MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by scoofy | 2025-11-19 03:26:20+00:00
I’m not suggesting that nullification is against the law. It’s not. States have the right to ignore federal laws if they choose to. However if the states refuse to cooperate with law enforcement, and especially when they pass laws making cooperation illegal, it is for very obvious reasons likely to result in political escalation, as the feds will need to spend a significant amount of resources on statewide enforcement.

When you refuse to allow city and state law enforcement to assist federal agencies, don’t be surprised if federal law enforcement show up. It’s not even unprecedented, it’s just an issue of scale.

Ultimately, this is about democracy, and how refusing to participate when laws we don’t like pass, it is a recipe for extreme political conflict because it’s inherently undemocratic.
by piperswe | 2025-11-19 03:27:07+00:00
The Wikipedia page makes it seem like it's been largely cleaned up for decades:

> In 1988, the NRC announced that, although it was possible to further decontaminate the Unit 2 site, the remaining radioactivity had been sufficiently contained as to pose no threat to public health and safety.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident
by mitthrowaway2 | 2025-11-19 03:27:20+00:00
The right answer to this is not a number, but rather a feedback loop that converges on the right number. When everyone is laid off without production of goods slowing down, the result is deflation; when everyone gets too much money relative to production of goods, the result is inflation. So that means you can use the CPI inflation as a feedback variable, and adjust the UBI amount until the CPI is stable.
by jcalvinowens | 2025-11-19 03:28:15+00:00
> Instead, the routine likely should have worked within `Result`.

But it's a fatal error. It doesn't matter whether it's implicit or explicit, the result is the same.

Maybe you're saying "it's better to be explicit", as a broad generalization I don't disagree with that.

But that has nothing to do with the actual bug here, which was that the invariant failed. How they choose to implement checking and failing the invariant in the semantics of the chosen language is irrelevant.
by aw1621107 | 2025-11-19 03:28:27+00:00
> It should be limited to use in `unsafe` blocks.

That would be a fairly significant expansion of what `unsafe` means in Rust, to put it lightly. Not to mention that I think doing so would not really accomplish anything; marking unwrap() `unsafe` would not "surface `unwrap` usage" or "make any guarantees", as it's perfectly fine for safe functions to contain `unsafe` blocks with zero indication of such in the function signature and.
by OneDeuxTriSeiGo | 2025-11-19 03:28:43+00:00
water is provided via desal or filtration.

air is scrubbed and additional O2 is available via water splitting.

the main limit is food. food is stored under the floor boards and it can last a while but generally they are gonna try and restock every few months rather than running to empty (which on full stock can be close to a year)
by a2128 | 2025-11-19 03:29:27+00:00
If disk space was the only thing preventing a much better update system, it would seem very trivial to just reserve a few extra gigabytes and do what Android does with compressed deltas that get applied which emulates A/B but with much less disk space usage (similar to non-A/B)

> Do you really think that Windows is like "naw, we could do zero reboot updates, but prefer not to because we are so dominant in the OS space"?

Microsoft has become complacent with Windows and I think there's no denying that. You need to look no further than the new right-click context menu they thought is acceptable to ship to a billion users. It's lacking half the functionality such as extensions, so they just decided to keep the old one behind "Show more options"? Or maybe no software engineer in the world could solve the infamous context menu 2.0 problem...

No operating system has fully solved every problem with updates, but many of them have solved many problems that Windows still continues to have. Zero reboot updates are probably impossible to do reliably but there are other ways to improve that aren't zero reboot updates. I don't claim to know the ins and outs of Windows and exactly how to implement better updates, but they could surely do better than what they're currently doing.
by jrm4 | 2025-11-19 03:29:49+00:00
This feels very analogous to my experience with the place. As a Black person (who absolutely loves the idea and model), it's weird.

Feels very much like a "you become what you hate situation," in my case, interacting with Black folks with whom I share probably like 97% similar views on just about everything -- and yet, (it's mild, no worries, but) I have been on the receiving end of the literal worst behavior I've ever experienced via strangers on social media. E.g. some mild doxxing, you aren't really Black etc.

(And for those curious/interested/familiar, yes it was "Bad Space" aligned people)
by almosthere | 2025-11-19 03:31:42+00:00
It seems to be working - companies that bought $2 China doohickies that sold them for $5 are now paying $4 and now charging $6 and you're going to get $2000 for buying that doohickie for a dollar more.

Meanwhile people that are in the working class don't buy doohickies, they just buy American grown food (for the most part) in this economy, so they aren't suffering much at all from the tariffs.

It almost makes trump sound like Robin Hood.
by echelon | 2025-11-19 03:31:49+00:00
> fairly significant expansion of what `unsafe` means in Rust

I want an expansion of panic free behavior. We'll never get all the way there due to allocations etc., but this is the class of error the language is intended to fix.

This turned into a null pointer, which is exactly what Rust is supposed to quench.

I'll go as far as saying I would like to statically guarantee none of my dependencies use the unwrap() methods. We should be able to design libraries that provably avoid panics to the greatest extent possible.

Unwrap is an easy loss on a technicality.
by forgotoldacc | 2025-11-19 03:32:25+00:00
Saying Evangelion isn't big is like saying Minions are some irrelevant little flick. Evangelion is quite possibly the biggest series in Japan for 3 decades running. You won't find a person who has not seen it to some extent. Evangelion goods are sold everywhere at all times. You really cannot escape it. For the biggest series in Japan to use Blender is a huge sign to the rest of the industry in one of the most risk-averse countries that yes, it's good enough.
by r721 | 2025-11-19 03:33:51+00:00
>Chris Menahan

>Publisher of the independent news site http://InformationLiberation.com

Just a publisher of a conspiracy website doing his thing:

>Overall, we rate Information Liberation Questionable based on extreme right-wing bias, promoting propaganda/conspiracies, a lack of transparency, poor sourcing and false claims.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/information-liberation/
by zdragnar | 2025-11-19 03:35:03+00:00
It's right in the article:

> The debt facility is being made through the Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office (LPO), which was formed under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to foster the growth of clean energy technologies

and, more importantly:

> The Inflation Reduction Act, which passed during the Biden administration, created another pot of money under the LPO known as the Energy Infrastructure Reinvestment program. That program was created to restore existing power plants to operation provided they avoid or reduce pollutants or greenhouse gas emissions. The Trump administration kept it largely in tact, rebranding it the Energy Dominance Financing Program.
by WhyOhWhyQ | 2025-11-19 03:35:05+00:00
I just spent 12 hours a day vibe coding for a month and a half with Claude (which has equal swe benchmarks at gemini 3). I started out terrified but eventually I realized that these are just remarkably far away from actually replacing a real software engineer. For prototypes they're amazing, but when you're just straight vibe coding you get stuck in a hell where you don't want to or can't efficiently really check what's going on under the hood but it's not really doing the thing you want.

Basically these tools can you you to a 100k LOC project without much effort, but it's not going to be a serious product. A serious product requires understanding still.
by scoofy | 2025-11-19 03:35:23+00:00
The issue is that it is illegal AND a nontrivial part of the electorate wants it enforced.

The “let’s all step back and consider my side’s view of this” isn’t really relevant after our side loses elections. If the will of the people is to start enforcing jay-walking, for better or worse, we’re going to see a lot of jay-walking enforcement.
by imgabe | 2025-11-19 03:35:55+00:00
It's in the article.

> The debt facility is being made through the Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office (LPO), which was formed under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to foster the growth of clean energy technologies.

> The Inflation Reduction Act, which passed during the Biden administration, created another pot of money under the LPO known as the Energy Infrastructure Reinvestment program. That program was created to restore existing power plants to operation provided they avoid or reduce pollutants or greenhouse gas emissions. The Trump administration kept it largely in tact, rebranding it the Energy Dominance Financing Program.

Congress passed the Energy Policy act of 2005 and then the Inflation Reduction Act allocating money to the DoE to make these loans.
by bigstrat2003 | 2025-11-19 03:35:56+00:00
Restricting unwrap to unsafe blocks adds negative value to the language. It won't prevent unwrap mistakes (people who play fast and loose with it today will just switch to "foo = unsafe { bar.unwrap() };" instead). And it'll muddy the purpose of unsafe by adding in a use that has nothing to do with memory safety. It's not a good idea.
by nuuuwan | 2025-11-19 03:36:32+00:00
On 14 November, the world paused for World #Diabetes Day. #SriLanka did too.

But did we stop long enough to ask the harder question: why is a largely preventable disease still maiming and killing so many of our people?

MEDIUM: https://nuwans.medium.com/diabetes-is-not-nice-cef83343ae81

SUBSTACK: https://open.substack.com/pub/nuuuwan/p/diabetes-is-not-nice
by swisniewski | 2025-11-19 03:36:44+00:00
Sigh…

Saying the code doesn’t have conditions or booleans is only true if you completely ignore how the functions being called are being implemented.

Cycle involves conditionals, zip involves conditionals, range involves conditionals, array access involves conditionals, the string concatenation involves conditionals, the iterator expansion in the for loop involves conditionals.

This has orders of magnitude more conditionals than normal fizz buzz would.

Even the function calls involve conditionals (python uses dynamic dispatch). Even if call site caching is used to avoid repeated name lookups, that involves conditionals.

There is not a line of code in that file (even the import statement) that does not use at least one conditional.

So… interesting implementation, but it’s not “fizzbuzz without booleans or conditionals”.
by keypusher | 2025-11-19 03:37:34+00:00
The most surprising thing to me here is that it took 3 hours to root cause, and points to a glaring hole in the platform observability. Even taking into account the fact that the service was failing intermittently at first, it still took 1.5 hours after it started failing consistently to root cause. But the service was crashing on startup. If a core service is throwing a panic at startup like that, it should be raising alerts or at least easily findable via log aggregation. It seems like maybe there was some significant time lost in assuming it was an attack, but it also seems strange to me that nobody was asking "what just changed?", which is usually the first question I ask during an incident.
by echelon | 2025-11-19 03:38:17+00:00
Panics should be explicit, not implicit.

unwrap() should effectively work as a Result<> where the user must manually invoke a panic in the failure branch. Make special syntax if a match and panic is too much boilerplate.

This is like an implicit null pointer exception that cannot be statically guarded against.

I want a way to statically block any crates doing this from my dependency chain.
by thaumasiotes | 2025-11-19 03:38:43+00:00
Note that that phrasing is terrible, the recipe can't be protected no matter what.

The page, including the recipe and the intro, can be protected. But if you extract the recipe verbatim and publish it without the intro it used to cooccur with, no one can stop you.

I said that this is the "received wisdom" on why recipe sites do this. I didn't say it would work. I didn't say that they think that's why they're doing it. But it is a popular theory.
by donavanm | 2025-11-19 03:38:43+00:00
> datacenters depend on used hardware sales to recoup cost

Who? Ive worked for few big infra companies with millions to billions of DC assets. After depreciation and then some, say 3-5 years, theyre effectively scrap. Its more cost effective to buy new, denser, racks than continue to MRC on the stranded space and power. The reseller is cheaper/easier effectively paid to scrap the parts as e-waste and recover what they can.
by datadrivenangel | 2025-11-19 03:39:53+00:00
"On the other hand, if we can’t accept failure in our hearts, we’ve already lost. Not only do we deny ourselves the possibility of succeeding (and what is success in art but a chance to enjoy ourselves and connect with people?), but from experiencing the process and all that it has to teach us. We have to embrace it all or embrace nothing."

Words of wisdom and inspiration.
by sloaken | 2025-11-19 03:40:18+00:00
To me 'Legacy code' means the person who wrote it (or most of it) is not fixing / changing it.

It implies you cannot ask them WTF is this. Or more critically Why did you do this? Which of course is critical to avoid the 'Chesterton's Fence' Which I learned about here on HN and find it such a critical aspect of documentation now.
by zdragnar | 2025-11-19 03:41:44+00:00
Cost varies with the site conditions. It's one of the many things that push nuclear construction costs up; every build needs to take into consideration the geographic nature of the site (bedrock levels, etc) and so every location requires customizations to the design.

With that said, while it doesn't provide numbers, the article does say the refurbishment (costing $1.6 billion, estimated) will be cheaper than a new build. It'll also likely be much faster, projected to open in 2028.

A quick google search puts construction costs of new nuclear of a Unit 2 size in the $5-10 billion range. 3 Mile Island itself was constructed for $2 billion in 2024 inflation-adjusted dollars. All in all, refurbishing sounds like a good bargain compared to a green field build.
by aw1621107 | 2025-11-19 03:42:14+00:00
> I want an expansion of panic free behavior.

Sure, and I'd hardly be one to disagree that a first-party method to guarantee no panics would be nice, but marking unwrap() `unsafe` is definitely not an effective way to go about it.

> but this is the class of error the language is intended to fix.

Is it? I certainly don't see any memory safety problems here.

> This turned into a null pointer, which is exactly what Rust is supposed to quench.

There's some subtlety here - Rust is intended to eliminate UB due to null pointer dereferences. I don't think Rust was ever intended to eliminate panics. A panic may still be undesirable in some circumstances, but a panic is not the same thing as unrestricted UB.

> We should be able to design libraries that provably avoid panics to the greatest extent possible.

Yes, this would be nice indeed. But again, marking unwrap() `unsafe` is not an effective way to do so.

dtolnay's no_panic is the best we have right now IIRC, and there are some prover-style tools in an experimental stage which can accomplish something similar. I don't think either of those are polished enough for first-party adoption, though.
by yes_really | 2025-11-19 03:43:45+00:00
> > It’s bad because it overrides society’s determinations about which foreigners to allow into the country and how many.

> No it doesn't. What if I want more foreigners? What if I want people to come here?

Then that's your preference, that's not society's determination! We theoretically live in a democracy. Policy should be determined by the Rule of Law determined democratically, not by @ivraatiems's preference.
by somat | 2025-11-19 03:46:28+00:00
Enumerating all values probably can't be done in python as that requires some sort of unchecked loop construct, that is a goto or bare loop nether of which is present in python. perhaps a recursive solution(throws up a little in mouth)

baring that I too got nerd sniped by this and unsatisfied by the limitations of the authors solution here is my attempt. and when I read up on fizzbuz to make sure I was solving the correct thing. (I was not and my elegant duel state engine was wasted) it turns out the problem solution could be as simple as

f_out = ['', '', 'fizz'] b_out = ['', '', '', '', 'buzz'] def fizz_buz(n): return(f_out[n % 3] + b_out[n % 5])

anyhow the rest of my clever but unneeded and useless enumeration system, remember to read the spec first.

f_state = { 0:1, 1:2, 2:0, } b_state = { 0:1, 1:2, 2:3, 3:4, 4:0, } def fizz_buzz_all(): f_index = 0 b_index = 0 while 1: #how to loop with no end check? print(f_out([f_index] + b_out[b_index] ) f_index = f_state[f_index] b_index = b_state[b_index]

and the recursive solution:

def fizz_buzz_recurse(n): print(fizz_buzz(n)) fizz_buzz_recurse(n + 1)
by cestith | 2025-11-19 03:46:33+00:00
What exactly are we counting as “a conditional”? Is it only “if” statements? Do “case” or “switch” statements count? Do loops with loop conditions count? Do all the included functions being abused count for all the conditionals in them? Do short-circuited boolean operations count, or only boolean variables?

I mean, if we want to play fast and loose with those definitions then this also has no conditionals and no booleans.(Warning: Perl, somewhat golfed)

$s = '', $i % 3 || ($s .= 'fizz'), $i % 5 || ($s .= 'buzz'), $s ||= $i, print "$s\n" while (++$i < 101)
by donavanm | 2025-11-19 03:47:10+00:00
Bad news, 60/40 isnt a diversification strategy the last few years. 1) positive correlation in equity and fixed income 2) US treasuries/dollars have not had a “flight to safety” bump when volatility/l or bad news happens recently 3) treasuring moving to “all” short term debt, short term rate cuts resulting in long term rate increases.
by aw1621107 | 2025-11-19 03:47:28+00:00
> same like chess, engine is better than human grandmaster because its solvable math field

Might be worth noting that your description of chess is slightly incorrect. Chess technically isn't solved in the sense that the optimal move is known for any arbitrary position is known; it's just that chess engines are using what amounts to a fancy brute force for most of the game and the combination of hardware and search algorithm produces a better result than the human brain does. As such, chess engines are still capable of making mistakes, even if actually exploiting them is a challenge.
by daemonologist | 2025-11-19 03:47:40+00:00
There's not much to go off of on this subject in the US - only two successful reactor projects have been started since the 70s: Units 3 and 4 at Vogtle in Georgia*. They cost $15 billion each and bankrupted the remnants of Westinghouse (in combination with a similar project in South Carolina which was never finished).

*Many reactors started construction in the 70s and were finished in the 80s or 90s, plus Watts Bar Unit 2 which was started in 1972 and finished in 2016 for a total of $5 billion. The US also of course builds many naval reactors.
by brudgers | 2025-11-19 03:48:16+00:00
Probably the same reasons it funded JustinTV when the idea was live streaming Justin Kan’s life. YC bets on founders not ideas because that’s how they get Twitch paydays.

Remember that the “Air” in AirBnB came from the idea of renting air mattresses. Smart motivated people can have dumb ideas. Iterating from a dumb idea is how good ideas are made.
by anilgulecha | 2025-11-19 03:48:40+00:00
We've done some transcription exercises. The way to get the timestamps to line is : 1) break up the audio into minutes, and pass it in, one after another, so the chat completions prompt looks like: Here's minute 1 of audio [ffmpeg 1st minute cut out.wav] Here's minute 2 of audio [ffmpeg 2nd minute cut out.wav] Here's minute 3 of audio [ffmpeg 3rd minute cut out.wav] and so on..

The cutting step is simple, and token count is pretty much the same, but the crucial additional detail allows for excellent transcription fidelity time wise.

We've also experimented passing in regular TTS (non-llm) transcript for reference, which again helps the LLM do better.
by aceazzameen | 2025-11-19 03:48:42+00:00
My rear view mirror does this, I wish my side mirrors did too. Although recently I've noticed some cars headlights can even pierce my rear view mirror's polarized dimming. It never used to be a problem in the past. I've seen the difference when drivers turn their high beams on and off. It always did a great job against driver's brights including large trucks. But occasionally there's now a vehicle with the light of a thousand suns that is too bright for the auto-dimming.
by nhatcher | 2025-11-19 03:48:46+00:00
I would be very curious to compare notes on the integrators you used. How good do they perform in general?

In the avobed shared you can go to the settings a pick an integrator. I did the integrators in wasm although I suspect js is just as fast.

Color me impressed! I love the ammount of settings you can play with. I still need to understand what happens whe yu add more bodies though.
by sophacles | 2025-11-19 03:51:52+00:00
I think you should get exactly what the contract you signed said you'd get. Outages happen in all infrasturture. Planned and unplanned ones both. The SLA and SLO are literal acknowledgements of the fact that and part of the contract for that reason.

Its fair to be upset at their decision making - use that to renegotiate your contract.
by otterley | 2025-11-19 03:53:21+00:00
It has been a very, very long time since AWS had a simultaneous failure across multiple regions. Even customers impacted by the loss of Route 53 control plane functionality in last month’s us-east-1 were able to gracefully fail over to a backup region if they configured failover records in advance, had Application Recovery Controller set up, or fronted their APIs or websites with Global Accelerator.

Customers survive incidents on a daily basis by failing over across regions (even in the absence of an AWS regional failure, they can fail due to a bad deployment or other cause). The reason you don’t hear about it is because it works.
by aw1621107 | 2025-11-19 03:54:12+00:00
I don't think "implicitly panicked" is an accurate description since unwrap()'s entire reason for existing is to panic if you unwrap an error condition. If you use unwrap(), you're explicitly opting into the panicking behavior.

I suppose another way to think about it is that Result<T, E> is somewhat analogous to Java's checked exceptions - you can't get the T out unless you say what to do in the case of the E/checked exception. unwrap() in this context is equivalent to wrapping the checked exception in a RuntimeException and throwing that.
by anon7000 | 2025-11-19 03:54:51+00:00
But to be clear, the agreement does allow him API access to view apps and display metadata. Presumably, to build App Store experiences on top of the data. Which could easily include something like stack ranking your favorite apps as a review system, or displaying favorites.

Saying this is scraping is so pedantic, and given that Eric’s company is paying for access to the API, they should kick rocks.