs devs. It should all be in the README (at least it always has been, through various updates, since I started using the Emacs on Android before it was merged into the main branch).
by fooker | 2025-11-26 21:10:09+00:00
> Space is so ridiculously big that I don't think it will ever happen

You are underestimating acceleration. To travel and come to a stop at 4.2 light years, a spaceship with 1g acceleration barely needs 3.5 years in relativistic ship time (~6 years earth time).

The technology to sustain 1g acceleration through 3.5 years is a different story, but very much within our understanding of physics (and not warp drives, etc). 20-50 years of engineering can get us there.
by Sharlin | 2025-11-26 21:10:41+00:00
No. As the author tries to make clear, these are not the most common causes to go to a hospital. They are the causes, however unlikely, that show the most gender bias. That is, if the sample had one single data point of some very uncommon cause, it would show up on the list as either 100% male or 100% female.

Also, probabilities don't work like that.
by bc569a80a344f9c | 2025-11-26 21:11:52+00:00
I’m not nitpicking as such, I’m just providing a counterexample because it is rather rare for a company to spell it out:

> In order to achieve our mission, we will conduct our business with the following Code of Ethics in mind:

> Obey the law.

> Take care of our members.

> Take care of our employees.

> Respect our suppliers.

> If we do these four things throughout our organization, then we will achieve our ultimate goal, which is to reward our shareholders.

https://customerservice.costco.com/app/answers/answer_view/a...
by dragontamer | 2025-11-26 21:12:04+00:00
> For what? The US Navy will play no role in a war between china and taiwan.

Uhhhhh, Taiwan is an island dude. That's either Marines or Navy. I'm betting Navy will do the heavy lifting given that China is missile heavy.

Marines might be used to shore up anti-landing defenses if China decides to send boots on the ground. But ideally the US Navy prevents the landing entirely.

Said war taking place while we have 1980s-era Arleigh Burke Destroyers would be an attack while our Navy is at our weakest. Anything we can do to delay said war until after the DDG(X) upgrade is to our advantage.

> No offense, but who gives a shit about taiwan? Not americans. Only chinese people care about taiwan.

I'm American and I care? That's why I'm arguing on this point.

Current wargames suggest that USA will be willing to dedicate like 2 carrier strike groups for the defense of Taiwan. I'm not sure if it's enough (especially with the aging Arleigh Burke destroyers), but that's the level of commitment mostly assumed in this scenario if not more.

We have like 14 Carrier strike groups for a reason. We can spare two of them to this task, maybe more.
by sema4hacker | 2025-11-26 21:12:30+00:00
Good movies aren't created often, while movies in general are now produced more frequently, so unimpressive movies are much easier to bump into. I just saw a chart showing over twice as many movies were released in 2018 as in 2000. It would be interesting to see for each IMDB decade what percentage of films are rated 8 or higher.
by auntienomen | 2025-11-26 21:12:31+00:00
I think at this stage, most mathematicians recognize that formal proof verification is a real and interesting thing. We have extremely prominent mathematicians like Scholze & Tao making a point of using these tools.

But in many cases, it's extra effort for not much reward. The patterns which most mathemematicians are interested in are (generally) independent of the particular foundations used to realize them. Whether one invests the effort into formal verification depends on how hard the argument is and how crucial the theorem.
by AJ007 | 2025-11-26 21:12:53+00:00
Kind of reminds me of the junk forensic fire science. "Slop Detective" might have been nice in 2022, now its slop itself. Maybe this is an old link? If someone just published this in the last 90 days, they are an idiot.

There's a lot of anti-AI sentiment in the art world (not news) but real artists are now actively accused of using AI and getting kicked off reddit or whatever. That tells me there is going to be 0 market for 100% human created art, not the other way around.
by logsr | 2025-11-26 21:12:55+00:00
I think you are right that the entire analysis is flawed. The Amazon and Microsoft "rental" deals have inflated price tags because of the circular financial arrangements between them and OpenAI, and because those future revenue streams can be used notionally to finance CapEx. All of the Stargate DC build is being done through for-profit SPVs, so the financials are murky, but building the infra gives them collateral for debt, and they are going to lease the compute to the highest bidder, so there is a whole scheme for getting out of the non-profit box, creating a self-perpetuating loop of borrowing to build, using what they build as collateral for more borrowing, raising additional revenue and hedging by leasing compute to 3rd parties, and then using the for-profit SPVs to cross-subsidize OpenAI proper. That plan has enormous risks of its own (can the leadership team of OpenAI effectively build a competitor in the hyperscale compute space?) but whatever happens, it won't just be straight line scaling their current deals with existing hyperscalers.
by embedding-shape | 2025-11-26 21:12:57+00:00
S&B existing and being what it is, effectively makes it the Source 2 SDK, although it's not from Valve. But fair point Source 2 isn't licensed to others, I think the expectation is that if you wanna build a Source 2 game, you have to use S&B. At least for now, who knows what their ideas and ambitions really lie.
by kridsdale1 | 2025-11-26 21:13:10+00:00
In my experience it’s that set lighting has changed enormously.

Modern digital cinema cameras can capture dark scenes far better than the film stocks of the 90s and earlier. So set designers don’t need to blast light everywhere to have actors be visible. Now, we even have AI Denoising that can make ISO 12500 look like 800.

Go watch a 90s movie and look at a night or interior scene. You’ll see that everyone is actually lit by blue lights. Not natural darkness. That’s a major change.

This also shows up in porn. A playboy photo was expertly lit and beautifully so, with angles and bounces and shade filters and gobos.

Since the 2000s the market has expected the “DV Cam” which became “Smartphone” recorded look. Which means natural lighting all the time. It’s lost the “glam”.