MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by spwa4 | 2025-11-15 23:12:01+00:00
Well, most are not rich and the biggest complaint is hukou, ie. that you can't actually live where you want in China. The state assigns you a city and you go there. There's a huge set of consequences if you don't, and a lot of people aren't happy with the choice made for them. People outside of China think China is like the US. You want to live in, oh, say Washington, or Anchorage, you can just go live there, find a job and live life.

Which also means your basic question is kind-of wrong. There's a lot of Chinese who want to leave but can't. The only Chinese who actually leave were asked by the government to leave, for a purpose (often studying), usually only for a limited time. Now it's not like it's 100% forced, they do ask for volunteers and what you want but it's certainly not a free choice to leave China or go back.

In China you're effectively locked into your city/town/village, and often a specific building and job (you can leave for a weekend or ..., that's not usually a problem, though sometimes it is)

For the rich the fear is kind-of the same, just with much more pressure and much more consequences, essentially being asked to relocate, give up a company (apparently much more common under Xi), forced to hire someone and give them a high position, buy or sell certain things, and being arrested, even tortured (in some kind of torture chair) if you are even suspected of not complying with often corrupt requests from government officials. The issue with that is just how many corrupt governments or de-facto governments there are. State, province, city, 1000 special purpose governments (e.g. one for the coal industry). Of course, the state can't be bothered with having a standard for identifying/authorizing themselves, so there's scam requests too. Then there's the local police, and 10+ police services that all operate where you live for one reason or another.

Makes you wonder. I always thought a communist state would be like a gigantic bureaucracy. And it is, but it's also a mafia.

Second complaint you keep hearing is about the consequences of failing the Gaokao, or even succeeding but getting selected wrong/not what you want. There are no second chances.

And I do get almost all of Asia is less "do what you want" than the US or Europe is, but some aspects of China are absurdly controlling.
by sillystuff | 2025-11-15 23:12:05+00:00
> They are about as accurate as flipping a coin.

They are actually worse than a coin toss.

The TV news show, "60 Minutes" tested several companies that provided polygraph testing services.

The show claimed some one stole some equipment. For each testing service the show said they suspected a different employee. In every case, the polygraph operator claimed they detected deception in the person they had been told by the show was the person already under suspicion. Polygraph is total bullshit, just used to add a pseudo-scientific shine to prejudice.
by watwut | 2025-11-15 23:12:16+00:00
Are they? The reason for larger text for me is that I cant read it. It really does not mean I want who ui bigger, unless it is text being displayed.

Why do you think most people want scalling overall being changed? It does not make sense to me. Contemporary UIs are wasting so much space, there is no reason to double everything. Just the small font you used inside those giant empty spaces.
by colechristensen | 2025-11-15 23:13:04+00:00
How I pick a CPU:

- Visit https://www.cpubenchmark.net/single-thread/ and pick the fastest CPU under $400

- Visit https://www.cpubenchmark.net/multithread/ and verify there are no CPUs at a lower cost with a higher score

It has been, for a long time, the latest generation Intel CPU with a 2xxK or 2xxKF model number these used to be "i7" models now there's just a 7, I'm very vaguely annoyed at the branding change.

It would be hard for anybody to convince me that there is a better price|performance optimum. I get it, there was a very disappointing generation or two a few years ago, that hasn't put me off.

The dominance of Apple CPUs might be putting me off both Intel and AMD and consider only buying Apple hardware and maybe even doing something like Linux running on a Mac Mini in addition to my MacOS daily driver.
by no_wizard | 2025-11-15 23:13:49+00:00
I do know how to do that. I also know how to deploy bare metal servers, I have done so for years. Not really sure what you’re assuming here.

I however prefer to acknowledge the nature of the business, which is there will be an inevitable untimely failure in some way you did not prepare for despite being the most well read, well practiced and researched to the problems at hand.
by XorNot | 2025-11-15 23:14:12+00:00
Sure, but there are animals with much larger brains on Earth which have - we believe - a reasonably high level of cognition but have not achieved the technological and engineering feats which we have (i.e. dolphins, whales, elephants as naive examples based on brain mass and complexity).

Conversely you have birds - with much smaller brains - which also don't achieve those things but display advanced language skills, have apparent societal structure and despite our inability to understand it seem to have enough language to communicate advanced concepts.
by kenmacd | 2025-11-15 23:14:16+00:00
> If I’m gone on a trip for 2 weeks my hot water bill is zero

You mention other advantages, but money isn't one. You're limited to 100% efficiency with tankless.

Although an idle hot water tank can waste ~70W (~1.7kWh) of power, this is way more than made up for by using a heat pump. Plus tankless strains the grid a lot more than any system with a buffer built in.
by dmix | 2025-11-15 23:15:42+00:00
Both Elixir Phoenix and Ruby on Rails use plain HTML by default but they both support view morphing (phoenix via LiveView and rails via Hotwire Turbo). It really doesn't cost anything to add it. Clicking links with a bit of caching can make it feel near instant the way a (small) SPA does. Adding link prefetching algo on top of the that and it will seem even faster.

If anything it removes a ton of the argument for using React absent maybe a small subset of highly complex UI subcomponents which may need it, but rarely required for a whole SaaS app. Frontend teams just want React so they can use a single tool not because it's the best solution.
by paxys | 2025-11-15 23:16:34+00:00
Appointing John Ternus is going to be a pretty clear indicator to investors that Apple plans on continuing its iterative hardware, supply chain and operations focus and isn't looking to shake things up from a product or vision standpoint. Which may be the best move for the company (this strategy has definitely worked wonders for the last decade and a half), but I can't help feel that among all the large tech companies Apple is the one most at risk of a major disruption. It might not come tomorrow or even in the next decade, but whenever the next shift in personal computing happens (maybe AI, maybe AR/VR, maybe something else entirely) they are going to be caught unprepared and unable to adapt in time.
by johnea | 2025-11-15 23:17:14+00:00
The whole article seemed a little tautological to me.

You could say: Scientific advances have massively accelerated with the use of the new tool of electricity, but there are serious concerns about the "black-box" nature of electricity, since no one has ever answered the question "what is charge?".

Modern semiconductors depend on quantum effects that no one has ever "explained", but they are highly repeatable, and make useful predictions that can be confirmed.

My expectation is that every advance cited in the article, and attributed to LLMs, is in fact the output of a team of human scientists using LLMs as a tool to expand their scope and increase productivity.

All of these examples are actually human endeavors.

The only qualitative difference I see, is that LLMs are a human invention, whereas electricity and quantum effects are natural phenomenon that were discovered, and utilized as a tool, by humans.

While LLMs, and subsequent s/w advances, may well lead us into new, even unexpected, realms of science, the need to be able to confirm repeatable results and verify the accuracy of predictions, will always be necessary.

As such, I would still call this science, not "after"...
by manquer | 2025-11-15 23:17:25+00:00
> that's what shareholders want

What else could shareholders want? Employees, management, founders, customers, vendors could all have other goals, wants or desire but when you have a large number of shareholders that is what they want always.

Shareholders - a large majority of them are institutional with their own shareholders they are accountable to, always want more money - that is a core principle of capitalism.

Occasionally we can tie other objectives to financial gains to get a behave in a specific way, say a green initiative will improve the brand perception therefore brand value - because now they can charge more/ justify current pricing etc.

It can at times align the other way too for risk minimization - a founder wants a large budget for something - like say Zuckerberg with Metaverse[3], or Musk with $1T pay [2] firing the founder is more expensive[1] so shareholders sign off.

Fundamentally it always boils down to profit/value maximization for the shareholders.

---

[1] By no means unique, except for the scale of money spent on a vanity project.

[2] Firing is more expensive - Tesla trades at such crazy multiples those are arguably not viable without Musk. It is probably cheaper to give then $1T pay package or the similar $56b package from 2018 currently being disputed in court.

[3] Almost impossible in Meta's case. The board can fire the CEO in any company, but since Zuckerberg owns > 50% of the voting shares, he as the majority shareholder can also fire the board anytime and replace with a board who will sign off. It is not absolute power though, there are some protections for minority shareholders as Delaware court is showing with 2018 Musk package case.
by gishh | 2025-11-15 23:18:35+00:00
> This contrasts inheritance as a “white box” form of reuse, because the inheriting class has full visibility over the implementation details of the inherited class; with composition as a “black box” form of reuse, because the composing object only has access to the interface of the constituent object.

So, we just need devs to stop trying to be overly clever? I can get behind that, “clever” devs are just awful to work with.
by p_l | 2025-11-15 23:19:17+00:00
It's related to XInput making that easier option on Windows, from my understanding.

Especially if you supported both XBox and Windows.

So the only complex HID game controllers are for very much enthusiast setups, which are rare enough to trip things like absurd assumptions in HID drivers in some systems (the joystick+throttle I have used to break linux HID driver because someone decided to statically allocate possible amounts of joystick buttons per device...)
by thrance | 2025-11-15 23:19:45+00:00
Your armchair psychoanalysis is extremely distasteful. Can you engage with the other side without straw manning them?

It is perfectly explainable for someone to fear Musk, pouring billions into influencing elections to prop up an anti-workers candidate, who runs on hate of minorities and ends up severely impoverishing the country through huge tax cuts to the wealthy and the destruction of all remaining social nets.

No, I do not envy Musk. Frankly, he looks rather miserable on his own. A healthy man does not send 50 tweets a day, cheat at videogames on stream to boost his fragile ego, or consume 10 different drugs.

Same thing with the others.
by arp242 | 2025-11-15 23:19:46+00:00
Demos existed, for home computer and PC games anyway. This is why you bought the game review magazines to get the disk (and later, CD-ROM) with demos. For consoles you could often try the game in the shop, or rent them at the Video rental shop. You could even rent entire consoles! I've also returned a few games back in the day.
by fragmede | 2025-11-15 23:20:23+00:00
You can't have because they were redacted. If you tried to talk to ChatGPT prior to Adam Raine's case, it wouldn't help you, just like it won't one-shot answer the question "how do you make cocaine?" The court documents don't have the part where it refuses to help first. The crime here is that OpenAI didn't set conversation limits because when the context window gets exceeded it goes off the rails. Bing instituted this very early on. Claude has those guad rails. But for some reason, OpenAi chose not to implement that.

The chats are horrifying, but it took a concerted dedicated effort to get ChatGPT to go there. If I drive through a sign that says Do Not Enter and fall off a cliff, who's really at fault?
by skywhopper | 2025-11-15 23:20:30+00:00
I’ll be honest. I don’t really understand the point of this article. Maybe that’s just a preference thing. The philosophy behind these abstractions is the least interesting part of the question for me. What problems do these various methods of polymorphism solve and create? What solutions do they enable or prevent? That’s the only part that matters. But citing some discussion about the philosophy behind the theory from 40 years ago is not particularly enlightening. Not because it’s not relevant. But because we have 40 years more experience now and dozens of new languages that have different takes on this topic. What has been learned and what has been discovered?
by nrhrjrjrjtntbt | 2025-11-15 23:20:31+00:00
I think AI can be a tool to understand a cosebase but needs human insight to turn into real docs.

I have used AI to ask specific questions about a codebase and it has been helpful in narrowing the search base. Think of AI as probable cause, not evidence. It speeds up getting to the truth but cant be trusted as the truth.
by mendigou | 2025-11-15 23:21:19+00:00
I keep hearing this thing about apps and I'm confused. I write code on my MBA M1, run orbital simulations, run a media server... All like I would on Linux. What am I missing on userland?

I understand there is low level system stuff I can't control, but I've made my peace with that. When using Linux I hadn't touched its internals for years.
by Aurornis | 2025-11-15 23:21:23+00:00
Those are articles about maternal stress during pregnancy.

The trans-generational epigenetic inheritance proponents claim that trauma can induce lasting generational effects spanning multiple levels of descendants, even if it doesn’t occur during to the mother during pregnancy.

The paper this HN submission is talking about claims to have found an effect like this that persists for 4 generations.

A key problem with the inter generational trauma proponents is that they presume the effects will only be negative. However, studies like this one showed a positive adaptation. Evolutionarily, it would make more sense if epigenetic mechanisms generally conferred benefits and learned adaptations, which goes against the narratives that anything negative would produce lasting negative effects. It’s not entirely that simple, but it reveals why the intergenerational trauma equals epigenetic inheritance people are starting with a conclusion and trying to get the science to fit their narrative, which is backward from how it should be.
by Onavo | 2025-11-15 23:21:31+00:00
Well, they need to a vibe code a drag-and-drop Nocode UI first if they want to compete with Simulink.

https://www.mathworks.com/products/simulink.html

(There's also Julia and Modelica)

https://discourse.julialang.org/t/simulink-alternative-in-ju...

https://modelica.org/
by kenmacd | 2025-11-15 23:21:48+00:00
There are systems (like the sanco2) that use an indoor/outdoor pump.

> This sounds terrible for efficiency in winter, as you will need to reheat the room

Sure, but lots of people have some point of the year they want cooling.

Even during the heating season it's only worse if you're heating the living space with something _worse_ than what you're using to heat the hot water. If you have a heat pump for room heat then you're moving heat from outside, to in the house, to in the water heater.

If you're heating the room with electric then in the winter it's no different than using an electric water heater (100% efficient).
by DamnInteresting | 2025-11-15 23:22:04+00:00
I did something similar with someone who was using my site’s donation form to test huge batches of credit cards numbers. I would see hundreds of attempted (and mostly declined) $1 donations start pouring in, and I’d block the IP. A little while later it would restart from another IP. When it became clear they were not giving up easily, I changed tack: instead of blocking them, I would return random success/failure messages at the same rate they were seeing success on previous attempts. I didn’t really try to charge those cards, of course.

I like how this kind of response is very difficult for them to detect when I turn it on, and as a bonus, it pollutes their data. They stopped trying a few days after that.
by raw_anon_1111 | 2025-11-15 23:22:25+00:00
If you haven’t noticed, “the people in DC” right now don’t care about the US outside of red states. And the reason a plane is different because people think it could happen to them if they got on a plane. If you don’t live in NYC, it’s easy to avoid the NYC train system. If I want to get from ATL to Seattle - what am I going to do drivers two or three days?

>Less than a quarter as many people as get stuck when the NYC subways are offline, presumably.

There plenty of ways to get from Manhattan to Queens if the train system went down then to get from California to Florida.

Is it really that hard to see the difference between a localized transportation system in NYC and a worldwide network of planes? Especially since airline security doesn’t just affect domestic flights it also affects flights leaving the US.

And you think the US pressured England of all places to have higher security? Did you forget about all the bombing they use to have? Did they also irsssye countries to have higher security security measures for domestic flights and their internal train system?

Or do you think that Israel would have less security if it weren’t for US pressure or Central America?

Why would the US care for instance if there were screenings to get on the baby Sansa propellor plane that flies from San Jose Costa Rica to Manual Antonino?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quepos_La_Managua_Airport

The plane they use.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_208_Caravan#Variants

Yes the terminal is a hut and I’ve flown into there before.
by rolph | 2025-11-15 23:23:02+00:00
the entire OP displays a lack of knowledge regarding epigenetic mechanisms, as well as a lack ot knowledge base required to make an informed appraisal.

the knowledge base required, is extensive for a non biologist, and made difficult to attain without experience interpreting decades long synthesis.

thus the fundamentals are provided, should anyone desire breadcrumbs pursuant to independant edifiction.
by frxx | 2025-11-15 23:23:06+00:00
That's what I've been saying for some time now... "No one really wants AI! They want their software to be faster or better, but do they care if the people in the background of the image have been removed by AI or not?" And in fact they don't.

Managers think they want AI but they actually want their people to work faster or better. Higher managers think they want AI so they can save money, or at least not fall behind the competitors, if those were to use AI to get an advantage.

Companies making software think they want AI because their competitors are using it, and they think the users want AI so the software can be perceived as modern, not falling behind.

And so on, and so on... other than Nvidia, openAI, Anthropic, etc, no one really wants AI.
by taeric | 2025-11-15 23:23:37+00:00
It really helps me to think of it all as extensive metaphors. Math included. The point is to tell an active story using symbols as metaphorical representations of something. With a lot of assumed language implied (through teachings) by choices of naming things. (As a fun example, don't focus on the name Algebraic if you aren't going to lean in on grade school algebra for things.)

That said, I think this is also a good way to approach framing things. Agreed that the idea of "prefer composition" is often a thought termination trick. Instead, try them both! The entire point of preferring one technique over the other is that it is felt to give more workable solutions. If you don't even know what the worked solution would look like with the other technique, you should consider trying it. Not with a precommitment that you will make it work; but to see what it illuminates on the ideas.
by perching_aix | 2025-11-15 23:23:52+00:00
> If you want to live without the risk of a little danger, go live in prison.

You have a very interesting idea of prison life.

In any case, labeling this a FUD I find to be a rather ill-spirited characterization. "Be cautious, not afraid." It is difficult to exercise caution without being aware of the risks, and this is a real risk.

But since we're getting all philosophical, it also hampers the exploration of the space between uncontrolled safety + original vision <-> controlled safety + a total loss of that vision. Which I find is what a lot of the pleas towards "freedom" actually turn out to be; an obstruction of curiosity and rigor that would otherwise yield a more robust portfolio of options. The Monkey's Paw edition of the idea, where freedom is just another word for the unknown. The ability to do better, and an active choice not to.

If I think about when I usually take on operational risks at work confidently, it comes down to two things: knowing what might go wrong, and having a contingency plan. It is not going YOLO. Note the emphasis on taking on risks (so these are not unavoidable risks).

Contrast this with what was said. You're appealing to the risk both remaining unknown and staying unavoidable, while being fully aware that people do not maintain contingencies for this. How is this any reasonable? Is "rolling the dice on getting their systems infected" vs. "just getting their OS look different" really what you think people are looking to spice up their life with?

This is not a knock on the project or the community mind you, it's a knock on your idea of preferring to keep things yeeing and hawing. Something which I can assure you I'm growing equally if not more tired of than purportedly "having to be afraid". Especially given how I increasingly struggle to suspend my disbelief when people claim they're now being told all the time how they should "be afraid", and how they're now supposedly living in terror because of it, as the innocent victims they are. People blatantly mischaracterizing reasonable concerns as FUD over and over kinda does that to you. I think the trendy word for this is "performative"?

Between having to choose "not telling people about dangers so that those with an inability to properly self-regulate their anxiety don't go toast" and "always leading with the danger and safety information", maybe the way forward instead is having appropriate spaces for these? Cause I'd argue in that case, the extents the post you replied to went is pretty okay for this forum in my view. They know that arbitrary code is submitted, so they're wondering how malware is screened. Big deal.