MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by CableNinja | 2025-11-02 16:19:43+00:00
Being able to explain a thing to someone non-technical is an important social requirement. If you have to explain a problem or project to a C-level and you go off the rails with technical stuff, or get deep in the weeds of some part of it, without being asked, youre going to get deer stares and no one in the room is going to understand you. Similarly, if you as an engineer, go too technical when explaining things to an admin or jr, then you are also going to get deer stares and no one is going to understand you, or they will get frustrated.

You can be a """"rockstar"""" engineer and still not be a good fit because you cant sanely explain something to someone not at your technical level.
by mdhb | 2025-11-02 16:20:17+00:00
As seen with the many examples of this that have come before it I.e stack exchange and reddit answers etc… nobody is in anyway even remotely motivated to put in the time and effort to offer their expertise to have someone else steal it for their own greedy profit seeking reasons.

You’re asking people to willingly sign up to be robbed and receive no compensation or credit in return.
by embedding-shape | 2025-11-02 16:20:20+00:00
The problem isn't "spending above/below per diem" as I understand the article. The problem is that whatever spending is happening, might be fake, that's why they're complaining about "faking expense receipts".

So it does seem like the companies themselves do worry about if what you spend it on is legit or not, it's almost the entire purpose of the article unless I misunderstand something?
by griffzhowl | 2025-11-02 16:21:52+00:00
Great, I love this stuff.

See here for a summary of the many results of the author and team's research project on formalization:

https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~lp15/Grants/Alexandria/

Especially interesting for me is the work on formalizing quantum computing algorithms and theorems (open access):

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10817-020-09584-7
by move-on-by | 2025-11-02 16:21:52+00:00
Oh just wait till it’s time for your company to stop the ‘growth mode’ shenanigans and get serious about acceptable levels of tech debt and feature bloat. It’s where we are.

You can’t just flip a switch. There is no “Hey, that was fun, but it’s time to start designing these things with a purpose and vision”. Beyond the totally unreasonable expectations that have been set by Product and C-level- you still have the mountain of tech debt that is coming due and changes slow to a crawl or outages skyrocket or both. Plus, hiring has been based on ‘getting things done’, so you have this group of people who are actually really skilled in hacking things together and getting it out the door. It’s tough and calls for an entire culture shift. How do you stop being a reactionary startup and become vision-based and purposeful organization?
by anonzzzies | 2025-11-02 16:22:09+00:00
You just prove / use dependently typed languages / tla+ where it makes sense, not for everything. The latter might make sense if it's mostly automated maybe, but it takes really painful elaborate work to get full coverage and for sure most stuff really doesn't need that. I always think these formal methods + unit/integration tests cover so much that you are already far more robust than most on earth.
by cwzwarich | 2025-11-02 16:22:13+00:00
The bigger problem with HOL (or simple type theory) is not the lack of dependencies, but rather the lack of logical strength. Simple type theory is equivalent in logical strength to bounded Zermelo set theory (i.e. ZF without Foundation or Replacement, and with Separation restricted to formulas with bounded quantifiers). This is unfortunately too weak to formalize post-WW2 mathematics in the same style as is done by ordinary mathematicians. Similarly, it does not offer a great way to deal with the size issues that arise in e.g. category theory.
by egberts1 | 2025-11-02 16:22:18+00:00
No. Just natural disaster for DSNAP (Disaster SNAP, Stafford Act).

Hurricanes: 2017 (Harvey, Irma, Maria)

• Wildfires: 2021 (CA)

• Floods: 2008, 2022, 2025

• Tornadoes: 2025 (KY)

• Mudslides / Landslides: 2022, 2025

• Severe storms: 2025 (AR, WV, KY)

• Winter storms: 2023 (CA)

• Tropical storms: 2024 (NC, Tropical Storm Helene)
by mpalmer | 2025-11-02 16:23:22+00:00
Forth and Common Lisp are demanding, but they demand different things of the novice programmer than Rust.

The latter's baroque syntax is not provably good or necessary, but I'd call it the other end of a compromise for safety and expressiveness. And once you learn it, you've learned much of the language by default.

Not so with with the first two! The mental models involved in reasoning about a piece of code require much more cognition on the part of the programmer.
by obeavs | 2025-11-02 16:23:30+00:00
So, we've been down this rabbithole at Phosphor (phosphor.co) and have explored/made a couple of really big technology bets on it.

The most unique/useful applications of it in production are based on combining dependent types with database/graph queries as a means. This enables you to take something like RDF which is neat in a lot of ways but has a lot of limitations, add typing and logic to the queries, in order to generally reimagine how you think about querying databases.

For those interested in exploring this space from a "I'd like to build something real with this", I'd strongly recommend checking out TypeDB (typedb.com). It's been in development for about a decade, is faster than MongoDB for vast swaths of things, and is one of the most ergonomic frameworks we've found to designing complex data applications (Phosphor's core is similar in many ways to Palantir's ontology concept). We went into it assuming that we were exploring a brand new technology, and have found it to work pretty comprehensively for all kinds of production settings.
by Keyframe | 2025-11-02 16:23:55+00:00
wait until you start conversing with it. It's been a game changer for me how I use Claude CLI. It suits my workflow fine since my sessions are intense in focus I have to bring and I iterate with it; I just haven't found _a way_ where I can give it a large thing to work on and that it will not deviate. I do one focused thing at a time, review, test, alter code and then repeat. With voice mode it's been great since I can talk with it while walking fast on a treadmill. It's bizarre, star trekish, and it works. I wish I could have a stop word with whisper, since I do tend to think long between sentences in this mode, and I wish I could stop it with voice while it's talking, but I found a flow that it doesn't matter that much.

I suggest everyone who can to try the voice mode. https://getvoicemode.com/
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-11-02 16:24:00+00:00
> if your goal is the control of resources, you don't really care if your proxy ends up engaging in these and other war crimes

Granted. The UAE is not involved due to animus. But this analysis renders everyone in Sudan as NPCs. The reason the conflict is an opportunity for meddling, the reason it has turned into a genocide, these causes are found more in culture and politics than pure economics.

> You get that power when you supply the weapons and can choose who to supply them to

America withholding arms from Sudan wouldn’t change much.

If we started dictating Emirati foreign policy based on withholding arms, they should drop us as a security guarantor. (And can. And eventually would.)

We’d lose a reliable ally and investor and oil producer in exchange for foreign policy control in a region Americans are sick of being involved in.

> What if the US declared that gold sourced from Sudan was illegal to trade in?

Nothing. Like actually nothing. Maybe domestic gold prices would bump up a bit, but less than they have with tariffs and the deficit explosion.

If we tried to get the UAE to stop trading Sudanese gold, on the other hand, that would mean applying diplomatic and possibly economic pressure. That could result in costs to American voters we don’t care to pay.

> the Kimberly Process Certification Scheme ("KPCS") for conflict-free diamonds

Yet blood diamonds still sell.

Gold is tracked and traded based on provenance—high-end mints will produce more expensive bars. The difference is there is a larger buyer pool for conflict gold than there is for diamonds. (And much more for oil.)

> American voters pretty famously don't really care about foreign policy at all

This is what I meant. American leaders are constrained in acting on foreign policy lines that result in domestic pain. Alienating the Gulf would result in domestic pain.
Show HN: Get AI job tools and Premium Perks at RemotelyGood.us
by Theresa_i_a | 2025-11-02 16:24:06+00:00
Hey everyone!

My name is Theresa and I am the founder of RemotelyGood.us, an AI-powered job board for remote social impact careers.

I updated the site and would love your feedback! I'll be increasing prices soon for Premium Membership that includes AI tools for resume and cover letter generation and interview prep, as well as a new perks section with discounts and free trials to tools that help with your job search and work life.

Sign up now for just $5 before prices increase on 11/8!

You can also trial our Premium Plus tier with an full suite ATS-friendly Resume Builder and AI mock interview coach for $30 for the next 3 months!

If you like it, please give us an upvote on Product Hunt (https://www.producthunt.com/products/remotely-good/launches/...) and on Artizen Fund! (https://artizen.fund/index/p/remotely-good?season=6)

If you're a social impact founder who's hiring, check out remotelygood.us and reach out to me at theresa@remotelygood.us!

Thanks so much!
by orsorna | 2025-11-02 16:25:04+00:00
Timing a market change is inherently even more risky. Think about all of the students in the past 10 years who chose compsci not because they enjoyed it but because of the lucrative salaries. Now, those without the passion or knowhow can't pass an increasingly higher bar in an increasingly difficult market.

The subject of the article, and fellow social media participants, are hedging a bet that manual trade jobs will be safe forever, at the cost of a salary cut and inflicting physical damage to the body. All to do a trade that perhaps doesn't even interest them that much. Insecurity, maybe even arrogance, is driving these people outside of the white collar workforce and I think they will get burned for their decision in the long run. Because there really is no guarantee that these physical jobs will be safe.

The other subtext is that white collars should take a salary cut to work in a different field. And who absorbs the difference in salary that is no longer being paid out? No one that is the subject of this article.
by Anonbrit | 2025-11-02 16:25:22+00:00
If your report for the month is "I saved a terabyte of ram usage across our cluster estate!" and I as a manager do some quick maths and say great, that's our income from 2 median customers. We lost 8 customers because we didn't laugh feature foo in time, which is what you were supposed to be working on, so your contribution for the month is a massive loss to the company...

Does that frame things differently? There's are times in your product lifecycle where you doing want your developers looking at things like this, and a time when you do
by 1718627440 | 2025-11-02 16:26:05+00:00
In German characters, there is now difference between 'sz' and 'ß'. 'ß' is in fact just the concatenation of the glyphs of 's' and 'z'. 'ß' only became relevant when the glyphs switched to Antiqua.

I don't know it German characters are considered to be Latin script or not. The number and meaning of characters is mostly the same, besides stuff like 'ſ', but the glyphs are all different.
by lapcat | 2025-11-02 16:26:33+00:00
That's fine, but you should attribute your certainty or uncertainty, as the case may be, to yourself and not to "the devil."

It's vastly more honest to say, "I'm not sure about this" than "Devil's advocate: blah blah blah". Besides hiding behind the devil, the devil's advocate makes the devil look more confident than he should be.
by awillen | 2025-11-02 16:26:45+00:00
This works for the subset of people who have a good story or a real connection to their brand, but that's just not most businesses. I buy and operate e-commerce brands, and I can't do it both because I really don't want to be on camera and because "hey I bought this company that sells leather handle covers for cast iron pans, and I personally don't use them but the cashflow was good" is not so compelling as a message. Sometimes you just need messages that convey the value proposition of the brand. (And FWIW they are nice handle covers, I just prefer to use a kitchen towel to grab my cast iron.)

That said, I think video generation is at the point where someone will probably develop a product that fakes the kinds of videos you're talking about in the near future.
by the__alchemist | 2025-11-02 16:26:58+00:00
Good insight! I guess I don't really understand why we can't use native types then. I don't want to keep having to write these:

pub fn fir_q31( s: &mut sys::arm_fir_instance_q31, input: &[i32], output: &mut [i32], block_size: usize,

) { // void arm_fir_q31 ( // const arm_fir_instance_q31 * S, // const float32_t * pSrc, // float32_t * pDst, // uint32_t blockSize // ) // Parameters // [in] S points to an instance of the floating-point FIR filter structure // [in] pSrc points to the block of input data // [out] pDst points to the block of output data // [in] blockSize number of samples to process // Returns none

compiler_fence(Ordering::SeqCst); unsafe { sys::arm_fir_q31(s, input.as_ptr(), output.as_mut_ptr(), block_size as u32); } }
by zozbot234 | 2025-11-02 16:27:06+00:00
> In that sense, a fairly direct C to Rust translation that doesn't try to generate idomatic Rust, but does accurately encode the lifetimes into the type system (ie. replacing pointers with references and Box) is already a huge safety win, since you gain automatic checking of the rules you were already implicitly following.

Unfortunately, there's a lot of non-trivial C code that really does not come close to following the rules of existing Safe Rust, even at their least idiomatic. Giving up on idiomaticness can be very helpful at times, but it's far from a silver bullet. For example, much C code that uses "shared mutable" data makes no effort to either follow the constraints of Rust Cell<T> (which, loosely speaking, require get or set operations to be tightly self-contained, where the whole object is accessed in one go) or check for the soundness of ongoing borrows at runtime ala RefCell<T> - the invariants involved are simply implied in the flow of the C code. Such code must be expressed using unsafe in Rust. Even something as simple (to C coders) as a doubly-linked list involves a kind of fancy "static Rc" where two pointers jointly "own" a single list node. Borrowing patterns can be decoupled and/or "branded" in a way that needs "qcell" or the like in Rust, which we still don't really know how to express idiomatically, etc.

This is not to say that you can't translate such patterns to some variety of Rust, but it will be non-trivial and involve some kind of unsafe code.
by mlyle | 2025-11-02 16:27:17+00:00
I think the accountant would retort that it's way better to get $125 of profit from $500 of revenue than from $1000 of revenue, overall. In the former case, you have a lot of padding for conditions to change, and in the latter case you don't.

And, if there's some outside dealer that can make a profit taking their $500 cut, but you need to pay all of the $500 out-- it seems like your sales function is less efficient-- less efficient than the rest of Autodesk and less efficient than the outside dealer.

Margins aren't everything. Absent outside judgment, I think I'd rather make, say, $175 profit from $1k of revenue than $125 from $500. But I wouldn’t trade $125 on $500 for $126 on $1,000.

And, of course, there's always the strategic concerns. Control of accounts, opportunities to upsell or cross-sell, etc, etc. Financial reporting can't tell the whole story, because you can't boil down the whole story of a company to a few numbers. It's the triumph of GAAP that it's a pretty dang good start to understanding most companies.
by zkmon | 2025-11-02 16:27:40+00:00
The way businesses or empires had success was by dancing to the tune of the time. The tune changes with time. The wind changes, tides change direction, the overall context changes. So it doesn't help to much to study what business have done or what empires have done or what leaders have done. They were a minuscule part of the overall climate and context, which was overlooked by historians.

Foreground is a product of the background.
by CableNinja | 2025-11-02 16:27:42+00:00
Call me when AI can manage to write a regex that i would write, to parse a complex string, rather than some ridiculous mishmashing of nonascii chars that you need to talk to an ancient shaman to decrypt; or when AI can actually recognize contextual hints enough to know what the fuck im talking about, and not produce a writeup of things no longer relevant; or when it stops hallucinating and giving made up answers just to give an answer (which is far worse than saying i dont know, from a human, or ai)

AI has some uses, but the list of things it cant do is longer than the list of things it can.
by MSFT_Edging | 2025-11-02 16:28:12+00:00
While Obama, Biden, and Trump all had cruel deportation policies, the previous two didn't have 5-figure bonuses for a deportation.

Additionally, the performative method of how they're looking for deportations, its random, violent, and meant to send a message of powerlessness and fear.

The point is fear and cruelty. As was Family separation under Biden, the cruelty is accelerating.
by embedding-shape | 2025-11-02 16:28:40+00:00
> Technically, Big Ben is the bell, not the clock, from the article as well:

Technically I guess yeah. The tower that used to be called the "Clock Tower", is now called "Elizabeth Tower" yet it's also true that the de facto nickname for the entire tower is "Big Ben", even though technically that is the name of the bell, not the tower itself.
by jeroenhd | 2025-11-02 16:28:43+00:00
There are plenty of setups where the X server runs at higher privileges/on a different host than the (partially trusted) application that might exploit the X server. This is a classic elevation of privileges vulnerability in those setups.

X11's practical absence of any security mechanisms for user sessions means you should probably not run any kind of low-trust UI program anyway, as there is no prevention of keystroke injection or screen recording, but that's a design flaw that will never be solved. That doesn't mean that EoP style attacks like these should be ignored or underestimated, though.
by jitl | 2025-11-02 16:28:46+00:00
Oh, look at the time, a few more CVEs in C code, posted 3 hours ago to Hacker News: "X.Org Security Advisory: multiple security issues X.Org X server and Xwayland"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45790015

https://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-announce/2025-October/0036...

To torture the analogy: perhaps the "returns" are diminishing, but their absolute value is still a few million bucks, I'm happy to take those returns.
by zokier | 2025-11-02 16:28:46+00:00
I like hyperrogue but I think it is arguable that it is not very good as a roguelike; I like it more as a puzzle game. The thing is that in hyperrogue each of the worlds is almost entirely self-contained, and the choices you make in one world, or the order you go through the worlds, do not really impact the overall run in any major way. So it lacks the combinatorial explosion of possibilities that many good roguelikes (incl nethack) have.
by cowboylowrez | 2025-11-02 16:29:03+00:00
As a counterpoint, I found wikipedia's "perennial_sources_list" to be a pretty reasonable efficiency measure. Additionally whats the problem with wikipedia's entry about "artic frost"? (your [1] did not link to anything regarding that entry)

>This is broadly demonstrated by Wikipedia's constant decline in traffic from 2022 (~165M visits/day) through the present (~128M visits/day)[3].

This demonstrates only the decrease in web traffic, and there are plenty of discussions about the reasons why and I suspect that conservatives didn't all of a sudden decide to hate wikipedia starting in 2022 as you seem to imply.
by Mond_ | 2025-11-02 16:29:08+00:00
> It means it is no longer possible to draw a line between any two points (portals can shadow portions of the space such that some points are not connectible

This feels a bit like saying that putting a wall in a room makes it non-euclidean since there's now a barrier in the way.

I know where you're coming from, but this is confusing geometry and topology. (Curvature vs. how the space is connected.)
by brabel | 2025-11-02 16:29:32+00:00
> Maybe you can afford to wait for Project Valhalla to arrive and finally build the applications and libraries you really want to build

Or just use one of many languages that support generics over primitive types right now?! I get it, I also write Java but if some application would benefit greatly from some feature another language has, I don’t really think too much about it. Having a few languages under your belt is really good, and most companies these days know that and have at least a couple of “approved” languages. People normally can learn a new language fairly quickly. With AI now it’s easier than ever.
by Aurornis | 2025-11-02 16:31:44+00:00
> The big exceptions are things like…

> Modern games and compilation are the other obvious things.

I mean if we exempt all of the CPU intensive things then speed of your CPU doesn’t matter

I don’t have a fast CPU for the low overhead things, though. I buy one because that speed up when I run commands or compile my code adds up when I’m doing 100 or 1000 little CPU intensive tasks during the day. A few seconds or minutes saved here and there adds up multiplied by 100 or 1000 times per day. Multiply that by 200 working days per year and the value of upgrading a CPU (after over a decade) is very high on the list of ways you can buy more time. I don’t care so much about something rendering in 1 frame instead of 2 frames, but when I type a command and have to wait idly for it to complete, that’s just lost time.
by mdhb | 2025-11-02 16:31:47+00:00
It’s literally impossible to reconcile the fact that the same groups (I.e heritage foundation) that backed trump are trying to collapse the European Union (as a matter of fact on the record) with the idea that the US intel community can be trusted.

European intel services should be laser focused on undermining that part of US political power at every possible opportunity because it’s entirely incompatible with the goals of the European Union or any kind of rules based international order.
by Foobar8568 | 2025-11-02 16:31:51+00:00
Even that...I can't comment but companies play with CAPEX, OPEX, what they call innovation, what they amortize etc.

Amortizing CAPEX, claiming it's innovation and building on the future when it's done by consultancy having a 1-3y turn over.

Oh and let's fake maintenance works under "projects".

I am not accountant, so there might be some stuff missing but the 3 upper points are stuff I have seen in many companies.
by Mond_ | 2025-11-02 16:32:35+00:00
> It is still ugly / noisy / overly-complicated and probably could have been done better.

I don't know, it feels like you're just saying that you don't like it, missed the point of the post, and are not giving us anything concrete. Can you list a very clear example of how you'd improve the syntax?

Again, see the post: You can remove things, but you're losing explicitness or other things. If you want a language that's more implicit, this is fine. I don't.