MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by afandian | 2025-11-17 18:48:43+00:00
Thanks for sharing!

I did some similar playing around with an ESP32 and I2S a few years ago (lockdowns were an odd time). Where I seem to remember getting stuck was how to get the phase to line up, so that each sample looped at a zero-crossing point (which is different for each frequency).

For the lazy, what did you do?

https://gitlab.com/afandian/melodicornamuse/-/blob/main/melo...
by entropie | 2025-11-17 18:49:23+00:00
This is interesting. I questioned the "why is tinanium so expensive" more than once and the only answer was "It's hard to make"

I have a bit of a titanium fetish. 90% of my cutlery and cups in the kitchen are now made of titanium. I especially love the (double-walled) bowls.

I really like touching the material. I like its aesthetic. I find it very strange myself. My first encounter was 15 years ago with the Snow Peak spork that I bought for outdoor activities/camping. Later, I acquired a Snow Peak cup, which I still use every day.
by bigyabai | 2025-11-17 18:49:51+00:00
Mozilla has proven they can exist in a free market; really and truly, they do compete.

Safari is what I'm concerned about. Without Apple's monopoly control, Safari is guaranteed to be a dead engine. WebKit isn't well-enough supported on Linux and Windows to compete against Blink and Gecko, which suggests that Safari is the most expendable engine of the three.
by Eisenstein | 2025-11-17 18:49:55+00:00
> Is that an actual EA argument?

you missed this part: "The arguments always feel to me too similar"

> The value is all at the margins. Like Carnegie had legitimate functional businesses that would be profitable without Pinkerton's. So without Pinkerton's he'd still be able to afford probably every philanthropic thing he did so it doesn't justify it.

That isn't what OP was engaging with though, they aren't asking for you to answer the question 'what could Carnegie have done better' they are saying 'the philosophy seems to be arguing this particular thing'.
by kuschku | 2025-11-17 18:50:19+00:00
> Actually, you can make an RSS feed user-browsable by using JavaScript instead

Say I have an XML document that uses XSLT, how do I modify it to apply your suggestion?

I've previously suggested the XML stylesheet tag should allow

<?xml-stylesheet type="application/javascript" href="https://example.org/script.js"?>

which would then allow the script to use the service-worker APIs to intercept and transform the request.

But with the implementation available today, I see no way to provide a first-class XSLT-like experience with JS.
by hunterbown | 2025-11-17 18:50:24+00:00
Hey HN! Here's Hegelion -- applying Hegelian dialecticism to push LLMs to construct stronger arguments.

The motivation I think is pretty obvious -- most LLM answers are confident first drafts. They rarely surface their own contradictions or explore serious alternatives. Hegelion wraps any backend and makes it do three passes: Thesis – initial answer. Antithesis – targeted self-critique: contradictions, missing cases, bad assumptions. Synthesis – a reconciled, more defensible position.

The JSON output is designed for researchers and eval work. Each run includes: contradictions: itemized weaknesses the model identified in its own reasoning. research_proposals: testable hypotheses or follow-up questions from the synthesis. metadata: timings, backend info, prompt hashes, etc.

Repo includes a CLI + Python API, MCP server for multiple backends, & hegelion-bench tool for basic model comparison

Repo: https://github.com/Hmbown/Hegelion

I'm the creator (hmbown). Curious to hear if this is useful for your own work.
by pletsch | 2025-11-17 18:50:43+00:00
I agree with the premise that report writers usually lack an ability to tell the story. It's tough though because I know a lot of SOCs and IT dept's will take any detail they can get if an incident happens in their own vertical and there is a lot of desire to help the community in IT/security culture.. but these reports really are for business partners more than anyone else and in that context, people could learn a lot by taking the advice into account.

The post does use cyber industry terminology inconsistently though, noted in another comment, and I fear that's going to make every technologist exit the page before getting the point.
by red-iron-pine | 2025-11-17 18:51:49+00:00
why is China flying drones over Italy? is Italy a big backer of Taiwanese independence?

it is almost certainly Russia, or NATO running drills.

also don't underestimate idiots and assholes in the same way that incoming flights to airports still have to deal with people shining laser pointers at them on an irregular but not uncommon basis
by keiferski | 2025-11-17 18:51:59+00:00
The popularity of EA always seemed pretty obvious to me: here's a philosophy that says it doesn't matter what kind of person you are or how you make your fortune, as long as you put some amount of money toward problems. Exploiting people to make money is fine, as long as some portion of that money is going toward "a good cause." There is really no element of self virtue in the way that virtue ethics has..it's just pure calculation.

It's the perfect philosophy for morally questionable people with a lot of money. Which is exactly who got involved.

That's not to say that all the work they're doing/have done is bad, but it's not really surprising why bad actors attached themselves to the movement.
by estearum | 2025-11-17 18:52:21+00:00
The blue-line/red-line diverging price graph is such a great litmus test for someone's ability to do even a single round of interrogation.

Here's the question to ask:

Which of these have economies of scale, are scale-neutral, or have diseconomies of scale?

Ta-da!

Three sectors that have diseconomies of scale: education, healthcare, housing.

Essential services aggregate in the red because non-essential services that have diseconomies of scale... wait for it... never achieve scale! Then you have government step in because the services are important (often with hard-to-capture upside, ergo limited incentive for private investment to begin with), and now you have an aggregation of essential, expensive, government-involved services.
by gopher_space | 2025-11-17 18:52:45+00:00
Every time you have your work "checked over by other serious people", it only means it's been checked over by other people. You can't attach a metric to this process. Especially when it comes to security, adding more internal eyeballs doesn't mean you've expanded coverage.

One of the things I enjoy about Penn and Teller is that they explain in detail how their point of view differs from the audiences and how they intentionally use that difference in their shows. With that in mind you might picture your org as the audience, with one perspective diligently looking forwards.
Ask HN: Can you help me with this technical policy?
by piratesAndSons | 2025-11-17 18:52:49+00:00
I am currently working on a small blog built with Flask and Python (community size under 10k). To manage spam, I am considering adopting a policy similar to Hacker News by not allowing users to delete their submissions after a specific period. This approach obviously has pros and cons. However, in the age of AI-generated spam and content scraping by LLM-based tools, freezing submissions might be an effective way to combat content theft. What do you think of this content freeze policy?
by kragen | 2025-11-17 18:53:36+00:00
The solution I was taught as a child is to saw the hole square, put a section of 2×4 behind it spanning the hole, held in place with a drywall screw through the drywall on each side of the hole, cut a square chunk of drywall small enough to fit in the hole, put a drywall screw through the middle of it into the 2×4, and tape, mud, sand, and paint.

I suspect that this procedure is faster and easier than taking a 3-D scan of the hole, 3-D printing a PLA patch, and gluing it in, but it does require most of an hour and the appropriate materials on hand.
by vkou | 2025-11-17 18:53:42+00:00
> TIL. Now I'm really curious how maintaining this fiction works (or doesn't) in practice.

Very easily. There's an official account, which 'everyone'[1] knows is bullshit, but if you try to assert any logical consequences of it, you will immediately out yourself as a malcontent, and will get into serious trouble. (Because despite having all sorts of constitutional protections for your rights on paper, the executive has the power in practice to do anything it wants to you at any time, with no redress. Good luck exercising articles 67 through 79 of that constitution. If you're lucky, you'll be softly told to sit down and shut up. If you're unlucky, you'll be doing a few years in a camp.)

It's the time-tested playbook that every authoritarian regime follows, and if you're interested in learning more about how it works in practice, just turn on Fox News. It's got the first half of the double-think process down, and is working hard on getting us to the second half.

There is always a thin public justification for why rights don't apply to the enemies of the state, which is enough to convince ~half the country. (Because ~half of any country will happily accept whatever atrocities its leaders do. You can observe that sort of thing on this very forum.)

---

[1] Not actually everyone, some people really are that fucking stupid, but most know there's something off[2] about it.

[2] In this particular case, the official Atlas says they are one country, but the country's Constitution (updated last year on this very subject) says that the ROK is a foreign, hostile state. Anyone who can read or has eyes to see and ears to hear should easily be able to tell that the latter is the more accurate one.
by observationist | 2025-11-17 18:54:02+00:00
Not even bad advice. Its interpretation of reality is heavily biased towards the priorities, unconscious and otherwise, of the people curating the training data and processes. There's no principled, conscientious approach to make the things as intellectually honest as possible. Anthropic is outright the worst and most blatant ideologically speaking - they're patronizing and smug about it. The other companies couch their biases as "safety" and try to softpedal the guardrails and manage the perceptions. The presumption that these are necessary, and responsible, and so on, is nothing more than politics and corporate power games.

We have laws on the books that criminalize bad things people do. AI safety is normalizing the idea that things that are merely thought need to be regulated. That exploration of ideas and the tools we use should be subject to oversight, and that these AI corporations are positioned to properly define the boundaries of acceptable subject matter and pursuits.

It should be illegal to deliberately inject bias that isn't strictly technically justified. Things as simple as removing usernames from scraped internet data have catastrophic downstream impact on the modeling of a forum or website, not to mention the nuance and detail that gets lost.

If people perform criminal actions in the real world, we should enforce the laws. We shouldn't have laws that criminalize badthink, and the whole notion of government regulated AI Safety is just badthink smuggled in at one remove.

AI is already everywhere - in every phone, accompanying every search, involved in every online transaction. Google and OpenAI and Anthropic have crowned themselves the arbiters of truth and regulators of acceptable things to think about for every domain into which they have inserted their products. They're paying lots of money to politicians and thinktanks to promote their own visions of regulatory regimes, each of which just happens to align with their own internal political an ideological visions for the world.

Just because you can find ways around the limits they've set up doesn't mean they haven't set up those very substantial barriers, and all big tech does is continually invade more niches of life. Attention capture, trying to subsume every second of every day, is the name of the game, and we should probably nuke this shit in its infancy.

We haven't even got close to anything actually interesting in AI safety, like how intelligence intersects with ethics and behavior, and how to engineer motivational systems that align with humans and human social units, and all the alignment problem technicalities. We're witnessing what may be the most amazing technological innovation in history, the final invention, and the people in charge are using it to play stupid tribal games.

Humans are awful, sometimes.
by nocoiner | 2025-11-17 18:54:30+00:00
For one, a higher child-to-caregiver ratio. There may be others, but this seems to be the easiest lever to pull to eke out some productivity gains.

Personally, I’m completely fine with having this be the subject of regulation - even if it’s possibly an overly blunt instrument, this is not an area where I’d be comfortable letting the free hand of the market do its thing. Further, I suspect that universal, subsidized, high-quality pre-K would be a net economic benefit in the long run, but I haven’t done the research to back up this assertion.
by ssl-3 | 2025-11-17 18:54:33+00:00
It might be said that it is true that you can't reason a person out of a position that they didn't reason themselves into -- even with the use of hyperbole.

But I am not unreasonable. I arrived where I am rationally.

And hyperbole here simply injects misguided, disingenuous noise into our interactions where no noise is necessary at all.

Don't sell yourself short. If I can discuss it without going hyperbolic, then so can you.
by chaseadam17 | 2025-11-17 18:55:26+00:00
Man, EA is so close to getting it. They are right that we have a moral obligation to help those in need but they are wrong about how to do it.

Don't outsource your altruism by donating to some GiveWell-recommended nonprofit. Be a human, get to know people, and ask if/how they want help. Start close to home where you can speak the same language and connect with people.

The issues with EA all stem from the fact that the movement centralizes power into the hands of a few people who decide what is and isn't worthy of altruism. Then similar to communism, that power gets corrupted by self-interested people who use it to fund pet projects, launder reputations, etc.

Just try to help the people around you a bit more. If everyone did that, we'd be good.
by ahmeneeroe-v2 | 2025-11-17 18:55:32+00:00
I recently sold my 1TB M1 Cellular iPad at a loss and picked up a 2019 Intel MacBook Pro for exactly the same reason.

I don't even need GNU-freedom, regular MacOS is fine. I just can't live with a iPadOS anymore.

edit: you can pry locked down iOS from my cold dead hands. Love it exactly because it's a walled garden.
by rahimnathwani | 2025-11-17 18:55:54+00:00
In my city, the regulations specify a maximum # kids per adult. So if you were to devise a way to supervise more children per adult, using technology, you would still have to hire the same number of adults.

The regulations specify that teachers must have completed a certain number of units of a specific type of education. If you create an AI Assistant that means you can hire people with less training and have the same quality, then ... you cannot.

The regulations regulate inputs rather than outputs.
by DontForgetMe | 2025-11-17 18:56:06+00:00
Are there a lot of commercially available nuclear reactors competing for consumers, or is it more of a niche market, like high end designer goods, custom made spectacles etc, that don't generally rely on public advertising campaigns?

I've seen an absurd amount of AI advertising, and very little nuclear reactor advertising, but maybe your point is valid and I'm just not the target audience.
by foofoo12 | 2025-11-17 18:56:11+00:00
Webapp doesn't work for me (current version Firefox):

Uncaught TypeError: loading.showModal is not a function <anonymous> https://2earth.pyscriptapps.com/celtic-knot/ latest/:20 latest:20:17 <anonymous> https://2earth.pyscriptapps.com/celtic-knot/ latest/:20

and

Uncaught (in promise) DOMException: IDBFactory.open: The operation is insecure <anonymous> index.js:65 Xe index.js:63 Ye sync.js:8 engine pyodide.js:95 get interpreters.js:36 promise callback*get/< interpreters.js:34 xn loader.js:66 promise callback*xn loader.js:66 Kn script-handler.js:91 or custom.js:99 define custom.js:266 <anonymous> core.js:307 promise callback\* core.js:182

core-Dwn9Kajy.js:1
by kixelated | 2025-11-17 18:56:34+00:00
I like to frame WebTransport as multiple WebSocket connections to the same host, but using a shared handshake.

It's common to multiplex a WebSocket connection but you don't need that with WebTransport, while also avoiding head-of-line-blocking.

But yeah I wish WebTransport had a better TCP fallback. I still use WebSocket for that.
by lesuorac | 2025-11-17 18:56:35+00:00
> The last piece of this economic riddle, which we haven’t mentioned thus far, is that elected governments (who appoint and direct employment regulators) often believe they have a mandate to protect people’s employment and livelihoods. And the straightforward way that mandate gets applied, in the face of technological changes, is to protect human jobs by saying, “This safety function must be performed or signed off by a human.”

I mean the role of you to go jail if something goes wrong is pretty important.... It unfortunately often doesn't work but the lengths at which well paid people go to avoid and then shorten prison sentences really should demonstrate this is the only punishment that works.

We cannot have computers solely in charge of stuff because the computer cannot have responsibility. If you take the radiologist out of the loop then you should take the responsibility.
by bryanlarsen | 2025-11-17 18:56:43+00:00
TLDR, AFAICT:

A: refining the titanium is probably fairly close to maximally efficient. But converting the refined titanium sponge into the final product has a ton of steps, and figuring out ways to delete one or two of those steps would pay dividends.

B: Assuming that the price of energy is going to drop relative to the other costs in the process is probably a safe assumption that can be exploited.
by mindslight | 2025-11-17 18:56:49+00:00
> And one woman, upon being confronted about leaving her cart, declared, “I have really bad vertigo,” before getting behind the wheel and driving away. To be clear: Disabilities deserve accommodation. But if you could push the full cart to your car, why couldn’t you return the empty one?

FWIW, the cart itself can serve as a mobility aid for some types of disabilities. So the hard part might be walking back alone from returning the cart, and that person might view abandoned carts next to open parking spots as a good thing for where they themselves want to park to minimize the cartless walking. I'm certainly not trying to justify the overall trend, just talking about this one particular example.
by tehjoker | 2025-11-17 18:57:11+00:00
As a Jew, the soon as I hear "Israel" and "App" I think of Pegasus. In this genocide, the Israeli government has shown it will cross any line. Remember the pager attack? So I would like there to be zero Israeli controlled products anywhere near me. That plus everyone should be engaged in boycotts divestment and sanctions against the regime.
by mcrich23 | 2025-11-17 18:57:30+00:00
Hi All, I'm pretty new to HN, but I just wanted to share the startup two friends and I are working on.

It's a API key securing service that makes it so you don't have the hard work of building and maintaining a server, while also protecting the key and not shipping it directly in your native client.

We've got a lot to do, so I'll just share the breakdown I wrote on Twitter https://x.com/morrisinlife/status/1990480271985303896.

We are starting with just Apple platform support, but hope to support others soon.

Please sign up for the waitlist if you are interested: https://proxlock.dev
by usr1106 | 2025-11-17 18:58:09+00:00
Creating artificial shortage and than charging overprices is not a normal free market process. Businesses should create added value, then they can charge a price for it.

Actors that misuse or unfairly dominate free markets will trigger regulation, that's the way it has always been. Some regulators are weak, so we still have endure cancers like Google and Microsoft.
by mushufasa | 2025-11-17 18:58:15+00:00
Another way to think of this intuitively is simple economies of scale. Or volume discounts if you work in sales.

When you buy 10,000 handbags you pay the wholesale price whereas buying a single handbag can be quite expensive.

If there is way lower hose demand (volume of sales), the horse producers will have to charge a higher price per horse.

Thus, society in aggregate spends way less on horses while the price of a horse goes up.
by nonethewiser | 2025-11-17 18:58:31+00:00
>The popularity of EA always seemed pretty obvious to me: here's a philosophy that says it doesn't matter what kind of person you are or how you make your fortune, as long as you put some amount of money toward problems. Exploiting people to make money is fine, as long as some portion of that money is going toward "a good cause."

I dont think this is a very accurate interpretation of the idea - even with how flawed the movement is. EA is about donating your money effectively. IE ensuring the donation gets used well. At it's face, that's kind of obvious. But when you take it to an extreme you blur the line between "donation" and something else. It has selected for very self-righteous people. But the idea itself is not really about excusing you being a bad person, and the donation target is definitely NOT unimportant.
by hackingonempty | 2025-11-17 18:58:53+00:00
> So I approached the question of shopping cart abandonment the way I would any puzzle about human behavior: I collected data. My evidence came from an unlikely source: Cart Narcs, a small group whose mission is to encourage cart return, sometimes gently, sometimes less so.

CartNarc videos are selected for the reaction of the subject. Many videos where the subject just returned their cart or didn't get sufficiently agitated end up on the cutting room floor. It isn't a representative sample, there is heavy selection bias. No conclusions can be drawn from them despite the attempts of the author.

It isn't even "somewhat" scientific as the author states.
by general1465 | 2025-11-17 18:59:08+00:00
NATO overestimated Russia by wide margin. We were expecting Ukraine to fall apart within few months and then the plan was to fuel insurgency in Ukraine and turn it into another Afghanistan.

However thanks to outstanding Russian stupidity and underestimation of Ukraine by Russian side we got WW1 with drones where Russia burned all its Soviet armor and all its oil money. Way to go, Russia knock itself out without NATO lifting a finger.
by loloquwowndueo | 2025-11-17 18:59:10+00:00
Depends on what the SLA phrasing is - us-east-1 affinity is a requirement put forth by some customers so I would totally expect the SLA to specifically state it’s subject to us-east-1 availability. Essentially these customers are opting out of Authress’s fault-tolerant infrastructure and the SLA should be clear about that.
by macintux | 2025-11-17 18:59:14+00:00
My small-town public library growing up had a great resource that I did not appreciate at the time: an English translation of the Great Soviet Encyclopedia[0].

I really wish I had spent time with it. If nothing else it would have given me some questions to ask my history teachers.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Soviet_Encyclopedia