MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mytailorisrich | 2025-11-13 15:02:09+00:00
IMHO, for someone to be deemed unfit to work for mental health reasons their condition has to be quite serious and require professional help, which seems to be contradictory with the proposal (What can employers do?).

Not sure as well what exactly an employer-provided "workplace health scheme" might mean... Does the office shut off the lift and inspects people's lunches and snacks?
by ta12653421 | 2025-11-13 15:02:12+00:00
Depends on how each individual institution handles it:

Some exchanges and banks to trace lets say the last 20 hops, and if these are OK, then they accept the coin. I know also about institutions which trace ALL hops, meaning: At their desk you cant ever sell a coin that has been in the dark only one day since its existance.

Most have a relaxed approach, like "if the coin wasnt in dirty hands for the last 5 or 6, its OK for us"
by barrkel | 2025-11-13 15:02:35+00:00
The information about what the code was doing at the time an exception is thrown is implicit in the stack trace; the control flow is evident from line numbers, and with half-decent tooling, you can get hyperlinks from stack traces to source code.

If there's extra information you need to know about what's going on, you probably want to log it in non-error cases too, because it'll contextualize an error before the error occurs. You can't log on unwind for decisions made in routines that were invoked and returned from, and are no longer on the stack, in the error case.

> Why is it error-prune. You receive an error of one type and need to convert it into an error of another type. You need to handle that or the compiler will bark.

This is a choice you've made, not something inherent to unchecked exceptions. My argument is that you should not generally change the type of the error, and let polymorphism cover the abstraction. It's error prone because it's code you need to write. All code you write is on the cost side of the ledger and liable to contain mistakes.

> How does it obscure the logs?

You get lots of error log messages for a single error.

> In addition, you would need to allocate on a failure path, which sounds like a nightmare.

I wanted to address this separately. Allocating on the failure path is only a real problem in OOM or severe memory corruption scenarios, in which case logging may not be available and the best course of action is probably to abort the program. In this case, you want the logs that led up to the abort, rather than trying to log positively under severe memory conditions.

Are you a Go user by any chance? I've stayed away from Go precisely because of its boilerplate-reliant error handling mechanism. Or if you're stuck with C++ (with or without exceptions), my commiserations.
by matthewaveryusa | 2025-11-13 15:02:39+00:00
So what's the issue here (I know what the issue is in terms of the subresource not loading, a bit like an oauth redirect not executing properly if a user needs to log back in.)

Is it because of a misconfiguration on blender's end that should allow css to passthrough without verification, the query param messing a cloudflare passthrough default, or something else?
by freejazz | 2025-11-13 15:02:49+00:00
>Let's say they do find some juicy detail and use it, then what? Nothing. It's not like you can ever fix a privacy violation. Nobody involved would get a serious punishment, like prison time, either.

There are no privacy violations. OpenAI already told the court they anonymized it. What they say in court and what they say in the blog is different and so many people here are (unfortunately) falling for it!
by rerdavies | 2025-11-13 15:02:57+00:00
It seems pretty silly to make pronouncements about what LLMs are capable of doing if the sum total of your experience is casual use of the cheapest and least capable LLMs. (ChatGPT: measured IQ of about 70, vs. measured IQs of 120+ for more capable models, some of which are available for free).

They DO understand what they are doing. When I ask it to solve math problems, it goes through the several (many) steps involved (e.g. e.g. "apply the chain rule" while doing partial differentiation on a term in a Jacobian matrix). It gets pretty tedious when solving systems of linear equations, where it goes through each step of the Gauss-Jordan elimination while doing an LU decomposition, row by row. But one learns to ignore the blah-blah. Step by step, in absolutely ridiculous detail. The point: they absolutely 100% understand what they are doing, and understand it in minute detail.

It's clearly NOT regurgitating something that it has literally seen before, because the level of detail is beyond ridiculous for a human. It is applying generalized rules to specific concrete problems, and doing so with some level of strategic thinking.

Where did it learn those generalized principles, and how did it learn to do that? With absolute certainty, there are math textbooks among the materials they have been trained on. And they certainly learned it from SOMEWHERE. Probably math textbooks. How did they learn to generalize and think strategically? Well, that's the big mystery, isn't it? But they do.

The very best models achieve high scores on Math Olympiad problem sets (so competitive with some of the best minds on the planet). And Terrence Tau (greatest living mathematician) declares state-of-the-art models to be "better than most of my post-graduate students".

And what they can and cannot do is increasing by leaps and bounds on a weekly or monthly basis right now. It's hard to keep up. I frequently find that they can do things this week, that they could not do a week or a month ago. Startling, and quite utterly amazing.

Most of the time, I am using Claude Sonnet 4.5 as my coding agent, for which I pay $10/month. Measured IQ of 110, I think, with an IQ of 120 if you flip it into thinking mode. But only because there isn't enough undergraduate level mathematics in a standard IQ test. Claude Sonnet 4.5 is also available for free here: https://claude.ai/chats (during periods of heavy load, it may fall back to simpler models). I often use the free web interface instead of the Coding Agent interface for math problems, because it's easier to read mathematical equations in the browser version. version). And I generally use the free version of Claude instead of Google Search these days.
by aleph_minus_one | 2025-11-13 15:03:00+00:00
> Would it still count as a transpiler if it minifies the code at the end?

I would say "yes, but the minimization is an additional step that is not actually a direct part of the transpiling process." :-)

So, a program that does this would not a transpiler by itself, but a program that

- executes a pipeline of which the transpiling is the most important step,

- can also be used as a transpiler by making transpiling the only step in the executed pipeline.
by jmyeet | 2025-11-13 15:03:14+00:00
Two legacies from the 1980s and 1990s that haunt us to this day are:

1. The idea of trickle down economics; and

2. That public-private partnerships ("PPPs" were a stalwart of Thatcher and Blair) do anything other than simply transfer wealth from the public sector to the private sector. Put another way, PPPs socialize the risk and privatize the profits.

For anyone who pays attention and can think critically, this is the least suprising thing that can possibly happen and was evident decades ago.

For the railways in particular, railroads (technically, train operating companies or TOCs) in the UK have zero incentive to invest in rolling stock, track, signalling systems or stations because they own none of it. So all they do is engage in cutting costs and gaming politics to raise prices to increase profits. That's all that happens.

You can say that British Rail needed reform and funding but PPPs were simply not the answer.
by Arnt | 2025-11-13 15:03:44+00:00
Android doesn't grant this by default, strictly speaking. Rather, an application can enable it by listing it in the application manifest. Most permissions require a question to to the user.

Did you find a suitable app? I don't really remember, but https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.nxp.taginf... might suit you.
by tpmoney | 2025-11-13 15:04:19+00:00
Yes and if you look on ffmpeg’s site you’ll find a link where they promote hiring their devs independently as consultants for ffmpeg work. Note the names of those maintainers. Now go to fflabs.eu, observe that they are an ffmpeg consulting firm, scroll down on the main page and observe the Google logo among their promoted list of customers. Now click on the “team” link and check out the names of the people that run fflabs. Notice that they are some of the very same people listed in the ffmpeg main site. Ergo Google pays ffmpeg developers to work on ffmpeg.
by rollcat | 2025-11-13 15:04:52+00:00
> Anti-cheats should run server-side [...].

This. It should actually be easier to catch offenders - you're leaning on hundreds of years of applied statistics, rather than racing versus sneakier exploits.

> [...] or better yet, servers should be community-operated.

I'm conflicted about this one. I've wanted to host a game server at home since 2003, but couldn't get a public, static IP. The landscape hasn't changed much, perhaps even for the worse: a Quake 3 dedicated server could be run from a mid-range laptop while playing the game; Minecraft and Factorio (both great games with fantastic communities), by that measure, have unreasonable hardware requirements.

So, you pay a host.

OTOH there's many ways for a studio to build and operate an ethical live service. Check out Warframe: it's 100% F2P, the main source of revenue is cosmetics, and it's easy for people to gift stuff (whales spill their pockets reinforcing community goodwill, rather than gambling).

It's best when a game offers both, e.g. Brood War. StarCraft II isn't "simply" dying; lack of LAN play actively hinders on-site, professional tournaments. And we can do nothing about it.
by FridayoLeary | 2025-11-13 15:05:00+00:00
The reason i made a point about low stress conditions is because i do actually appreciate that driving a train is not as simple as i imagine. I might have said that they are basically truck drivers (just without 90% of the driving part) whose entire job is sitting all day sometimes pressing a button that says go and pressing a button that says stop and a 12 year old could do it. But that would be overly uncharitable and wrong. They are after all responsible for hundreds of lives and thousands of tons moving at great speed. Are they good people? No. Are they overpaid? I believe so.

Just to clarify a point. My main complaint isn't even that they are overpaid. If their bosses want to fleece everyone, why can't they? It's more the absolute selfishness of their actions that bothers me.
by DonHopkins | 2025-11-13 15:05:12+00:00
This Blender Lab page "Beyond Mouse and Keyboard" page mentions the "wheel menu":

https://code.blender.org/2025/07/beyond-mouse-keyboard/

Here's an wonderful Blender extension, the Sculpt Wheel, that has concentric rings, and is deeply customizable (this video was posted 15 hours ago so it's fresh and current):

Blender 4.5 Sculpt Wheel - Glyph+

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhO-aU512NE&t=1s
by barrkel | 2025-11-13 15:05:41+00:00
The problem with this is you don't have context on subgraphs of control flow which have already returned by the time of the error.

I think our disagreement is less about error handling and more about logging policy. I favour a logging policy which lets you understand what the code is doing even if it doesn't error out; this means that you don't need to log on unwind. You favour a logging policy specific for errors.

My position is that your position ends up with less useful context for diagnosing errors.
by wongarsu | 2025-11-13 15:06:29+00:00
Yeah, I'm likewise a bit underwhelmed by the results.

If you go in with the expectation that you give it a single image and it's doing gaussian splatting from a single image and a prompt it's phenomenal. If you deviate too far from the image viewpoint it breaks down, but it looks decent long enough to be very usable. But if you go in with the expectation that it's generating "worlds" it's not very good. This only passes as a world in a 20 second tech demo where the user isn't given camera controls

My best guess is that they are forced (by investors, lack of investors, fear of the AI bubble, or whatever) to release something, and this was something they could polish up to production quality and host with reasonable GPU resources
by op00to | 2025-11-13 15:06:30+00:00
That is not “awkward,” it is reading comprehension. I said you skimmed a line and built a conspiracy out of it, meaning you spun a story of deceit and “noble lies” out of a cherry-picked source. You then tried to rescue yourself with “there’s no conspiracy,” as if that is what I had claimed. That is you inventing a position to knock down.

On the substance: “definitions of dying from COVID were meaningless” is hand-waving. Excess mortality does not care about coding quirks. Every rich country saw a visible spike in deaths above baseline. And on Sweden, the data is not on your side. Norway and Sweden took opposite approaches in 2020. Norway used strict lockdowns, tight border controls, and intensive outbreak tracking, while Sweden kept society largely open.

The results weren’t subtle. As the Juul paper puts it: “That resulted in 477 COVID-19 deaths (Norway) and 9,737 (Sweden) in 2020, respectively.”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38262870/

Holding up the outlier with vastly more dead people as the “sensible” model is quite a choice.

Your laundry list of culture-war anecdotes about restaurants, rallies, 6-foot rules, and cloth masks is not an argument about vaccines or mandates. It’s a vibes reel. Early non-pharmaceutical rules were inconsistent. Inconsistent does not mean "bad". The inconsistency doesn't retroactively erase the evidence that vaccination reduced severe disease, reduced transmission and pressure on hospitals. You keep skipping over the data I cited on secondary attack rates and infectious periods because it collides with your story.

You have also walked back your own claim which I appreciate. You are now saying “the vaccines worked, but were over-prescribed,” which concedes the core point while trying to shift the conversation to every grievance you can think of: models, school closures, toddler masks, the economy. We started with “this chapter proves vaccines do not reduce transmission.” It does not. Peer-reviewed household and cohort data contradict it. Everything you have added since is fog to avoid saying “I was wrong about that.”
by saghm | 2025-11-13 15:06:32+00:00
That's fair, but I was specifically responding to the part of OP's comment that said that compiling and installing comments was what they expected "most people" used homebrew for. I would expect the vast majority of homebrew users to be installing the built-in formulas for pretty much everything.

I do recognize that there's a bit of ambiguity around when the "compiling" happens, since even the binaries being distributed are still being compiled from homebrew's formulas. The main point I was trying to make was that there was a transition from the "compile everything on the user's local machine when installing" model that homebrew started with to "use the pre-built binaries that homebrew has compiled in advance for installing when possible if the user hasn't specifically expressed they want to compile it themselves". To be clear, I think this is a good thing, and it's a pretty huge quality of life improvement, but I've noticed a few times over the years that this change seems to have not been as widely noticed as I'd expect given how visible it seemed to me even as someone who only uses MacOS on my work machines and not my personal ones. I still sometimes get frustrated with homebrew feeling a bit slow compared to my preferred Linux package manager, but overall it's become far faster and less error-prone over the past decade, and I think it's worth calling out efforts they've taken (like pre-compiling and distributing binaries) that have made a noticeable impact.

In some ways, I think I think understanding the previous efforts they've taken might even help explain why they've chosen not to put in the effort to work around the quarantine issues (e.g. by using local signing like some other comments on this story have mentioned); they're a volunteer project that, unlike most standard package manages for Linux distros, are not in a position where they can easily influence the development of the OS features that might be useful for them. It makes sense to me that the most valuable use of their efforts would be on things that aren't swimming against the current of where MacOS is going. Getting to the point where they could have seamless binary installations at all can't have been an easy task, and the infrastructure needed for it takes additional effort beyond the local compilation model (which still exists). If cutting down on the scope in one dimension makes it easier for them to continue providing the overall feature set they have, this seems like a worthwhile tradeoff to me.
by tasn | 2025-11-13 15:06:49+00:00
Still cool, but very much a click bait!

You can boot the pixel 10 with mainline Linux Kernel!

Oh, but the patches to support that haven't landed in the kernel yet.

Oh, and you also need a custom bootloader that hasn't been released yet.

And btw, it doesn't boot a fully functional system, just a basic uart interface.

Still cool, but not what I expected from the headline.
by StopDisinfo910 | 2025-11-13 15:07:26+00:00
I think it's pretty clear to anyone with experience in the field that the notion of compilers, interpreters, transpilers are porous and even more so when you had the concept of VM ("Let's interpret a compiled artefact") and JIT ("I put a compiler in your interpreter. Don't worry, it all runs on the same VM in the end.")

These things live on a continuum. Still, I think the different worlds are useful. They put forward different concepts and ideas. It helps framing things.
by sjs382 | 2025-11-13 15:07:33+00:00
> What does the US benefit from this new policy?

This really makes me feel like a conspiracy theorist, but it doesn't seem as far from reality as it should...

If there's no response: exhibiting total dominance of the region and being able to make up whatever unverifiable statistics they want re: domestic safety (drugs, gangs, etc).

If there is a response: potential for armed conflict which could become a pretense for interning more citizens with hispanic heritage, similar to what was done to Japanese Americans in the 1940s.
by neya | 2025-11-13 15:07:44+00:00
You're proving exactly why this is the case. With 2 people, it's easy to coordinate, agree upon a lot of things, accept compromise, meet face to face. Try 20 people. Infinite meetings, pushback from managers, resource allocation clashes, politics top to bottom.

I'm not defending any large company, they could if they wanted to, they just don't care. If this is "cheaper" and they can cut costs, this is what they'll do.
by giraffe_lady | 2025-11-13 15:08:05+00:00
Another commentor pointed out that the problem they appear to be solving is consistent typesetting and layout across multiple east and southeast asian languages.

I've never dealt with those precisely but I have had to typeset documents containing both latin and greek or cyrillic (but luckily not all three) and even with that there are not very many fonts that support both, and even fewer that are a good font with both. You end up having to mix fonts, and finding ones that look good together with the same letter spacing and line height and consistent weight is quite a challenge!

I'm definitely aware of the trend of every tech company commissioning a near identical just-slightly-quirky sans serif font for no clear reason but this doesn't seem to be that.
by cmrdporcupine | 2025-11-13 15:08:46+00:00
That's the same model we have in Canada here mainly. Provinces pay for the service, but family doctors and most other practitioners are private businesses that then bill the government based on a set fee schedule.

The exception I guess is hospitals which are kind of a mixed structure of some kind and doctors in them are salaried employees not businesses of their own.

The problem with this approach is it intrinsically creates conflict between the doctors and the gov't about how fees are structured, and the patient gets stuck in the middle. That and inconsistent standards, structure, and quality. Couple that with conservative governments that sometimes have ideological antipathy to socialized medicine generally, and there's a recipe for difficulties.

I'm given to understand that the NHS in the UK is not like this, and most doctors are salaried?

I could be getting some details wrong.
by chollida1 | 2025-11-13 15:08:48+00:00
THis is mostly a non event.

He's done this before. He had a good run form 2000-2009 but then had a bad run and liquidated his fund to manage his own money.

he restarted a fund in 2013 and managed a relatively small amount of money(200M) and has had mixed results. He announced last month he's liquidating his fund but also left a teaser that he'll make an announcement on Nov 25th.

I think the one big lesson I've personally taken from him for money management is the saying that "right but early is still wrong". He was right in 2008 but nearly lost regardless.

Now he's made big bets on water, the ai boom ending and the age of free money for companies from the government ending, Palantir as a company wouldn't exist without copious amounts of government money, Thiel's bet on cozying up to Trump really paid off here..

He may be right on all 3 but he was early and therefor from an investing standpoint he was wrong.

With him and the rest of the old guard of short funds (Chanos, Kynikos and Hindenburg) all closing up shop it also proves the old adage that you can't fight the fed and when they pump out so much free money like they did from 2008 till now that its very hard to be short as even terrible companies can limp along forever.

I'll be watching closely to see what he does with his next act.
by squaresmile | 2025-11-13 15:08:59+00:00
There are problems with rail privatization but I don't think this is one.

> Privatization results in requiring riders to sometimes exit a station of one company, go all the way up to ground level, walk a block or to two another different company station, and then ride another train.

I believe this is the result of different private companies operating physically separate lines, rather than some privatization activities? For example, Shinjuku has stations of JR East (result of JNR privatization), Keio (private), Odakyu (private), Toei (public), Tokyo Metro ("private" but owned by Japan gov and tokyo metro gov). Sure, JNR privatization is controversial but without that, Shinjuku is still a mess of different operators.

Are you suggesting the government turn back time and banned private companies owning rail or they should buy out and nationalize all rails companies?

> A government managed system wouldn't have this issue

Well, if it's 2 different government levels and 2 entities, the issue still exists. For example, to transfer between Tokyo Metro and Toei Subway, you might need to tap or a transfer ticket https://www.tokyometro.jp/lang_en/ticket/types/connection/in...

It's also possible for public and private companies to cooperate. Keikyu main line (private) does through running on Toei Asakusa line that allows the subway to have connections to both airports through private rails.

Nowadays, with IC cards, transferring between systems is a breeze. For the walking distance, nothing much you can do besides moving the track itself (done sometimes) or station redesign with better walkways and tunnels (done often).