MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Podrod | 2025-11-08 09:28:47+00:00
Google Maps is garbage as well, full of inaccurate shit or meme stuff people added but the process of getting it fixed has been made worse and worse over the years.

The report system has been gimped massively,can't even type in reasons any more just have to select from some limited options and hope for the best. Took me over half a year of reporting a permanent street closure near me for them to actually change it and all the whole they were happy to direct people and cars down it . Other times they just outright reject reports without any reason.

Directions have got more sucky over the years.

More and more advertising has creeped into the maps as well, seeing the logos for stores and restaurants over other places and when zoomed out because they paid to be boosted.

I only use Google for street view and, on google earth, for historical aerial imagery these days, not for navigation. For that I use apps that use OSM like Organic Maps or now CoMaps.
by wseqyrku | 2025-11-08 09:29:24+00:00
> Zig is not only a new programming language, but it’s a totally new way to write programs

I'd say the same thing about Rust. I find it the best way to express when what code should run at any given point in the program and the design is freakin interstellar: It is basically a "query engine" where you write a query of some code against the entire available "code space" including root crate and its dependencies. Once you understand that programming becomes naming bits and then queries for the ones you wish to execute.
by Raph_Koster | 2025-11-08 09:30:40+00:00
Towards the end of the article I mention "some of us have been working out the rule set for how you can link loops into a larger network of problems for literally over twenty years."

That is referencing the "game grammar" effort undertaken by myself, Dan Cook, Stephane Bura, Joris Dormans, and many others. It is very specifically about arriving at a notation system for gameplay logic.

The original talk from 2005 is here: https://www.raphkoster.com/games/presentations/a-grammar-of-...

The principles in this talk went on to be used by the field of computational modeling of games, AI game generators, and also used in training AI game players.
by noir_lord | 2025-11-08 09:31:10+00:00
Doesn't seem like it tbh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shell_Grotto,_Margate#Origins

> A member of the Kent Archaeological Society analyzed the grotto and concluded in 2006 that it was likely a mediaeval denehole, a small chalk mine, reworked and decorated in the 17th or 18th century.

There are multiple buildings in my village older than that (and the core of the church is centuries older).
by zeristor | 2025-11-08 09:31:28+00:00
From there list hulls 102, and 103 have slightly larger battery storage of 45MWh batteries, these replacing previous Incat Catamarans on the Aarhus-Sjællands Odde route, one I know quite well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incat#Deliveries

The current ships are used as a bus station. Various coaches use the ship, and people can transfer whilst on the ship.

“The FERRY that's also a FLOATING bus terminal. Denmark's STRANGE bus service Copenhagen to Aarhus”

https://youtube.com/watch?v=rTdXe5jDojk

By strange one assumes he means innovative.
by imiric | 2025-11-08 09:31:30+00:00
> AI is killing websites

I think that's hyperbole.

Yes, users can rely on "AI" summaries if they want a quick answer, but they've been able to do that for years via page snippets underneath each result, which usually highlight the relevant part of the page. The same argument was made when search engines began showing page snippets, yet we found a balance, and websites are still alive.

On the contrary, there's an argument to be made that search engines providing answers is the better user experience. I don't want to be forced to visit a website, which will likely have filler, popups, and be SEO'd to hell, when I can get the information I want in a fraction of the time and effort, within a consistent interface. If I do need additional information, then I can go to the source.

I do agree with the idea you mention below of search engines providing source links, but even without it, "AI" summaries can hardly be blamed for hurting website traffic. Websites are doing that on their own with user hostile design, SEO spam, scams, etc.

There is a long list of issues we can criticize search engines for, and the use of "AI" even more so, but machine-generated summaries on SERPs is not one of them IMO.
by zimpenfish | 2025-11-08 09:32:13+00:00
> Would you be “snipe”ing like this if a man were plagiarized?

When men have had their scientific advances plagiarised, stolen, claimed from them in the same quantity as non-men, sure, but that's like saying "you're complaining that I stole a million pounds but they stole a can of coke!" Nonsense whataboutism.
by atoav | 2025-11-08 09:32:16+00:00
His premise there was "why simply adding more lanes won't fix the problem of congestion". He didn't claim that it won't lead to more cars using the road.

The problem with this is that if your goal is to build a liveable city where people can reach their destinations in predictable time without pulling their hair out, simply building more lanes does not usually help, for the reasons outlined very clearly in the article.

And that isn't exactly a wild guess, we have decades of data on the subject.
by StopDisinfo910 | 2025-11-08 09:33:22+00:00
I find it interesting that 80% of the Ocaml discussions here are similar to what I encounter during the change management phase on every complex project I work on: "But it’s different from what I’m used and must therefore be bad. Look, the syntax, it doesn’t look like usual. Scary."

15% are people trying to sell their own language of choice sometimes with the argument that "it’s less scary, look".

I would be shocked if a mere 5% is actual engagement with the topic at hand sometimes while pointing flaws which are very real.

From there, I gather two things, the main one being: maybe Meta was right actually. People are that limited and the syntax should have been changed just to be done with the topic.
by BrandoElFollito | 2025-11-08 09:33:42+00:00
Ah yes, he just took Rosy's pictures (she doe snot deserve her full nale) and then went on discussing what she wears.

I am a man who did his PhD in the 2000's. If my supervisor took my data and went on publishing them under his name, not only would I have kicked him in the ass publicly, but I would make my personal vendetta to crap his academic life.

She was a woman (with a not-so-nice character), in the 50s, so this would not have flown, obviously.

Let's not pretend he was not a crappy person in the name of a virgin academic world.
by kaspermarstal | 2025-11-08 09:34:17+00:00
We need a new term for LLMs actually solving a hard problems. When I help Claude Code solve a nasty bug it doesn’t feel like “vibing” as in “I tell the model what I want the website to look like”. It feels like sniping as in “I spot for Claude Code, telling how to adjust for wind, range, and elevation so it can hit my far away target”.
by fredoralive | 2025-11-08 09:35:41+00:00
If there was demand for more high performance 68k processors, presumably Motorola would have made more. But by the time of the 68060 customers for high end 68k had either already moved onto various RISC architectures (Mac, UNIX workstations) or were dead / dying (ST, Amiga).

A related question would be if Motorola could pull off what Intel did with x86, and drag the architecture to be competitive with RISC. Part of Intel's trick was that x86 isn't the most CISCy of chips, so it was easy to implement a processor that takes a "RISCy subset" of instructions and translate them into one or two µops. 68k is perhaps more on the VAX side of things, so whether they'd be able to pull off the same trick is a bit unclear. Clearly we need to check the parallel universes where IBM chose the 68008 for Chess instead of the 8088...
by killerstorm | 2025-11-08 09:36:08+00:00
Well, there are certainly kinds of code LLMs would struggle with, but people generally underestimate what LLMs are capable of.

E.g. Victor Taelin is implementing ultra-advanced programming language/runtime writing almost all code using LLM now. Runtime (HVM) is based on Interaction Calculus model which was only an obscure academic curiosity until Taelin started working on it. So a hypothesis that LLMs are only capable of copying bits of code from Stack Overflow shall be dismissed.
by omnimus | 2025-11-08 09:36:48+00:00
That's not really true. It may be legit strategy. If they realize they overhyped the whole industry, and everyone is tied to them, and they have strong political allies… if you also realize it's going to crumble. You might just see bailout as only viable option so you make yourself even bigger to fail.

If it turns like this it's extremely cynical and one would wonder how could Altman stay ou of prison (i am sure he will not go to prison).
by archi42 | 2025-11-08 09:37:06+00:00
They're entrenched. They have Telekom-branded stores (resellers) in every other town. They operate the network and hence have the best ability for trouble shooting. Non-technical users don't know what peering means, they just pay for Internet like they pay for water or power.

So for the "commoners" it seems a solid choice, while we, the Lords & Ladies of tech, are cursing in our basement home labs ;-)

Also, and that's why I'm stuck with them, for some reason they're the only one who offer combined DSL with 5G "boost". Our line is limited to ~45 MBit/s, and we get another 100 MBit/s over 5G. Doing this yourself with multiple links is of course an option, but costs a magnitude more than the 5€ extra I'm paying now; and the day only has so many hours to take care of such private deployments.
by tialaramex | 2025-11-08 09:37:10+00:00
Maybe I don't understand, in D, how do I write a function which makes a new type?

For example Zig has a function ArrayHashMapWithAllocator which returns well, a hash table type in a fairly modern style, no separate chaining and so on

Not an instance of that type, it returns the type itself, the type didn't exist, we called the function, now it does exist, at compile time (because clearly we can't go around making new types at runtime in this sort of language)
by 8474_s | 2025-11-08 09:37:35+00:00
Crime is mostly individual and income-driven, so its both not community-policed and inversely proportional to income level. Laws against crime require police to effectively enforce them, as community cannot "reduce crime" without significant investment and focus on it(police is significantly more effective vs vigilantes/citizen patrols). Whichever this scheme tries to do, is effectively collective punishment for community not allocating resources for policing itself.
by BLKNSLVR | 2025-11-08 09:38:44+00:00
Tangential point:

Whilst I don't hear as much about people getting banned from their Facebook accounts as I do about Google accounts getting perma-banned with little to no recourse, it does seem that legitimate users of their services are treated as second class citizens, whilst literal scammers and fraudsters are given the white glove treatment because it contributes to their revenue.

And it must be a non-trivial contribution to their revenue, because it must be worth having their reputation smeared.

All of the hard problems they've been able to solve, and the questionable application of AI to everything, and yet they cannot solve this? Complete BS.
by gregoriol | 2025-11-08 09:39:21+00:00
Sadly about 98% of real world users are going to fall into scams, ransomwares and stuff. They are not mentally challenged, there are just so many traps/fakes/tempting stuff that we as IT people are more aware of (but even we still fall into some).

We also can't count on every person being able to check every single thing they do: how do you check if some food or drug you get is good or not? you can't really, you have to trust someone who knows.
by ScottRedig | 2025-11-08 09:39:33+00:00
Hello Mr. Bright. I've seen similar comments from you in response to Zig before. Specifically, in the comments on blog post I made about Zig's comptime. I took some time reading D's documentation to try to understand your point (I didn't want to miss some prior art, after all). By the time I felt like I could give a reply, the thread was days old, so I didn't bother.

The parent comment acknowledges that compile time execution is not new. There is little in Zig that is, broad strokes, entirely new. It is in the specifics of the design that I find Zig's ergonomics to be differentiated. It is my understanding that D's compile time function execution is significantly different from Zig's comptime.

Mostly, this is in what Zig doesn't have as a specific feature, but uses comptime for. For generics, D has templates, Zig has functions which take types and return types. D has conditional compilation (version keyword), while Zig just has if statements. D has template mixins, Zig trusts comptime to have 90% of the power for 10% of the headache. The power of comptime is commonly demonstrated, but I find the limitations to be just as important.

A difference I am uncertain about is if there's any D equivalent for Zig having types being expressions. You can, for example, calculate what the return type should be given a type of an argument.

Is this a fair assessment?
by jmiskovic | 2025-11-08 09:39:58+00:00
I was talking about web as technology stack. The tech is battle proven and capable. I had great success in getting some ancient web projects to run locally, less luck with Windows projects and even less with Linux sources.

You are right that by the nature of web the long term stability is not guaranteed. The ecosystem could do more to encourage decoupling and graceful degradation. About 95% of modern web is competing in sharing your data to even more "parties with legitimate interest".
by dragonwriter | 2025-11-08 09:40:37+00:00
> Why not make universal basic income conditional on the crime rate?

There are lots of good answers for why not to do this, but the simplest that is sufficiently decisive, I think, is Goodhart's Law.

> Do you think this would be a good way to keep the crime rate low in a city/country with UBI?

It would be a good way to make the official crime rate track the UBI-related policy preferences of whatever authority was in charge of crime statistics.
by eviks | 2025-11-08 09:40:54+00:00
> But I don't have a button that corresponds to "unicode arrow"

You mean the label: well, take out your favorite marker and draw one on the side! But also, you don't have labels that correspond to these standard Mac layout symbols https://i.sstatic.net/ht0Tg.png So? Should it be removed?

> ubiquitous, regular keyboards that have been around for decades.

All poorly designed, most even acknowledge that by adding an extra set of numbers at the side because the default numeric (and symbolic) row is so bad. Why is the 'why bother improve the awfulness' a great attitude?

> but then a wise elder dissuaded me, reminding me how amazing it is to be able to type fast on any keyboard you come across

There is nothing wise here, it's a bog standard rejection of any improvement. First of, you could still train yourself to use both. Second, if you're only using your own keyboards 99.9% of the time, there is nothing amazing about not being slowed down in those tiny percent of typing cases. Also, it's of course not literally `any` keyboard you come, that's such a myopic view - plenty of countries have different non-qwerty default layouts, so you wouldn't be able to enjoy your qwerty speed there

> only be 90% of your theoretical maximum on the perfect keyboard

What if it's 10% that will make you disabled in 20 years? After all, "speed" isn't the only factor here. Any "wise" man could appreciate the broader ergonomic implications...

> It's never "just one more".

If only you didn't cut off the quote you could've read "implicitly about a dozen more", but the most important part is the last that you failed to address about the millions
by versteegen | 2025-11-08 09:42:05+00:00
grok-code-fast-1 is free (for a limited time) in opencode zen, has been for a while. (Originally it was billed as a test/to gather training data for xAI.) But right now GLM 4.6 is also temporarily free there (hosted by opencode themselves; they call it "big pickle", and there's no data collection), has been for weeks, and GLM 4.6 is far better (better than Haiku and not very far off Sonnet), and still very fast, so I have no use for gcf1 anymore.
by Arch-TK | 2025-11-08 09:42:29+00:00
You can't use Docker on Mac or FreeBSD. Now, I am not calling you a liar, you _can_ use Docker on Mac and FreeBSD. But you would probably only want to do so for development, as Docker on Mac and FreeBSD requires running a Linux VM which is the thing which _actually_ runs the containers.

There is work ongoing to try to make this more native on FreeBSD (by using Linux jails) but that work is not complete yet.

So, if you want to get the same kind of experience as Docker on FreeBSD, you are forced to use jails.

The only reason Docker seems accessible is because it's native to the platform people seem to like for running all their services, but if you're dealing with FreeBSD, you most certainly would not just "use Docker" to deploy your stuff. Because you would get worse performance than if you had just used Linux.

So the answer to "Isn't this just Docker with extra steps?" is truly and absolutely "No". Not because of some kind of old man shouting at cloud argument, but because if you are on FreeBSD (for whatever reason that might be) you can't just use Docker as an easier replacement for Jails (at least right now).
by Raphael_Amiard | 2025-11-08 09:42:35+00:00
I love systems programming language and have worked on the Ada language for a long time. I find Zig to be incredibly underwhelming. Absolutely nothing about it is new or novel, the closest being comptime which is not actually new.

Also highly subjective but the syntax hurts my eyes.

So I’m kind of interested by an answer to the question this articles fails to answer. Why do you guys find Zig so cool ?
by fuzzfactor | 2025-11-08 09:43:08+00:00
Since before the birth of the nation, America was founded on a dollar that was an ounce of silver.

That held true for all generations up until a certain point in the 1960's.

By the 1970's the faltering was precipitous, and even worse "mistakes" were made.

One of the things that made the "Greatest Generation" so great was that all dollars that were earned up until that time were worth way more than they are today.

It's not fair or even possible to compare to following generations which have only debased dollars to hand down to today's youth. When only a few decades ago there were still plenty of people living who had spent their whole life earning silver-equivalent dollars, and when they passed on their life's work it was about a 10x to 20x better safety net than now.
by wronex | 2025-11-08 09:43:15+00:00
I don’t think you’ve used KiCAD. Simply add an MPN attribute to your component and that is it. Use the built in BOM editor and exporter. Done. There are certainly ways to misuse any advanced software. But it definitely can and will produce a complete BOM without additional add-ons. Grated, the exporter is limited to CSV files. So I’m guessing your workflow requires something more interesting?
by zelphirkalt | 2025-11-08 09:43:37+00:00
The diagrams could use a bit bigger font. It is slightly hard to read. Or make the pictures bigger on the website, but they are already big.

As far as I can see, there is no mention of how many elements are inserted in each run? The x/horizontal-axis is not number of items, as one would expect, but is "run #" which I interpret to be "number of the run"/"run number", which says nothing about the number of elements added to the data structures. So from what is visible in the writing of post, one couldn't actually conclude the conclusion. I guess the idea is, that you must go and look at the code itself. This post could do a better job at explaining what is measured, especially since it is about a benchmark.

But aside from that: I think the answer here is not merely from a performance side of things. If there is a chance, that your program might grow to need to put more stuff in that a-list, I think you can just go for a hashtable right away and save yourself the effort to later change the code. Unless you are hyper-optimizing stuff, which most of the time we are not. I also want to note, that there is SRFI-69 [1], which has `a-list->hash-table`, in case you want to opt for a-list because of how easy they are to write in the code.

Choosing an a-list in a scenario where it might still be faster is not only a trade-off in performance, but also in maintainability. Are you ready to build an abstraction layer around a-list, so that you can later switch it out and put a hash-table in easily? If not, then the little performance cost for using a hash-table too early might be the better trade-off, compared to having to replace usages of a-list in the code later.

I think a-list is fine for things where you:

(1) convert to hash-table anyway, with `a-list->hash-table` (2) construct a struct/record from it, because those usually don't have that many fields (3) never add to the a-list, and only have it contain stuff you manually type in the code, because those usually aren't that many either (4) know that the a-list will not grow much or is even static in size, and that size is small. One such example are often function (keyword) arguments.

Otherwise just use a hash-table and maybe, maaaaybe check again, if there is really any performance bottleneck that can be traced back to using a hash-table. Don't obsess over it.

[1]: https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-69/srfi-69.html#lst
by imiric | 2025-11-08 09:43:40+00:00
> Unfortunately it’s in the interests of search and AI companies to keep you inside their portals, so they may be less than willing to link to the outside even when it would improve the experience.

This is true, but aren't "AI" summaries directly opposed to this interest? The user will usually get the answer they need much more quickly than if they had to scroll down the page, hunt for the right result, and get exposed to ads. So "AI" summaries are actually the better user experience.

In time I'm sure that we'll see ads embedded in these as well, but in the current stage of the "AI" hype cycle, users actually benefit from this feature.
by mrweasel | 2025-11-08 09:44:02+00:00
It's a really wonky app. The main feature works fine, no issue. Their "Stories" section, I can't can navigate that at all, there a no hint to how it works, so I don't use it. Seems a little weird, given that this is where the ads are, why wouldn't Snapchat make that easier to use?

There's also views I can get into which I can't figure out how to leave, so I force close the app to get back.

I don't necessarily think that's a flaw of the framework, just how Snapchat designs their app.
by eviks | 2025-11-08 09:44:05+00:00
and don't solve the spacing issue, also: I see an →, so I type one in my search box, but can't find anything since it's not an arrow, but a fake replacement of -> Or I press Shift+Right to select it, but can't, need to repeat it 3 times because again, it was a long arrow, not a single symbol. Then, of course, they could do a replacement in y our comments where you meant literal symbols, not an arrow...