MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by conductr | 2025-11-06 14:20:48+00:00
They had to know. My middle schooling coincided during wave of beepers (early 90s) and then high school was mobile phones (late 90s) then college in early 2000s (iPods but not iPhones). During all that time, devices were practically unacceptable at school. It was a zero tolerance, teacher would confiscate your device, your parent would have to come to school to get it back. It likely was accompanied by some detention or more punitive measure. College was a more adult approach to same, professor would yell or just tell you to leave the class if your device came out and you appeared distracted at all. If it rang, and everyone was distracted, they’d often be livid.

Then, it seems only a couple years after my schooling was complete, smart phones came out and they just let them exist, everywhere. It has never made sense to me how that shift happened so suddenly but best theories I’ve heard are 1) parents insisting kids be reachable and 2) educators just gave up the fight against it.

But yeah, it’s sad to me to think a whole generation had lost core social experience and socialization of such a pivotal age in life. When I hear stats about how kids/teens don’t; drive, party, date, sex, etc yet are lonely, anxious, depressed, etc I’m always like “no shit”
by mythz | 2025-11-06 14:21:27+00:00
Their latest 2023 results, shows Mozilla still has enough revenue to do something [1]:

- Total revenue: $653 million - Revenue from Google 85% ($555 million) - Total expenses $496 million (Software Development Expenses $260 million)

But even after spending 1/2 Billion annually I'm not expecting them to regain relevance. They'll likely keep the existing board until the money runs dry, axe more technical talent and promising projects.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Corporation
by joshuablais | 2025-11-06 14:21:43+00:00
I personally use Doom because there are a lot of out of the box optimizations, some don't like how hlissner has brought nix ideas of declarative package management into the mix, but I am a nix user so it makes sense. I also am an evil (heretic) user - Doom is configured from the get go as a gateway from vim/neovim into emacs, and it does that job very well.

I would say use both. You can run multiple emacs configurations, and you could have your vanilla config which you slowly build as well as Doom/spacemacs where you can see what is possible.
by realitydrift | 2025-11-06 14:22:08+00:00
What you’re describing is basically the Drift Principle. Once a system optimizes faster than it can preserve context, fidelity is the first thing to go. AI made the cost of content and the cost of looking credible basically zero, so everything converges into the same synthetic pattern.

That’s why we’re seeing so much semantic drift too. The forms of credibility survive, but the intent behind them doesn’t. The system works, but the texture that signals real humans evaporates. That’s the trust collapse. Over optimized sameness drowning out the few cues we used to rely on.
by mbesto | 2025-11-06 14:22:32+00:00
Did you read the whole article?

"In other words, the primary reason nearly all LLM inference endpoints are nondeterministic is that the load (and thus batch-size) nondeterministically varies! This nondeterminism is not unique to GPUs — LLM inference endpoints served from CPUs or TPUs will also have this source of nondeterminism."
by notepad0x90 | 2025-11-06 14:22:47+00:00
1) I didn't say we were, but when someone is called reasonable or acting with reason, then that implies deterministic/algorithmic thinking. When we're not deterministic, we're not reasonable.

2) Yes, to reason does imply to be infallible. The deterministic algorithms we follow are usually flawed.

3) I can't speak much to that, but I speculate that if "AI" can do reasoning, it would be a much more complex construct that uses LLMs (among other tools) as tools and variables like we do.
by 9dev | 2025-11-06 14:22:56+00:00
Yeah, that was my entire point really—there's some complexity that's just warranted. It's similar to a proper risk assessment analysis: The goal isn't to avoid all possible risks, but accepting some risk factors as long as you can justify them properly.

As long as you're pragmatic and honest with what you need from your CI setup, it's okay that it makes your system more complex—you're getting something in return after all.
by dotancohen | 2025-11-06 14:23:28+00:00
Another roadblock that I've encountered is moving a tab between profiles. For a multitude of reasons, foremost between them research, I would often come across a tab that I know would be useful for one of my other research subjects. If the profile in question is closed, there is too much friction to open it, copy the url, paste into a new tab, then close the profile again.

A single "Send to profile" option would be such a boon to productivity.
by seanalltogether | 2025-11-06 14:23:57+00:00
As someone who is a bit of a luddite when it comes to smart home features, there are 2 things that really stand out to me that i would like.

1. Open/Close sensors, I would like to put sensors on my shed door and side gates that can tell me if they are open or closed. I will occassionally leave these open, or the kids may leave them open and would prefer they be closed each night. It's impossible for me to tell if they are closed at the moment without stepping outside.

2. Smart plugs. Being able to remotely operate / schedule plugs to shut off or on seems pretty nice. Outdoor lights being one usecase. Kids media area is another.
by zephyreon | 2025-11-06 14:23:58+00:00
This may be a controversial position but I actually enjoy using Firefox. Vertical tabs, better profile management, etc. have all been welcome things I had in other browsers (cough Arc cough) that have made it bearable enough to use Firefox as my daily driver. They may not be as privacy-focused as some of the other derivatives of Firefox but they’re sure not Chromium.
by realitydrift | 2025-11-06 14:23:58+00:00
The real issue isn’t the policy change, it’s that AI has gotten better at sounding credible than at staying grounded. That creates a kind of performativity drift where the tone of expertise scales faster than the underlying accuracy.

So even when the model is wrong, it’s wrong with perfect bedside manner, and people anchor on that. In high stakes domains like medicine or law, that gap between confidence and fidelity becomes the actual risk, not the tool itself.
by andsoitis | 2025-11-06 14:24:02+00:00
> And how is that any different to the "Volkswagen"?

Volkswagen was founded in 1937 by a Nazi-controlled labor union.

Even if it weren't, "volks" is more ambiguous than "national", since it means "people's", which you can be interpreted as "a car for the people", not a specific "nation".
by foobarian | 2025-11-06 14:24:19+00:00
I think that is a significant factor as well - we can debate how related or not it is. I think in this case, there was a gradual ratcheting effect of how much work is extracted from people who would otherwise be contributing to childcare i.e. "the village" of elder people and women. No doubt this has a separate negative impact on the fertility rate. All IMO though, these are speculations without rigorous quantitative backing.
by mvkel | 2025-11-06 14:24:24+00:00
It was a let down to be bought into the "hook" that saying no, taking focus, is the key to continued long term success as a scaled company, only for it to devolve into how courageous it is to have a simple homepage.

I wanted to read a new story; one about an internal debate where the easy answer was to "just do it," but a hard no is what actually saved everything.

Surely that story exists.
by alexjplant | 2025-11-06 14:24:47+00:00
100% thought this would be about eating jellyfish (which I'm completely on board with because they've stung me upwards of a dozen times and that old Klingon proverb that says that revenge, much like jellyfish, is a dish best served cold).

Apropos of stinging plants though both of my parents are supposedly very allergic to poison ivy. I maintained an immunity to it until I was around 27-28 when it began to affect me very slightly. Now if I graze it I can get away without ill effects merely by washing the urushiol off with dish soap within a half hour or so. I've heard of gardeners and outdoorspeople eating it in small quantities to maintain their resistance to it. While I'm not particularly keen to try this there is something poetic about it.
by HeinzStuckeIt | 2025-11-06 14:24:50+00:00
> I'd argue it's already been flipped on.

The Great Firewall is, among various other things, an attempt to create a single historical narrative for the PRC by blocking out reference to things like Tiananmen, discussions of early twentieth-century China suggesting that China could have gone a different way than the Communist Party and prospered, etc. The USA has absolutely nothing like that, people can readily find open-web and social-media content taking every possible position on American history, both staid academic content and wacko conspiracy theory stuff.

When it all comes down to it, the USA just isn’t as hung up on social harmony and narrative control as the PRC. That’s why there isn’t a comparable system in place, and claiming that the odious DMCA is anywhere close, is hyperbole.
by Applejinx | 2025-11-06 14:25:32+00:00
I'm already seeing this. I very much fall into the category of 'delete all email offers' as I'm a small youtuber, big enough to be targeted by AI sponsor deals, so I'm just buried with it.

The last five times I've looked at something in case it was a legitimate user email it was AI promotion of someone just like in the article.

Their only way to escalate, apart from pure volume, is to take pains to intentionally emulate the signals of someone who's a legitimate user needing help or having a complaint. Logically, if you want to pursue the adversarial nature of this farther, the AIs will have to be trained to study up and mimic the dialogue trees of legitimate users needing support, only to introduce their promotion after I've done several exchanges of seemingly legitimate support work, in the guise of a friend and happy customer. All pretend, to get to the pitch. AI's already capable of this if directed adeptly enough. You could write a script for it by asking AI for a script to do exactly this social exploit.

By then I'll be locked in a room that's also a Faraday cage, poking products through a slot in the door—and mocking my captors with the em-dashes I used back when I was one of the people THEY learned em-dashes from.

One thing about it, it's a very modern sort of dystopia!
by estearum | 2025-11-06 14:26:01+00:00
Again: The USSG, CDC, HHS, DHS and White House don't have any funding or regulatory leverage over social media platforms. To claim that they do, you are claiming that any federal agency has leverage over any private party, and therefore the government may not ever make requests.

Of course it should raise concerns. Then you should look closely at the details and you will find that cases that look apparently similar are actually quite distinct.

I personally think it's actually good that our government can offer e.g. its public health expertise to social media platforms to inform their content moderation decisions, and those social media companies are free to accept or reject their requests/suggestions/guidance.

> If the FBI under Trump colluded with social media to suppress a story during election time about his son doing crack and hiring hookers, would you rightly see it as alarming abuse of power? That shouldn't change just because you like the side who did it.

It sure would! In fact, this would cause significant alarm if the Biden administration did either! Of course this is what you're trying to suggest: but you are, once again, absolutely incorrect on the facts.

Not only did the platforms testify as such under oath (once again), but here's a quote from the highly "motivated" Matt Taibi, author of the Twitter Files tasked by Musk to portray Twitter as politically compromised as possible. Even with unfettered internal access, he couldn't find any evidence of your claim.

> Although several sources recalled hearing about a “general” warning from federal law enforcement that summer about possible foreign hacks, there’s no evidence - that I've seen - of any government involvement in the laptop story. In fact, that might have been the problem...

https://x.com/mtaibbi/status/1598833927405215744

You can literally read the internal emails! Nowhere is there any evidence of government intervention, but there is a literal mountain of evidence of confused content moderators struggling to handle a confusing situation. I personally think they made the wrong moderation decision (as many of the principals feel today, too), but there simply isn't any evidence -- ANY -- of your theory of government coercion. You have simply made it up!

The issue here is not that I am blinded by partisanship, it's that you don't have a factual understanding of the salient details. It's quite apparent you're blinded by another flavor of partisanship (the most common among the slightly-smarter-than-average folks who congregate on HN) of "both sides are equally bad." Both sides have significant problems and the fact there are only two sides is perhaps a fatal flaw in our democracy, but close inspection of the actual facts will reveal they are not, in fact, equally bad.
by ModernMech | 2025-11-06 14:26:02+00:00
Trust collapse is real, I don't trust anything anymore. Take this article for instance, I don't trust it because of the random bolding. Does that mean it's AI generated? I don't know but I've seen lots of AI generated content and it has random bolding, so when I see it, I immediately don't trust it. And I don't have the time to verify anything, so whether or not this article was written by the author or AI, it's gone on the "not credible" heap for me, just because of the bolding. It's not a strong signal but it's a signal, and due to the volume of slop, I must filter on whatever signals I have to maintain any chance of finding genuine human work product. Maybe I miss something genuine and important by filtering this way, but it's the best I can do.
by stego-tech | 2025-11-06 14:26:18+00:00
On the one hand, Cloudflare crying crocodile tears for their policy decisions isn’t remotely moving. If anything, their plea for US intervention feels incredibly insincere given that their business has been to defend literal Nazis and Pirates alike for decades, and if you’re going to build a business out of defending bad actors, well, you best be prepared for the consequences.

That being said, they’re absolutely right that these broad, automated blocks aren’t acceptable for the internet as a whole - especially when a ruling is applicable regionally or globally. Blocking an entire IP range or service provider because of a handful of bad actors on their service is incredibly excessive, akin to barricading off an entire neighborhood because one apartment is a crack den, i.e. stupidly disproportionate. If countries are having an issue with a company routinely and willfully allowing bad actors to prosper, the solution is simply to bar that company from operating within their jurisdiction commercially.

Yet the IT dinosaur in me reads that statement above, and I ultimately find myself back at where I’ve been for years: for a globally distributed network, the only way to effectively punish an operator like Cloudflare is to block its entire IP range, despite the harms innocent customers and users will incur. And I can’t quite figure out a way past that under the current piecemeal system of the internet and the financial incentives for consolidation and centralization.

We have to punish bad actors, but when said actor commands a significant swath of the legitimate internet, you either have to harm a disproportionate amount of legitimate traffic in blocking them, or admit they’re too big and important for a government to intervene against. The former is bad, but the latter is infinitely worse.
by 56J8XhH7voFRwPR | 2025-11-06 14:26:30+00:00
Its moves like these that make me bet on Tesla. They are miles ahead of legacy auto when it comes to technology and I'm not even referring to any of the self driving stuff (which is also miles ahead of anything else). I feel more and more vehicles are moving from complex mechanical machines with crap software slapped on top to computers on wheels. Back to the Tesla example, the entire car is designed around the software and the hardware that software runs on. We live in a world now where most car buyers grew up with smartphones and everything IoT under the sun and in another 20-30 years every car buyer will have grown up in that world. The younger generation expects good tech in their car. If you have a legacy auto, when was the last time you got an update to the infotainment system? I've owned a model y for a year and half now and in that time have had 36 updates averaging an update every 16 days. I can honestly say my car has gotten better since I bought it. New features like adaptive headlights, more streaming music and podcast apps. new UI, etc. A buddy of mine has a 2018 model s and is still getting software updates and new features. What legacy auto car from 7 years ago is still getting software updates?
by randycupertino | 2025-11-06 14:26:36+00:00
Great overview of Sarepta continuing to be snake oil sales co, pushing sketchy data and corrupt lobbying. None of their drugs work!!

Eteplirsen (Exondys 51) was approved on super thin data- a TWELVE(!!) patient study, no placebo group and ambiguous results. The FDA’s own scientific staff said the data didn’t show it worked at all and later internal memos later showed internal drama and full on civil war over approving it.... Janet Woodcock overruling her own team to push it through for her buddies. (https://www.statnews.com/pharmalot/2016/09/19/sarepta-fda-du... and https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2016/2064...)

Once the FDA bent over for them once it was all over and Serepta pushed through more of the same - tiny surrogate endpoints and spliced half-assed data.

Their gene therapy Elevidys (SRP-9001) was hyped up as a cure, raised billions then data readouts were so underwhelming. Pivotal trial EMBARK didn't even meet it's primary endpoint yet the FDA still expanded it's approval!! Biotech lobbyists framed this as a triumph of accelerated approval process but really just demonstrative of how the FDA no longer has staff or spine.

Their stock behavior also is sketchy as hell, with Sarepta execs getting rich selling shares right after hype events and before disappointing data drops.

One of the worst biotechs out there.
by AlexErrant | 2025-11-06 14:27:32+00:00
What does "phased" mean here? My googlefu is failing to turn up meaningful results for "phased dependency injection", and the readme is unhelpful (and probably AI-generated: "distage follows distage's architecture", lol.)

The only 2 occurrences of "phase" are comments: `// Plan phase: analyze dependencies, detect errors` and `// Produce phase: create instances`. I'm mostly familiar with DI in C#, and SimpleInjector in particular.

Does "phased" mean "we iterate the dep graph to detect lifecycle/circular dep errors"? Similar to how `.verify()` works in SimpleInjector?

https://docs.simpleinjector.org/en/latest/howto.html#verify-...
by lapcat | 2025-11-06 14:27:59+00:00
> Is it? That’s not a given, and we definitely can’t say either way yet. Considering all of Mozilla’s past efforts, pretty much all of which they abandoned, I’d be very wary of calling this one a success so early on.

The economics of selling branded clothing has been very well understood for 50 years. The markup for slapping a logo on a T-shirt is massive. Plus, it's a form of crowdsourced, word-of-chest advertising.

And Mozilla already has designers on staff. It's unlikely they had to do any extra hiring for this.
Show HN: GraFlo - Universal ETL tool for property KG (Neo4j, TigerGraph, Arango)
by acrostoic | 2025-11-06 14:28:58+00:00
We built GraFlo after repeatedly writing the same boilerplate code to transform datasets into Neo4j, ArangoDB, and TigerGraph. Every time we had a new dataset (OpenAlex, IBES financial data, Debian packages), we'd write yet another custom ETL script with the same problems: ID generation, type coercion, deduplication, and database-specific quirks.

GraFlo is a declarative framework that handles this once and for all. You define your graph structure in a database-agnostic schema - vertices, edges, properties, and how they map to your source data (CSV, SQL, JSON, XML). GraFlo then generates the ingestion code for your target database. The key insight: while Neo4j, ArangoDB, and TigerGraph are all idiosyncratic, the underlying property graph model is universal. We crystallized that into a single abstraction layer.

What GraFlo handles automatically:

- Consistent ID generation across vertices and edges

- Type coercion (strings to dates, numbers, etc.)

- Vertex and edge deduplication

- Generating database-specific ingestion scripts

It's plug-and-play in the sense that swapping from Neo4j to ArangoDB takes no time — just change the target database type in your config (docker compose examples provided).

We've used it to build knowledge graphs from academic publications, financial datasets, and package dependencies. Instead of maintaining N × M scripts (N datasets, M databases), we maintain N schemas.

On the roadmap: SQL/API integration (e.g., automatically generating GraFlo configs from SQL schemas).

Would love feedback from anyone working with graph databases or building knowledge graphs.
by crazygringo | 2025-11-06 14:29:01+00:00
It's also entirely possible that the Japanese translation team didn't put the guidelines in the right place for the bot to follow them. Or there's a bug. Since another commenter says it's following guidelines just fine.

> I would consider it outright insulting if someone who ostensibly "wants to help" doesn't know basic information like that

Well, the person who wants to help is a customer service manager in Indonesia. They presumably are not the leader of the machine translation product. They are trying to get more information so they can, you know, escalate to the right people.

So how is that "outright insulting"?
by astronads | 2025-11-06 14:29:17+00:00
The solution is home assistant [0] it lets you manage and control all kinds of smart devices with a lot of customizable, hackable things. And it runs locally, so if you buy the right types of devices that don’t phone home to the cloud (or you shitcan their internet access) you can fully manage your own system.

[0] https://www.home-assistant.io/
by kristofferR | 2025-11-06 14:29:18+00:00
Matter is just the software. A lot of Matter devices use Thread as their radio protocol (think of it as "Zigbee 2.0") though, and you need a separate radio/dongle for that.

Seems like Home Assistant will launch a combo Zigbee/Thread dongle with great range in two weeks, might want to wait for that: https://old.reddit.com/r/homeassistant/comments/1opak9w/new_...
by dotancohen | 2025-11-06 14:29:32+00:00
I would expect that to work exactly how I code with it.

I would examine the inferred output, decide if it is fit for purpose, and if so then commit it. If not, I would either refine my prompt or make the fixes to the inferred code myself.

Would this hypothetical legal professional not verify that the inferred output (which is really a prediction) is correct?
by wizzwizz4 | 2025-11-06 14:29:35+00:00
A random walk can do mathematics, with this kind of infrastructure.

Isabelle/HOL has a tool called Sledgehammer, which is the hackiest hack that ever hacked[0], basically amounting to "run a load of provers in parallel, with as much munging as it takes". (Plumbing them together is a serious research contribution, which I'm not at all belittling.) I've yet to see ChatGPT achieve anything like what it's capable of.

[0]: https://lawrencecpaulson.github.io/2022/04/13/Sledgehammer.h...