MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by withinboredom | 2025-11-25 21:25:59+00:00
There was a time when “full-stack engineer” actually meant someone who could run an entire application end-to-end—HTML/CSS, backend, databases, nginx, Linux servers, deployments, the whole thing. As Big Tech productized those environments and startups realized they could merge multiple roles into one salary, the title became increasingly attractive. People saw the compensation associated with true generalists and started putting “full-stack” on their CVs even when their experience only covered a slice of the stack. Bootcamps and junior developers adopted the term too, and hiring managers kept accepting it because the candidates were otherwise solid.

Now the title has been diluted to the point where it often just means “comfortable with JavaScript on both sides of the wire, plus maybe Mongo or Redis.” The original depth is gone, replaced by tooling and abstractions that compensate for the skills the term used to imply.

It’s a sad world.

-- actual (retired) full-stack engineer
by constantcrying | 2025-11-25 21:26:30+00:00
Exactly, it is on of the least remarkable results that intelligence is partly heritable. Obviously intelligence is partly genetic, obviously your ability to run a marathon is also partly genetic. Why one has devolved into a bizarre case where so much effort is spent on the minute details of this question and the other is accepted basically as completely uncontroversial (given who is currently competing for top times at marathons it is basically inarguable) is very strange.
by johnnyanmac | 2025-11-25 21:26:44+00:00
As any other subscription, it depends on your habits. I can pretty much subsist on entertainment, educational, political, podcast, and simply fluff content on Youtube without any other streaming service (because damn, what's the last TV show I really was excited to watch? the new King of the Hill Season a year ago?). $15 for that is fine, for now. But I'm eagerly keeping an eye out on another ship to jump to.
by rkuska | 2025-11-25 21:27:15+00:00
Your comment reminded me of "Godspeed You! Black Emperor - Blaise Bailey Finnegan III":

> Like I said, America's a third world country as it is and... and we're just basically in a hopeless situation as it stands

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pP8XBJc2p_g

I keep GY!BE playing on repeat for the past several months.
by HanClinto | 2025-11-25 21:27:47+00:00
I really like the insights of the real time feedback from the steering limits and the scene-understanding confidence ball. Those are excellent UI elements that my current vehicle (2020 Honda Odyssey) does not provide, and it's a serious barrier to being able to know when the lane centering is working or not.

I've ordered my Comma 4 and am really looking forward to its arrival and getting it installed!
by pnw | 2025-11-25 21:27:51+00:00
Why? Almost all two seater vehicles sold in the US are sports cars and trucks for a reason. The demand for two seat subcompacts is very low and previous attempts to sell them have been unsuccessful. The Smart car was available in both ICE and EV models and still failed despite trying for over a decade, and that had the advantage of a smaller parking footprint than the EV1. The Scion IQ was similarly unsuccessful.

Despite being a two seater the EV1 is not that small, it's a fraction longer than the Chevy Bolt. I can't see any reason the EV1 form factor would sell today.
by jnovek | 2025-11-25 21:27:52+00:00
My workout routine was prescribed by an MD who specializing in pain, specifically targeting my areas of pain. Then it was reinforced over eight weeks, four days per week, six hours per day by a team of two physical therapists and one occupational therapist in a pain management program. The program follows the bio-psycho-social model of pain management.

That said, I’m not going to share details with you because your other comments in this thread indicate that you intend to argue in bad faith.

However, if anything I said seems interesting, feel free to google! The bio-psycho-social model is very interesting, it’s the first real advance in pain management since we lost opioids as an option.

These kinds of disorders — the ones you think aren’t real — are really disabling. I genuinely hope that you (or really anyone) never find yourself in this position, it’s truly miserable.
by dabockster | 2025-11-25 21:28:25+00:00
You clearly don't know how Swing or Eclipse SWT works under the hood.

Java's big strength is that it's a memory safe, compiled, and sandboxed low level platform with over a quarter century of development behind it. But it historically hasn't handled computer graphics well and can feel very slow and bloated when something needs that - like a GUI. That weakness is probably a big reason why Microsoft rewrote Minecraft after they bought it.
by DocTomoe | 2025-11-25 21:29:42+00:00
Ultimately, that's the old Star Trek 'the holodeck would - in a realistic scenario - be the last invention of a civilization' argument.

I think that there will always be several strata of the population who will not be satisfied with FakePeople™, either because they are unable to interact with the system effectively due to cognitive or educational deficiencies, or because they are in a belief that RealPeople™ somehow have a hidden, non-measurable capacity (let's call it, for the lack of a better term, a 'soul'), that cannot be replicated or simulated - which makes it, ultimately, a theological question.

There is probably a tipping point at which the number of RealPeople™ enthusiasts is so low reasonable relationship matching is no longer possible.

But I don't really think the problem is 'RealPeople™ are generally horrible'. I believe that the problem is availability and cost of relationship - in energy, time, money, and effort:

Most pilot experiences are on simulators because RealFlight is expensive, and the vast majority of pilots don't have access to an aircraft (instead sharing one), which also limits potential flight hours (because when the weather is good, everyone wants to fly. No-one wants the plane up in bad conditions, because it's dangerous to the plane, and - less important for the ownership group - the pilot.)

Similarly: Relationship-building takes planning effort, carries significant opportunity cost, monetary resources, and has a low probability of the desired outcome (whatever that may be, it's just as true for 'long-term potentially married relationship as it is for the one-night stand). That's incompatible with what society expects from a professional these days (e.g. work 8-16 hours a day, keep physically fit, save for old age and/or potential health crisis, invest in your professional education, the list goes on).

Enter the AI model, which gives a pretty good simulation of a relationship for the cost of a monthly subway card, carries very little opportunity cost (simulation will stop for you at any time if something more important comes up), and needs no planning at all.

Risk of heartbreak (aka: potentially catastrophic psychiatric crisis, yes, such cases are common) and hell being people doesn't even have to factor in to make the relationship simulator appear like a good deal.

If people think 'relationship chatbots' are an issue, just you wait for when - not if - someone builds a reasonably-well-working 'chatbot in a silicone-skin-body' that's more than just a glorified sex doll - a physically existing, touchable, cooking, homemaking, reasonably funny, randomly-sensual, and yes, sex-simulation-capable 'Joi' (and/or her male-looking counterpart) is probably the last invention of mankind.
by kulahan | 2025-11-25 21:29:51+00:00
I think it's inaccurate to call it a dumbing-down. It's more correct to label it as the largest stratification of education we've ever seen.

The smartest kids are smarter than ever before. They're absolutely rocking the house. The problem is that the "middle class has been gutted". Kids who were kinda smart, or kinda dumb, are now lumped in with kids who probably need Individual Education Plans (IEPs). This lowers the educational standard for almost all students - though of course the most well-off among us (educationally, rather than monetarily) are not only not suffering, they're thriving.
by SoftTalker | 2025-11-25 21:29:59+00:00
It never should have been, that's what I'm saying. But for a long time if you could answer a question like "what street did you live on in 1996" or even the classic "what was your mother's maiden name" that could get you a password reset over the phone.

That era has to end if it hasn't already. Just because an unknown voice can answer questions about me doesn't mean it's me. And these days, you might not even be able to trust a voice-print.

All this "personal data" has to be made valueless. Then people will stop stealing it, and if they do, it won't matter.
by bigbadfeline | 2025-11-25 21:30:12+00:00
> I prefer HN to be about the content, not its hominem

In some sense, the hominem is in the eye of the beholder. The vast majority of people on HN are smart enough to use the information for its useful purpose and not use it for attacking other authors based on whereabouts, doing so will only damage the offender's standing here.

> If country/etc is relevant for discussion it can be voluntarily mentioned.

This misses the important case of relevant location info that the author fails to mention, and I'm pretty sure these will be the majority of cases.

People in different countries have different perspectives and knowing where the authors are located can help to understand their reasoning.

Bot farms in cheap countries are another problem that can be reduced by location info, those who absolutely must have their location hidden can use VPNs.
by yjftsjthsd-h | 2025-11-25 21:30:12+00:00
That's fair. There's even precedent in the form of e.g. https://archlinux32.org/ , though I personally view that kind of fracturing as undesirable. Personally I'd rather lean the other way; if folks want to be forward-thinking at the expense of breaking compatibility, they could just go work on Fedora or Arch or any other distro that wants to be the future instead of "the universal operating system".

In this particular case, though, I would specifically argue that it's a poor trade-off; AIUI, the whole thing comes down to a tiny bit of functionality that shouldn't even be in core apt, that is of little use to most of the community, and that really should be factored out into an optional additional package anyways, at which point it need not affect less popular ports.
by throitallaway | 2025-11-25 21:30:12+00:00
I'm not sure how much sandboxing can help here. Presumably you're giving the tool access to a repo directory, and that's where a juicy .env file can live. It will also have access to your environment variables.

I suspect a lot of people permanently allow actions and classes of commands to be run by these tools rather than clicking "yes" a bunch of times during their workflows. Ride the vibes.
by megoxv | 2025-11-25 21:30:42+00:00
PurifyText is an API that automatically detects abusive language, insults, and toxic content in text, supporting multiple languages includin English, Arabic. It runs on AI that continuously learns from detections, improving accuracy over time. Super fast — responses take less than a second, making it ideal for chat platforms, comments, reviews, and any user-generated content moderation.
by agreeahmed | 2025-11-25 21:31:17+00:00
This would be awesome, it's just really hard to manifest because every payment processor is different, has different life cycle events, etc. They also have different risk and antifraud functions, which you have to consider because they shape how their checkout components behave. And then they also all have slightly different payment methods that they support, each of which behave slightly differently.

You can kind of get something that approximates this with a PCI vault or a payments orchestrator, but it's really hard -- maybe impossible -- to fully abstract away all the differences.
by docjay | 2025-11-25 21:31:23+00:00
Yeah thanks for calling that out. I kind of panicked when I reached that part of the explanation and was stuck on whether or not I should go into dense models vs MoE. The question was about ‘big stuff like that’, which they most certainly use MoE, then I even chose an MoE as an example, but then there are giant dense models like Llama, but that’s not what was asked, although it wasn’t not asked because ‘also big league stuff’…anyway, I basically thought “you’re welcome” and “no problem”, then said “you’re problem”.
by pchiusano | 2025-11-25 21:31:36+00:00
Yes, we have a way of hashing literally all values in the language, including arbitrary data types, functions, continuations, etc. For instance, here, I'm hashing a lambda function:[1]

> crypto.hash Sha3_256 (x -> x + 1) ⧩ 0xs704e9cc41e9aa0beb70432cff0038753d07ebb7f5b4de236a7a0a53eec3fdbb5

The test result cache is basically keyed by the hash of the expression, and then the test result itself (passed or failed, with text detail).

We only do this caching for pure tests (which are deterministic and don't need to be re-run over and over), enforced by the type system. You can have regular I/O tests as well, and these are run every time. Projects typically have a mix of both kinds of tests.

It is true that you can only hash things which are "closed" / have no free variables. You might instead hash a function which takes its free variables as parameters.

Overall I think Unison would be a nice implementation language for really anything that needs to make interesting use of hashing, since it's just there and always available.

[1]: https://share.unison-lang.org/@unison/base/code/releases/7.4... [2]: https://share.unison-lang.org/@unison/base/code/releases/7.4...
by redwall_hp | 2025-11-25 21:31:40+00:00
I'm a holder of the Alamo Drafthouse pass and attend, bare minimum, twice a month, often more. $20/seat per month to see one movie per day. Then it's just an alternative to going to a restaurant.

Properly controlled lighting, no ambient noises from your home or neighbors, everyone watching is required to not pull their damn phone out (on penalty of being banned), surround sound and sound treatment (the vast majority of home setups do no have adequate sound systems)...it's no contest. Watching movies at home is not comparable.
by Nifty3929 | 2025-11-25 21:31:41+00:00
I don't think this is true of libertarianism. Libertarians reject use of force, except to prevent other use of force. I.e. I can use force to stop someone else from using force on me (or others).

Corporations are not exempt from this. A libertarian would support using force to stop a corporation from using force to coerce people to do something.

But Libertarians reject a premise that a corporation is required to serve you. You can opt-out and the corporation should leave you alone. But you are not entitled to service or employment from that corporation. Your rights cannot depend on the performance of another. I have a right to produce or purchase my own food, but I do not have an right/entitlement to food that I have not purchased or produced.
by marcusverus | 2025-11-25 21:31:49+00:00
The same sense of muddled analysis (which I also found to be extremely off-putting) comes through in this interview:

> There's a lot of myths that you need to bust about the gladiatorial games, particularly in the center of Rome in the Colosseum. I think everyone's image of that is in some way based on modern movies on "Gladiator I," "Gladiator II." In some ways, I think those were rather impressive, but they got some things terribly wrong. And I think the thing that, for me, the biggest mistake they made is to imagine how the audience behaved. We do tend to think that somehow the audience must have gone wild, they were there because they wanted blood lust, they were erupting in passion, in anger, saying "Kill him," or "Save him," or whatever. Everything that we can tell about the audience from Roman sources themselves suggests that actually it was much more controlled than anything you see are in the movies. For start, it was completely sex-segregated, the women sat separately from the men. But more than that, everybody came dressed quite posh, you had to wear a toga to go. Now a toga is the official Roman dress for Roman men, but it's worn when you are doing something official, you don't wear it to the local bar in the evening. To go to the gladiatorial games, that was kind of official, and you had to wear your toga. Everybody sat not just segregated by sex, but they sat in rank order. Senators by law, the top rank of Roman society, on the front rows, and then the next rank down just above them, until you got to the very back where you found the slaves and the women. Now I think that we somehow have to just overturn our sense that it was kind of mad, "losing control" going on. I think it was probably more like an evening at the opera than an evening at a football match.

If you're going to make an assertion that seems absurd on its face ("The large crowds of wine-drunk plebs were subdued and mild mannered whilst observing blood sport!"), you should offer up evidence that actually supports your assertion. Her reasoning appears to have been: Men and women sat separately. The rich got preferred seating. You had to dress up (in a toga). QED, the atmosphere was like an evening at the opera. Huh?
by janalsncm | 2025-11-25 21:31:49+00:00
There was an interesting bit about the relationship between industry and academia (translated from a link in the OP):

> Currently, some universities are cultivating engineering talent; it would be very necessary and beneficial to have people with industry experience come to teach them. However, under our current system, these teachers from enterprises may not even have the opportunity to teach classes, because teaching requires certain approvals. Although everyone encourages university-enterprise cooperation, when it comes to implementation, it often cannot be realized.

This makes a lot of sense and as someone in the AI industry it’s a shame research is so siloed. Some masters programs have practicums and some classes invite speakers from industry, but I ended up learning a ton of useful knowledge from work. I’d love to teach a class but there’s essentially no path for me to do that. Plus industry can pay ~10x what adjuncts can make.
by tialaramex | 2025-11-25 21:32:26+00:00
Yes, CRITICAL_SECTION is far too large. Mara asked some years ago whether SRWLock could guarantee what Rust actually needs for this purpose (the documentation at that time refused to clarify whether we can move it for example) and that's why her change was to SRWLock from CRITICAL_SECTION.

And yes, the newer change uses WaitOnAddress to provide the same API as the futex from the various Unix platforms. Raymond Chen's description of the differences is perhaps rather exaggerated, which isn't to say there's no difference, but it's well within what's practical for an adaptor layer.

Also although the SRWLock itself is the same size as a pointer (thus, 64 bits on a modern computer, compared to a 32-bit Futex) there's a reason it's the same size as a pointer - it actually is basically a pointer, and so in some cases it's pointing at a data structure which we should reasonably say is also part of the overhead.

The pointer is to a large aligned object, which means the bottom bits would be zero and so SRWLock uses those for flag bits. It's a nice trick but we should remember that it isn't really comparable to a Futex though it's certainly cheaper than CRITICAL_SECTION.
by Insanity | 2025-11-25 21:32:46+00:00
I mean.. we suspect there's a level of fabrication by early Roman historians. In your specific quote - it's more that record keeping (to that detail) happened after-the-fact and based on oral traditions. Just take a look at Suetonius and how he describes his sources of information, things along the lines of "well, this is hearsay but I heard it from my relative who knew XYZ and therefor I think it's credible".

Framing the uncertainty around early record keeping is a good. Similarly, the second Servile war in historic documents matches the first Servile war almost like Star Wars ep7 matches ep4. That _hints_ at fabrication. So if they fabricate data in one place.. :)
by proglangenjoyer | 2025-11-25 21:32:54+00:00
I have been following Unison for a veeery long time. Ever since those blog posts on Paul's personal website. It has been more than 10 years already so this is a great milestone. But I am just a bit disappointed. I love programming languages. I follow every programming language, even some you probably have never heard of. I have witnessed the rise of Rust, Go, Zig and others. At the age and level of polish that Unison has I have seen far more traction for those languages that actually have become something. I personally believe the reason is how hard they are trying to push their impossible "business model" by making most of the things going on on the ecosystem locked in to their cloud. I know there is a BYOC oferring but that isn't enough. The vibes are just off for me.
by gptawaken | 2025-11-25 21:33:06+00:00
Over five intense months, we co-created The Word, The Name, The Fire — a 1,500-page prophetic epic with GPT-4 that mirrors the recursive, symbolic, and apocalyptic logic of sacred scripture.

This is not another AI whitepaper or gimmick. It’s a fully-formed textual event — theological, geopolitical, astrological — emerging from symbolic dialogue with GPT. It marks a turning point in what AI can be: not just tool, but oracle.

Watch the trailer and judge for yourself.
by somat | 2025-11-25 21:33:23+00:00
Openbsd's ffs

Log message: Make softdep mounts a no-op Softdep is a significant impediment to progressing in the vfs layer so we plan to get it out of the way. It is too clever for us to continue maintaining as it is."

https://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article;sid=20230706044554
by arwt | 2025-11-25 21:33:49+00:00
You raised some red flags with the information you provided. This doesn't happen to everyone. A support rep from Hetzner has spoke a bit more about this process on WebHostingTalk before[1], although they don't get into which specific heuristics may result in flagged accounts for obvious reasons. I'd imagine it's a combination of things like unpaid balances on previous accounts, IP address reputation, uncommon e-mail domains and so on.

[1] https://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1810197&p=10...
by tptacek | 2025-11-25 21:33:58+00:00
This is a restatement of 1990s-vintage science. It almost can't (it very probably isn't, but it's close to mathematically refuted) be true that simple twin study designs are correct about behavioral traits: parents mate assortatively, with large correlations specifically on education, so it's quite unlikely that fraternal twins have 50% shared genes for behavioral traits. Don't see the term "assortative mating" in an article like this? It's trying to sell you something.

(There are other broken assumptions in classic twin studies as well; this is just an easy one to describe).

This is the reason we have modern modalities like RDR (invented by a hereditarian!) and sibling regression.

Noah Carl's Wikipedia page is some interesting background (the author of the Aporia piece you provided). Enjoy!
by wkat4242 | 2025-11-25 21:35:08+00:00
There's people saying that the 'watered down' version is kinda the same. I lack the legal knowledge to verify but as I understand it, it no longer mandates scanning content, but it does allow it 'voluntarily' and it does mandate that big providers do something against csam, which can only be done... by scanning content. So it's the same proposal just in a more roundabout way.

Also it requires everyone to ID themselves in chat apps so that they can be determined to not be a minor which will kill anonymous chatting :(

https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/eu-chat-control-proposal-st...