MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Hizonner | 2025-11-09 00:48:17+00:00
> Internet but not for any other commerce. If you sell products to someone in the EU, you are liable to EU laws about that product category and commercial activity. The internet is the only exception, and that has caused a lot of problems.

I don't know the state of play now, and I do know that things have gotten more that way over time. But the traditional approach to international product sales is that the importer is responsible. That originally meant the person who physically brought it into the country. As common carriers became more common, it meant the person who ordered the thing. That's occasionally been leavened by some consideration of whether the seller specifically targeted customers in the receiving country. And nowadays there's more of a tendency to start "blaming" sellers in some cases, probably because nowadays "importing" something is often a retail order from a specific consumer, as opposed to somebody bringing in a shipping container on spec to resell. Maybe some of those changes are appropriate, but it's just not true that physical goods have always been treated the way you want Web sites treated here, or even that they're mostly treated that way now.

> IP block is the currently the only reasonable way to apply laws to internet based commerce.

"IP block" works in both directions.

If you want to keep something out of your country, you should be responsible for blocking it, not the other way around. That's not necessarily easy, but it's less costly in total than demanding that every Web site enforce every country's regulation... and it has the advantage of putting the cost of a regulation on the people imposing it, which is where it belongs.

> It has its flaws in accuracy; but ISPs could easily create a system to make them more reliable for IP lookup.

From your use of the word "easily", I conclude that you personally would not be among those responsible for making that work.

> Arguing that websites cannot be regulated outside of country of origin is an insane position to take with even the minimal level of hypothetical reasoning of what that would imply.

First, you can in fact "regulate" by blocking, without trying to extend the reach of your laws outside of your border. Your claim that a regulator is left totally powerless is just false.

Second, in practice, that "hypothetical" is pretty close to what we have now, and even closer to what we had 10 years ago. The world did not end.

> UKs laws are dumb, but they should be free to enforce them for websites operating in the UK

Sure, as long as we recognize that "operating in the UK" properly means "is physically located in or controlled from the UK" and not "happens to be accessible to people in the UK". The latter definition would indeed be insane.
by arkensaw | 2025-11-09 00:49:11+00:00
A word of caution.

> WARNING: This will erase everything on the laptop you install it on. Please make backups before beginning.

I ran it a few months back without reading everything. I was trying a bunch of different linux distros via bootable USB drives, when I tried this one and it wiped the underlying drive.

Luckily enough it was just a test machine, I didn't lose anything crucial.
by Waterluvian | 2025-11-09 00:49:50+00:00
I love the DS9 reference. But it also reminds me of Hamilton:

You'll be back, time will tell You'll remember that I served you well Oceans rise, empires fall We have seen each other through it all And when push comes to shove I will send a fully armed battalion to remind you of my love!

The idea that the world was better off under American rule is so deeply ironic that my brain is breaking.
by gtrevorjay | 2025-11-09 00:49:58+00:00
Of course I am. A military alliance is contingent on the other party remaining an ally. Even Democrats would expect NATO to be dissolved if by some shenanigans Putin was elected PM.

That the US abuses it's position as the primary military power on earth to violate other nation's sovereignty is wrong and might matter "in the final calculus" but doesn't change how wrong this UK action is in isolation. It does bring up another absurdity particular to interactions between the US and UK which is that the US extended an insane amount of courtesy of not "finishing the job" once it was the predominant world power.
by Maxatar | 2025-11-09 00:50:34+00:00
>Do you agree that C++ pass-by-value is using copy constructors?

C++ is an incredibly complex language that it's almost never the case that you can make a categorical statement this simple and have it be true or false.

In C++, pass by value may or may not make use of a copy constructor depending on a set of very complex rules. For example passing an rvalue by value for a class type which defines a move constructor may use the move constructor rather than the copy constructor (emphasis on may because even that isn't guaranteed). Passing an lvalue for a class type may or may not invoke the copy constructor depending on specific language rules regarding copy elision. For fundamental types, there is no copy constructor whatsoever.

>Do you agree that the copy constrictors of the C++ standard library (STL) all do deep copy?

I absolutely do not agree with this, in fact believing so is absurd and I can't possibly fathom what would lead you to believe this. The principle the C++ standard uses for copying objects is based on Alexander Stepanov's "Elements of Programming" where he defines the concept of a regular type. A regular type does not require making a deep or a shallow copy, what it requires is that copies satisfy the following:

The copy must preserve equivalence (if a == b, then copy(a) == copy(b)).

The copy must be idempotent in meaning.

Copying must not have side effects on the source.

So as an example a std::string_view can be copied, but making a copy of it is constant O(1) in both time and space. What is required is that after performing a copy, the original source remains unchanged, operator == returns true between the source and the copy, and that making a copy is an idempotent operation.

You can extend this further for other collections as well, a std::vector<Foo*> does not end up making deep copies of the pointers being contained, what it does do is satisfy the conditions for being a regular type.

>Do you agree that if you write your own class with a raw pointer member, you would need to write a copy constructor?

Absolutely not. Just sticking to the existing standard library types you have things like std::span, all of the iterator types which use pointers under the hood, std::initializer_list, std::string_view was already covered.

To be blunt, you're expressing a very superficial understanding of a very complex topic that's part of an even more complex language.

In general my advice is... never assume that things in C++ are as simple and straight forward as they appear. If you're using a subset of the language that works for you, great, like really good job and continue doing so and I absolutely don't want to discourage you from using the subet of C++ that works for your use case... but don't then confuse this subset for being representative of either the language as a whole or representative of the vast use cases that C++ belongs to and recognize that the advice you give which works so well for you may actually be really bad advice for someone else working within a different subset of the language.
by least | 2025-11-09 00:50:36+00:00
I’m not sure if you’re being tongue in cheek or not but the US government doesn’t really function like a parliamentary one. Elections can’t just be called, governments can’t just be dissolved, and any sort of coalition is within different factions of the two major parties.

Republicans hold a majority in the Senate (which is akin to the upper house, House of Lords, or whatever else) but in order to forcefully end a filibuster (cloture), you must get 3/5 of the senate to vote for it (60 votes since there are 100 senators)

The filibuster used to actually involve senators standing and speaking since the senate generally does not limit the amount of time that a senator may speak. Today it’s just a threat of filibuster. It’s controversial but neither party really wants to get rid of it.
by roenxi | 2025-11-09 00:50:48+00:00
It is true. That article doesn't really back up the idea that wealthy families have more children and in most of the graphs you can actually see fertility has dropped off with income. Eg, in Figure 1 it looks like the only demographic consistently meeting the replacement rate are low income women in certain cultural groups and a marginal number of wealthy migrants. It is obvious [0] that more wealth -> less children. The effect enormous.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_and_fertility
by AIVH | 2025-11-09 00:50:54+00:00
Valid concern about determinism. Let me clarify:

The AI layer translates intent → deterministic commands. It doesn't execute randomly.

Example workflow: 1. User: "install docker with nvidia support" 2. AI generates: ["apt update", "apt install docker.io", "apt install nvidia-docker2"] 3. Sandbox validates commands against whitelist 4. Execute deterministically 5. Verify installation

The AI is the interface layer, not the execution layer. Commands are reproducible and auditable.

We're also building dry-run mode so users can review before execution.

Think of it like: AI = smart man page reader, not autonomous agent making random decisions.

Open to feedback on making this more deterministic. What would make you more comfortable with the approach?
by AIVH | 2025-11-09 00:51:23+00:00
Update (12 hours in):

We now have working code! Three PRs merged:

- AI command interpreter with Claude/GPT-4 support - Sandboxed execution engine with security controls - Hardware profiling system (CPU/GPU/RAM detection)

Phase 1 is 60% complete already. The open source community is amazing.

Just posted 10 new issues with bounties ($25-100): github.com/cortexlinux/cortex/issues

Huge thanks to dhvil and Sahilbhatane for the excellent work.

Looking for more contributors - especially for package manager integration and CLI interface.
by matt-p | 2025-11-09 00:51:32+00:00
Maybe this is very european of me but 250KM is outrageously far. Dublin to Belfast is like 130KM. If it says they're in Seville (in Spain) within <200KM they could also be in Portugal, Morocco, or Gibraltar. If it says you're in Brussels within <200KM you could also be in France, England, Germany, Netherlands, Lux. If you're in Vienna (Austria), you could also be in Germany, CZ, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia or Croatia. Maybe you're in Vilnius? You could also be in Latvia, Poland, Russia or Belarus.

Comedically far.
by btilly | 2025-11-09 00:53:02+00:00
Are you sure that this is a strawman?

Accepted medical guidelines not long ago said to bring blood pressure from the dangerous range, to elevated, then encourage patients to engage in diet and exercise. Research such as https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26551272/ demonstrated that it is better to medicate all of the way to the normal range.

I personally had specialist in blood pressure follow the old advice around 2018. I asked for further medication, and he refused to give it. In so doing, he was following accepted practice, per professional guidelines. This left me with elevated blood pressure for several years. This despite the fact that when I was personally physically fit (when my blood pressure problems were discovered, I still had my crossfit bod), that did not help my blood pressure.

Guidelines are continuing to evolve. Even today, guidelines about how far down to take blood pressure are somewhat vague in the USA. Many countries stick to the older, higher, targets in who even gets medicated in the first place.

It wasn't until about 2 years ago that I encountered a doctor who was willing to medicate me all of the way into the normal range. Given the 2015 research, I'm very happy about this. But it is far from a guarantee that a random person on HN with high blood pressure will encounter a doctor who is willing to do the same.

That's why I believe that this is not a strawman position. I'd be curious to hear your case explaining why you wrongly assumed that it was.
by recursivecaveat | 2025-11-09 00:55:16+00:00
> KeyBanc analyst Justin Patterson downgraded shares sector weight from an overweight rating as the company’s focus on long-term product initiatives weighs on near-term growth and valuation.

> He wrote that “meaningful financial benefits” from these initiatives could take “several quarters” to materialize.

It's kind of beyond parody that you can grow revenue 41% YoY and people still complain that you're doing anything at all with a horizon as long as 6-9 months.
by sho_hn | 2025-11-09 00:55:33+00:00
I get that, and I guess I try to extrapolate from the image-based examples to other senses and congnition in general. The image replications give me the idea that there is some generative extrapolation based on actual sensory input a seed going on, like the brain circuitry that goes and re-imagines the input consciously going haywire and growing and extrapolating into overdriven, bizarre directions.

I recently read "A Brief History of Intelligence" by Bennet which spends quite a bit of time dwelling on "generative" simulation mechanisms in brain function and their role in cognition from prediction to mentalizing, and I think I can get a rough sense of how this would all click together.

It makes sense why creative/artistic people may be drawn to this and could consider it a heightened form or a letting loose of their normal processes, etc.

But to me it's still not that attractive. I can never shake the idea that it's a bit like driving a system past specifications and assigning meaning to malfunctions, and essentially lying to yourself. I get it's not black and white, and obviously philosophy is rife with arguments and takes on what is true experience and cognition, but given the risks and downsides I'd rather not.

I'm very fine with other people occupying different points on the spectrum.
by ricardobeat | 2025-11-09 00:55:54+00:00
I’m not completely sure of that. The simplicity of a backbone app, plain javascript with no build, less/sass, early days node.js or old RoR apps is becoming increasingly elusive. Not a lot of modern apps you couldn’t build with those stacks, and most of the underlying technology is the same (http/html/css/js/sql/libuv/etc).

Saying this feels like advocating for a return to horse carriages though, when the right analogy would be the brief electric car era of the early 1900s, and React as the Model T.
by nradov | 2025-11-09 00:56:08+00:00
Nonsense. Even if the wind is blowing the right direction it doesn't have enough energy to move a huge merchant vessel at economically viable speeds. Do you have any clue about the mass and drag involved with something like a 20000 TEU container ship? There is no magic hull shape which can ever make sail propulsion alone make sense. This is basic physics.
by Hizonner | 2025-11-09 00:57:06+00:00
The US will enforce most UK court judgements. I'm not sure how administrative fines work; there might be a need to involve a court first, but once that's done the US will [on edit- may] enforce them.

The US will not enforce UK judgements or fines if enforcing them is contrary to the US' own laws, including its Constitution. SCOTUS ultimately decides when that's the case.

So it's really, really relevant to whether a non-US actor like Ofcom can actually collect fines from people inside the US. That's a separate question from what the UK government can do to people from the US who actually enter the UK, and an important one.
by dmitrygr | 2025-11-09 00:57:12+00:00
If it doesn’t revolve around her, why should revolve it around you? Why do you think your view is somehow better? I admit we have a disagreement, but you have not presented a reason why your view is more correct.

Also “shill”? I don’t work for Apple. I am not Tim Cook. I have no reason to shill for anyone. That’s just an ad hominem.
by paranoidrobot | 2025-11-09 00:57:12+00:00
IP locations work great for probably a reasonably large chunk of services.

But it's the edges that get you.

I moved home a few years back, connected a new service with the same ISP.

They have an IP pool that is labelled as for one state (Victoria, Australia) but is also used for their services in Tasmania.

So now I have to fight every major website (Google, Amazon, Maxmind, etc) that does GeoIP lookups that I'm not in Victoria, I'm 500-800KM away.

Google was very confused for about 12 months because when I moved I also brought my wifi gear and so it would give me a precise location of my old address because it used wifi geolocation.
by olivia-banks | 2025-11-09 00:57:37+00:00
Functional programming is a different way of thinking about solving problems. People say it's about thinking about "what you're trying to compute" versus "how you're computing it," but quite frankly that never made sense to me. I prefer to think about it in terms of thinking about relationships (FP) versus thinking about steps over time (procedural).

This, at least for me, brings the act of writing a specific piece of code more inline with how I think about the system as a whole. I spend less energy worrying about the current state of the world and more about composing small, predictable operations on relationships.

As for what you can read, I find it's just best to get going with something like OCaml or F# and write something that can take advantage of that paradigm in a relatively straightforward way, like a compiler or something else with a lot of graph operations. You'll learn pretty quickly what the language wants you to do.
by indolering | 2025-11-09 00:57:48+00:00
Any government can get RCE on any OS with the change in their couch. Formal verification of process isolation is REALLY important when lives depend on it. That's a huge value add!

My main concern is speed and the lack of capability based security. seL4 is faster than Linux by a mile and I'm guessing that this is much slower. You can put a POSIX layer on seL4 but POSIX is inherently flawed too. MAC separates privileges from code and is too clunky to use in practice (see seLinux).
by GolfPopper | 2025-11-09 00:58:00+00:00
'Wail to god' (the second piece of artwork at that link) strongly resembles a brighter, faster, and more detailed version of what I see whenever I close my eyes but still try to pay attention to what I'm "seeing".

(Normally, I "tune out" my visual field when I close my eyes. And for reference, my mind's eye is weak, but I do not think I have complete aphantasia.)
by 0_____0 | 2025-11-09 00:58:13+00:00
Does this font simply ... Not look good to anyone else? It is visually kind of uncomfortable to behold. Maybe it's because it's a bit blurry feeling.

It sort of suggests to me that there's a lot going on with typeface design that we take for granted.

Edit: on closer inspection, the letter forms are kind of all over the place. The humps on the 'm' are lopsided, letter heights are sort of random. I think it's an interesting idea but to make it a more useful font would take a lot of manual fine tuning.
by themafia | 2025-11-09 00:58:31+00:00
Those are overall visitations. There's no indication that they're vacationing or tourists. Does Chicago have more global business interests than Rome?

My Mother went to Chicago every year for Emergency Room training. Was she a tourist? Or was she there because Chicago, for all it's problems, has one of the most competent and practiced set of ER doctors in the entire country?
by angeldimitrov94 | 2025-11-09 00:58:41+00:00
Windows was tolerable up until they introduced their extremely intrusive service that will monitor if the user has disabled Windows updates and then undo the user's settings quietly and without notification, again allowing the updates to occur.

This single feature is almost certain to kill off the use of Windows for any important use cases, like kiosk-type softwares in non-trivial environments. It's impossible to control software updates deterministically.
by iamnothere | 2025-11-09 00:58:42+00:00
Typically one-sided laws are not enforced against citizens of foreign countries except in rare cases, because it creates diplomatic friction. Countries really don’t like it when you arrest their citizens for things that aren’t illegal at home. And when one country has enormous leverage over another, it’s a bad idea for the less powerful country to attempt enforcement. A visa ban would usually be a more appropriate tactic.
by badtuple | 2025-11-09 00:59:17+00:00
Something akin to interfaces, but weaker. Right now people roll their own vtables or similar, and that's fine...I actually don't expect these to be added. But because of Zig's commitment to "everything structural is a struct", a very very simple interface type would likely end up being used more like ML's modules.

The need for this jumped out at me during Writergate. People had alot of trouble understanding exactly how all the pieces fit together, and there was no good place to document that. The documentation (or the code people went to to understand it) was always on an implementation. Having an interface would have given Zig a place to hang the Reader/Writer documentation and allowed a quick way for people to understand the expectations it places on implementations without further complications.

For Zig, I don't even want it to automatically handle the vtable like other languages...I'm comfortable with the way people implement different kinds of dynamic dispatch now. All I want is a type-level construct that describes what fields/functions a struct has and nothing else. No effect on runtime data or automatic upcasting or anything. Just a way to say "if this looks like this, it can be considered this type."

I expect the argument is that it's unnecessary. Technically, it is. But Zig's biggest weakness compared to other languages is that all the abstractions have to be in the programmer's head rather than encoded in the program. This greatly hampers people's ability to jump into a new codebase and help themselves. IMO this is all that's needed to remedy that without complicating everything.

You can see how much organizational power this has by looking at the docs for Go's standard library. Ignore how Go's runtime does all the work for you...think more about how it helps make the _intent_ behind the code clear.
by makeitdouble | 2025-11-09 00:59:43+00:00
> fairly mature

That's the part that's hiting me the most. Macos and major linux envs are squarely focused on traditional desktop experience, mouse and keyboard, and I sense a "that should be good enough for everybody" patronizing vibe from the designers of the interfaces.

Gnome did a big effort to better support touch, but that's thousand miles away from what win11 supports and I got the sense they didn't actually try to use it day to day with a Z13 with no keyboard attached for instance (dumb anecdote: tried to vim a config, just to realize the stock virtual keyboard has no escape key)

And I get it, the vast majority of the community probably doesn't give a damn about touch or even actively dispises it.

That just leaves people who found actual benefits to the paradigm stuck in dark corner where fighting win11 has a better ROI than fighting a whole community.
by epolanski | 2025-11-09 00:59:50+00:00
> I'm still not saying this is definitively the Trump administration's fault

How is it not?

The budget requires 60 votes, not a simple majority. Thus it's up to the majority party to present a bill that will win 60 votes.

Some important stuff in major democracies is designed to require way more than simple majority.

In Italy, e.g. the president is elected by the parliament, but the quorum required is two thirds of votes.

This is very important because it forces all governments to find a suitable candidate that is as unbiased and trustable as possible by the overwhelming majority of the representatives.

While elections of the president can drag for very long, even for months, I can't but say we italians have been blessed with great presidents. Each one stepped up to represent italians and never political interests.