MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by EdgeExplorer | 2025-11-11 21:07:16+00:00
My point wasn't supposed to be that copyright is bad (or that it's good), just that the business logic of fighting the sharing of lyrics is incomprehensible to me.

That aside, I think there's a lot more complexity than you're presenting. The issue is who gets to benefit from what work.

As hackers, we build cool things. And our ability to build cool things comes in large part from standing on the shoulders of giants. Free and open sharing of ideas is a powerful force for human progress.

But people also have to eat. Which means even as hackers focused on building cool things, we need to get paid. We need to capture for ourselves some of the economic value of what we produce. There's nothing wrong with wanting to get paid for what you create.

Right now, there is a great deal of hacker output the economic value of which is being captured almost exclusively by LLM vendors. And sure, the LLM is more amazing than whatever code or post or book or lyric it was trained on. And sure, the LLM value comes from the sum of the parts of its source material instead of the value of any individual source. But fundamentally the LLM couldn't exist without the source material, and yet the LLM vendor is the one who gets to eat.

The balance between free and open exchange of ideas and paying value creators a portion of the value they create is not an easy question, and it's not anti-hacker to raise it. There are places where patents and other forms of exclusive rights seem to be criminally mismanaged, stifling progress. But there's also "some random person in Nebraska" who has produced billions of dollars in value and will never see a penny of it. Choosing progress alone as the goal will systematically deprive and ultimately drive away the very people whose contributions are enabling the progress. (And of course choosing "fair" repayment alone as the goal will shut down progress and allow less "fair" players to take over... that's why this isn't easy.)
by m463 | 2025-11-11 21:07:36+00:00
I agree

deep linking allows apps to know/intercept known URLs and do "things". I don't know if the screenshot mechanism would involve this.

I do know that some things cannot be screenshotted. On macs this is any HDCP image on the screen (shows up as a blank rectangle). On android I believe some apps cannot be captured in a screenshot. Don't know about ios.
by brendanfalk | 2025-11-11 21:07:38+00:00
I think the real problem here is "decision making" as opposed to "collaboration"

I can't think of a single time where having someone else review my work or give me feedback is a meaningfully bad thing. It's an opportunity to learn. But getting feedback is different to making the final decision.

Instead, the real problem is the either 1) lack of knowing who makes the final decision or 2) requiring everyone must agree to a final decision. You will move a lot faster if you know who the final decision maker is, ideally have fewer (or only one person) making that final decision, and encourage people to make decisions quickly (most decisions are reversible anyway)
by Phemist | 2025-11-11 21:08:20+00:00
Well, if Dutch is your second language for sure it is difficult to see.

"Gamen" is one of those anglicisms that has made it into the language, with ugly but in this case useful conjugations:

Ik game met je (I (play a) game with you) Hij gamet met je (he plays a game with you, this is especially nice because of the repeating "met") Zij gamet met je (she *) Wij gamen met je (we *) Zij/Hun gamen met je (they *)
by wry_discontent | 2025-11-11 21:08:23+00:00
I've been working on a web framework in Clojure. There are already a few others, but they're, in my opinion, too focused on the Clojure community, and are much harder to sell to people I know who might otherwise use Clojure. I wanted something that was more like a Rails or a Phoenix or a Next.js. We'll see if it goes anywhere.
by compsciphd | 2025-11-11 21:09:02+00:00
I used to be a digitial hoarder (now less so, but I still have what I hoarded, built over a 15 year period). When I moved overseas, I shipped my 120HDs (~600TB) in a container (120 HDs don't take up "that" much space (they all arrived in one piece, though 5 have died, though only 3 non recoverable, after the first one died, I made sure to image each one first and then writing it back (bitrot was a problem)).

anyways, in took 2-3 months for it to arrive (and most of that time it was waiting in either port), but by my calculation, I have needed to transfer it at a consistent 80MB/s or so (close to gigabit) to be able to net the equivalent transfer rate.
by ben7799 | 2025-11-11 21:09:13+00:00
I still have an expensive Canon dedicated slide/film scanner from 20 years ago.

IIRC at some point their value started going up as they became rare.

Mine did something like 50MP scans of 35mm film/slides. The quality was more than enough.

But it was painfully slow.

This thing is not 100x faster, so I think it's still painfully slow. If it takes 5 minutes to do a roll of 24 that still means someone with hundreds of rolls needs to have a lot of time on their hands.

Not sure I can actually figure out software to get my old one to work FWIW, but I don't think I care to deal with it, I have a big enough mess dealing with the ~200k digital photos that are already on disk.
by enether | 2025-11-11 21:09:17+00:00
Aren't nanoplastics a larger concern?

All microplastics out in the open will degrade to nanoplastics at some point, and those find it much easier to infiltrate the human body. They penetrate the blood-brain barrier.

This leads me to believe that it's literally impossible to avoid. The air/water supply must be getting more poluted by the minute with these things
by egypturnash | 2025-11-11 21:09:31+00:00
> Drawing takes forever because you're exploring AND refining simultaneously.

> We don't "rehearse" a specific drawing, we solve a novel problem in real-time. There's no cached motor sequence to execute.

When you have been drawing long enough there are a lot of cached motor sequences to execute and modify. A lot of art training is simply filling this cache: spend a few hours every week drawing the human body from different angles, in a year or three you'll be able to make it up from pretty much any angle. Add in another twenty years of doing that and experimenting ways to make your tools do more of the work for you and you can dash off "sketches" that a beginner would consider finished paintings that took days to do.
by bonsai_spool | 2025-11-11 21:09:56+00:00
> You cross us? We nuke you. We don't bother you, you don't bother us unless you want to face nuclear annihilation. Seems to work for North Korea.

I think this is interesting on a few levels.

One issue with North Korea is that they have an enormous number of uneducated, malnourished citizens that no country can reasonably absorb. I feel that the potential chaos from the fall of NK was part of the brinkmanship that led to them getting nuclear capabilities.

Second, if you only have nuclear weapons then you lose a lot of tactical possibilities (bunker busting bombs for example) and you lose the ability to dial up/down aggression as we've seen with Russia.

In all, I think have a continuum of force options is rational. What is scary is that this continuum may no longer involve soldiers - and if there's no risk of soldiers' dying, force projection becomes a lot 'cheaper' in a political sense.
by ImPostingOnHN | 2025-11-11 21:09:59+00:00
> Doesn't your (proverbial) Costco membership card track every time you enter and leave the store

No (you have to use it at the register for Costco to know you were there),

and they don't track your every movement in store either,

and they don't track your every movement outside the store either,

and there isn't a standard way to say "I don't want this" which they nonetheless choose to ignore.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-11-11 21:10:06+00:00
> No, with LLMs being fair use.

In which case you're responding to the wrong thread.

> Copying was always easy.

Compare the price of a physically printed book which is in the public domain to the median one that isn't. The prices are only a little lower because the printing and distribution costs are significant.

Now compare the price of ebooks in the public domain with ebooks still under copyright. The latter isn't 40% more or 75% more, it's a billion percent more. Infinitely more. Copying went from being a double-digit percentage of the price to being zero.
by shadowgovt | 2025-11-11 21:10:13+00:00
I think a reasonable person can conclude that what Damore did was de-facto engaging in harmful stereotypes, even if he believed he was creating a grounded argument from science.

> As for "sexual harassment", I genuinely cannot understand how any reasonable person could ever have alleged this in good faith

"Since Suzy is a woman, she is more neurotic than Bob" is also sexual harassment, just in terms of legal definitions. Not all sexual harassment is of the "I want intercourse" kind.

> What Damore said, objectively, was no more "sexist" than observing that men are taller than women on average

So it turns out that if you go around saying "Well of course Suzy's short, she's a woman," that is sexual harrassment. And while Damore didn't single out any specific coworker, he made clear that he was approaching working with his colleagues from a framework that made assumptions about them based on gender, and that made working with him dicey (especially at Google, where management roles shift so fluidly).

I think a piece of the puzzle you're missing is this: the law doesn't always trust science. And the law has reason not to. Eugenics was a science. Phrenology was a science. Race essentialism was a science. Science hasn't always pointed the way towards truth in all cases, and the law's method of finding fact differs from the scientific method with good reason. If something's scientifically true and a Title VII violation... it's a Title VII violation.

> All people who made such complains were objectively incorrect in their assessment. The words cited, nor anything else in the memo, plainly do not support such a conclusion.

When nearly everyone in a population group is making the same claim about their own emotional state... Wouldn't the "reasonable person" principle conclude that, from a legal standpoint at least, the claim should be accepted true for a reasonable person in that population?
by StopDisinfo910 | 2025-11-11 21:10:31+00:00
I'm not misunderstanding anything. CVE involves a third party and it's not just a number. It's a number and an evaluation of severity.

Things which are usually managed inside a project now have a visibility outside of it. You might justify it as you want like the need to have an identifier. It doesn't fundamentally change how that impacts the dynamic.

Also, the discussion is not about a specific bug. It's a general discussion regarding how Google handles disclosure in the general case.
by Zensynthium | 2025-11-11 21:10:32+00:00
Very interesting article. As a developer that has focused on writing more code than the infrastructure and tooling, I can definitely see the benefit to a product existing that allows everything to work together more seamlessly because on the surface everything we need to do it already exists. Something like glue code we could drop in or like you mentioned the whole integrated environment. I didn't realize how specific and difficult it was to do something like this, maybe it's not that we should have deployable option, but that technology could get to a point to where maybe implementing and deploying this could be worth it as you could get more value than effort it takes to implement on a per company basis so companies besides Google and other big tech companies can operate like this.
by shadowgovt | 2025-11-11 21:10:34+00:00
The law can say all kinds of things that aren't (scientifically) true. We can pass a law that says the sun revolves around the Earth, and it's legally true if we do.

I'd think if our backstop for understanding if a level playing field was created by the law is the law, we'd want to verify the claim by external signal such as outcome observation if we aspire to some objective assessment.
by bborud | 2025-11-11 21:10:59+00:00
Objects have to earn the right to exist. We make so much stuff. Most of it unnecessary. Stuff that will soon be cluttering your home and then end up in a landfill.

This is not a product that deserves to exist. It is not made from quality materials ( Nylon (14%), Polyester (85%), Polyurethane (1%)). It is not innovative. It is questionable whether it solves its primary use case particularly well.

What makes this particularly objectionable is that it is from a design house that usually makes quality garments. And then they stoop to making this crap, slapping their designer label on it and then exploit ghastly people who don't know any better to waste tons of money on it.

This is pissing on Issey Miyake's grave.
by an0malous | 2025-11-11 21:11:03+00:00
It’s not pseudoscientific, it’s one of the most rigorously studied topics in academia and has pushed the standard for psychology research: https://www.deanradin.com/recommended-references

The Ganzfield experiments have been reproduced 78 times by 46 researchers and this review article concludes that anomalous cognition meets the standards of proof: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11134153/

The president of the American Statistical Association has reviewed the evidence for psi and said: “Using the standards applied to any other area of science, it is concluded that psychic functioning has been well-established”

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/out-the-darkness/202...

Of course you don’t believe it because you listen to a podcast about skepticism so it’s a dogma for you, you’ve drawn your conclusion without even considering the evidence. Skepticism is a religion as much as Catholicism in Galileo’s time.
by adriand | 2025-11-11 21:11:11+00:00
> if i were alive in the 50s and had the internet i simply would not buy lead-paint

The contamination is so widespread and is in things you can't avoid (like the air) but I have made some lifestyle changes that I hope decrease my exposure at least a little bit. I:

- don't drink water out of plastic bottles

- don't use any plastic dishes at home

- switched from using tupperware for food storage to mason jars

- use bedding made from natural materials (mostly cotton)

- prefer clothing made from cotton as opposed to polyester (exception: some exercise clothing)

- don't eat meat (this was not because of concern about plastic, but I think it's helpful here too)

My family mocks me for this, but I also hold my breath when I clean the lint filter in the dryer, because that cloud of dust that shoots up is, I believe anyway, a whole pile of breathable microplastics.
by the_af | 2025-11-11 21:11:20+00:00
In principle, I agree.

In practice, I think the kind of blur that happens when you're looking at a physical object vs an object projected on a crisp, lit screen, with postprocessing/color grading/light meant for the screen, is different. I'm also not sure whatever is captured by a camera looks the same in motion than what you see with your eyes; in effect even the best camera is always introducing a distortion, so it has to be corrected somehow. The camera is "faking" movement, it's just that it's more convincing than a simple cartoon as a sequence of static drawings. (Note I'm speaking from intuition, I'm not making a formal claim!).

That's why (IMO) you don't need "motion blur" effects for live theater, but you do for cinema and TV shows: real physical objects and people vs whatever exists on a flat surface that emits light.
by tempestn | 2025-11-11 21:11:21+00:00
Inspired by the concept of "a piece of cloth", we give you this "3d-knitted" piece of cloth to put your phone in. It's kind of difficult to actually get a phone into and out of, and it looks a bit ridiculous, but don't worry, it's only $160 (unless you want the long strap).

Like, if you were doing this as an April Fools joke post, what would you even change?
by jorvi | 2025-11-11 21:11:26+00:00
Vinyl literally cannot be brickwalled because the needle can't handle it. That's also why vinyl can't handle heavy bass, it'll make the needle vibrate out of the groove. It has nothing to do with the speakers.

It was sort of a happy coincidence that vinyl's limitations forced more dynamic (but less bass-y) masters. Although if your artist didn't do vinyl releases -which really was a dying medium until hipsters brought it back in the 2010s- you were hosed.
by vel0city | 2025-11-11 21:11:30+00:00
Eh, I think it depends on the carrier.

My wife didn't have international data with the carrier she had previously. When we traveled out of the country at first she was thinking she wouldn't care and would just get by with wifi. After a couple of days she changed her mind and wanted to have some kind of service. It was extremely simple to find a provider through the hotel WiFi, prepay for a week of service, download the SIM to the phone, and boom she was back to having service. Manged to get it all done at breakfast.

So long as the carrier is simple to get an eSIM it doesn't seem like a big deal to me. Its trivial to transfer an eSIM on Android assuming both devices are still functional. Its pretty easy to load an eSIM, compared to having to somehow call the phone company and have them manually enter the IMEI or whatever from back in the day. The only somewhat pain point is when your old device is smashed and you don't have any internet. In that case, having a physical SIM is better, I agree.
by themafia | 2025-11-11 21:11:33+00:00
> Google also does not owe the ffmpeg devs anything either.

Then they can stop reporting bugs with their assinine one size fits all "policy." It's unwelcome and unnecessary.

> It applies both ways.

The difference is I do not presume things upon the ffmpeg developers. I just use their software.

> The whole "pay us or we won't fix this" makes no sense.

Pay us or stop reporting obscure bugs in unused codecs found using "AI" scanning, or at least, if you do, then change your disclosure policy for those "bugs." That's the actual argument and is far more reasonable.
by lamontcg | 2025-11-11 21:11:39+00:00
They should set up a foundation/LLC if they don't have one already and require a support contract for fixing any bugs in niche codecs. Target the 95%-98% use cases for "free" work. If someone gives them a CVE on something ancient, just note it with an issue tracker and that the problem is currently unsponsored. Have default build flags to omit all the ancient/buggy stuff. If nobody is willing to pay to fix all the ancient crap, then nobody should be using it. But if someone is willing to pay, then it gets fixed.
by BuckRogers | 2025-11-11 21:11:42+00:00
It's a self-fulfilling prophecy to launch the iPhone mini during Covid, offer it 2 years, and say no one wants them.

The haters dismiss the SE point by saying it was the price, not size. But it does prove that no one avoids phones due to being "too small".

The size increase is because of cost optimization. Where it's wrong is that everything else meant for humans comes in small, medium, and large. Phones? Just large and XL.
by strictnein | 2025-11-11 21:11:47+00:00
> One problem here is that CVE scoring is basically entirely bugged, something scored 8.7 could be an RCE exploit or a "may be able to waste CPU" issue.

+100000

My favorite 8.x or higher CVEs are the ones where you would have to take untrusted user input, bypass all the standard ways to ingest and handle that type of data, and pass it into some internal function of a library. And then the end result is that a regex call becomes more expensive.
by tombert | 2025-11-11 21:12:38+00:00
I feel like collaboration can work great with a group of exactly two people. It's not terribly hard for two people to partition work and actively help each other. With two people working on a project, both people can realistically understand most of the codebase, and can competently review each other's pull requests.

I feel collaboration suffers from combinatorial complexity though, and I feel any number bigger than two ends up doing more harm than good. Once you have more than two people, the codebase starts becoming more segmented, it becomes really difficult to agree on decisions, and the project becomes a lot harder than it needs to be.

If I ever get into management, I think I will try and keep this in mind and try and design projects around two-people teams.
by jiggawatts | 2025-11-11 21:13:09+00:00
I recommend LTSC for terminal services environments like Azure Virtual Desktop, where driver issues just aren’t a problem.

Windows LTSC has semi annual updates, the same as Windows Server. Speaking of which, that’s essentially what it is: a cut-down version of the Server Desktop Experience with pretty much the same defaults and capabilities.

Microsoft could implement App Store support for LTSC (and Served), they simply choose not to. It’s telling that this isn’t a problem in practice.
by godelski | 2025-11-11 21:13:11+00:00
(I get the idea)

Costco is much more like the Joe's Corner Market. I'm only dealing with Costco. It is a bit more invasive than Joe's Corner Market, but I'll admit that I have much more trust for Costco given their history. Like Joe, Costco isn't following me around the store, unless I explicitly ask for their help finding something. They similarly won't follow me outside unless I'm explicitly asking for something like a delivery or some other service. It is always explicit and I'm always aware that I'm being "watched".

But the key difference is that Costco isn't sharing that data with Walmart, Facebook, and others. There is some tracking and I definitely don't like that, but there's a huge difference in going to Costco.com vs Facebook.com or even Google.com. Heading to Costco.com uBlock hits me with 9 blocks. Heading to google.com I get 17 and then it is constantly rising. In the time to write these few sentences it has already hit 30. Meanwhile, costco is still at 9. I mean I'm literally on google.com sitting and staring at a search page doing nothing. There's a much more aggressive and invasive attitude here.

Mind you, nuance and intent matter very much. Without them we wouldn't be able to differentiate a partner you live with and a stalker. Similarly expectations of trust. I'm glad you're asking the question of getting the steelman and pressing, but we must make it clear that if we're going to brush away detail and be dismissive of the nuances then we are contriving an environment where we would be unable to differentiate these things. But again, the consequences of that contrived setting is that we would not be able to differentiate someone's husband/wife from a stalker. And that result is beyond laughable. So maybe the better question is to ask where these lines are drawn. I'm not sure there's an easy answer, but I'm certain it is important.
by fallingfrog | 2025-11-11 21:13:14+00:00
The life path of "going to school, then going to unviersity, partner, kids, work, work, living daily live, getting old, dying" is, other than the kids part, utterly horrifying to me and feels like not living at all. Why even bother with life if driving to work and driving home is all youre going to do with it? I am fully of how pretentious this sounds but, the way most people live is an insult to the precious gift of the human spirit.

Of course for many there is no choice. But that only makes it more horrifying not less.

2 weeks ago I took shrooms with my friend, we went to the basement of an arcade and crashed a bdsm costume party, then i spent the night at her place. This weekend, I played music with 4 talented people for 15 hours, and we finally collapsed giggling and covered in sweat at 2:30am. Thats living life! These are the kinds of things you can do if you are willing to take risks. You think I want to retire to a life of watching wheel of fortune? Why???