MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bell-cot | 2025-11-15 10:46:14+00:00
(Largest ever for Poland, that is - about €1.6 billion.)

> The trains, which can travel at speeds of up to 200 km/h and each have 550 seats, [...] The first is set to be ready in 2029, with the rest to follow by 2032.

> PKP plans to use the trains on routes between Warsaw and the cities of Gdańsk, Łódź, Olsztyn, Wrocław, Kraków, Białystok, and Terespol. Janusz Malinowski, PKP Intercity’s CEO, says that they will operate in the economy category, offering cheap tickets and stopping in smaller towns.

Other than being 5+ years from now, this sounds like a good thing. Though the "up to 200 km/h" and "stopping in smaller towns" are obviously in conflict - stopping and starting fast trains takes a lot of time and energy. And building & maintaining 200km/h-rated track is neither quick nor cheap.

Might anyone be familiar with Polish rail, or PKP, to comment?
by seg_lol | 2025-11-15 10:48:15+00:00
Lua 5.4.0 first came out in June of 2020.

Last-Modified: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 16:11:05 GMT

This seems too soon for 5.5? /s

Point releases in Lua are like major releases for other projects. You can get the source here https://www.lua.org/work/#5.5.0
by keyringlight | 2025-11-15 10:48:26+00:00
There was a podcast episode linked here a while ago about how the software industry in Japan never took off as it did in America and it was a similar conclusion. According to the host, the product being sold was hardware, and software was a means to fulfill and then conclude the contract. After that you want the customer to buy the new model, primarily for the hardware and software comes along for the ride.

It should be obvious by now though that there's symbiosis between software and hardware, and that support timescales are longer. Another angle is that it's more than just AMD's own software developers, also the developers making products for their customers who in turn buy AMD's if everyone works together to make them run well and it's those second developers they need to engage with in a way their efforts will be welcomed.
by LightBug1 | 2025-11-15 10:49:10+00:00
Interesting perspective. However (and give me some rope here), I'd still argue that, somehow, Germany emerged from WW2, eventually, as a relatively sane and democratic country compared to where it had been during and prior to the war. So it wasn't a complete failure.

All countries, as we're sadly finding out now, have a nasty undercurrent. Particularly now, but nothing compared to Nazi Germany in terms of its ideological underpinnings.

However, the indiscriminate hatred, dehumanisation, and, yes, genocide on display from Israel echoes what I've studied in Hitlers Germany.

And so, again, I'll argue Israel needs a similar program of DeNazification. I don't know how you get there, because they haven't been "defeated" and are in fact being supported. But that is what is needed in Israel.
by DrierCycle | 2025-11-15 10:49:18+00:00
Yet what about aphasia? There seems to be direct evidence that thought, action, language are in conflict rather than seamless, so language plays a weird role in that some of us are programmed and others are blissfuly unconnected to their effects.

If aphasia is evidence that some of us don't use language to think, then language is nothing more than a programming language.

Whatever programming language using language is irrelevant to people with aphasia.
by andyjohnson0 | 2025-11-15 10:49:59+00:00
I use Teams every day (for work, the company basically runs on it) for chat and meetings, and I'm one of those strange people who never really have much problem with it. I can think of one occasion in perhaps the last six months when it crashed and I had to kill and restart it. Otherwise it just sits there on my laptop and does its thing. Same with Outlook etc.

So, what am I doing wrong? How do I get the authentic Teams user experience that everyone else here seemingly has?
by dwb | 2025-11-15 10:51:46+00:00
You can get away with incredibly vague "specs" in tickets most of the time because of a shared understanding of the system and product – of the kind that an LLM won't have (without very careful and well-organised in-repo documentation). When it works, which in my experience is quite a lot, it's very efficient. Sometimes it fails, sure. Sometimes it's annoying because you actually do need more detail than is provided and have to ask for it in a conversation. In my experience that's a low cost because it happens much less often and isn't too laborious when it does.

But crucially, the details here are coming from the issue authors. Do you really think that issue authors are going to be reviewing LLM-generated specs? I don't think so. And so engineers will be the intermediary. If that's going to be me, I would rather mediate between the issue author, some kind of high-level plan, and code. Not the issue author, a high-level plan, code-like specs, and code. There is one extra layer in the latter that I don't see the value of.

> Developers like it because it gives them freedom to be creative in how they interpret what needs to be done, plus they don't need to plan things and their estimates can be total nonsense if they want

I like it because it moves me closer to the product, the thing actually being built. You seem to be asking to move the clock back to where there was a stricter division of labour. Maybe that's necessary in some industries, but none that I've worked in.
Show HN: A tool to safely migrate GitHub Actions workflows to Ubuntu-slim runner
by r4mimu | 2025-11-15 10:53:03+00:00
Hi HN!

I’ve been running GitHub Actions workflows for a while, and when GitHub announced the new ubuntu-slim runners as a cheaper alternative to ubuntu-latest, I wanted to migrate—but figuring out which workflows are safe to switch turned out to be surprisingly tedious.

You need to check for Docker usage, services, containers, step failures due to missing packages, and whether jobs rely on tools not available in the slim image.

So I built gh-slimify, a GitHub CLI extension that automates all of this. It scans your repository, detects which jobs can be migrated, flags incompatible patterns, identifies missing commands, and can update only the safe workflows with a single command.

gh extension install fchimpan/gh-slimify gh slimfy # Analyze workflows gh slimfy fix # Update only jobs that are safe to migrate

It’s open source (MIT). As a bonus: the README also includes an AI agent prompt that reproduces the same workflow-migration analysis—useful if you want to integrate the logic into an LLM agent or experiment with automated refactoring.

I’d love feedback—especially on edge cases, false positives/negatives, or patterns it should detect better.
by iam-TJ | 2025-11-15 10:53:15+00:00
This reminds me of a recent discussion about using a tarpit for A.I. and other scrapers. I've kept a tab alive with a reference to a neat tool and approach called Nepenthes that VERY SLOWLY drip feeds endless generated data into the connection. I've not had an opportunity to experiment with it as yet:

https://zadzmo.org/code/nepenthes/
by seer | 2025-11-15 10:53:28+00:00
The idea came from linking salt to heart failure, but last I checked the link was a confounding variable - e.g. bad diet leads to problems that themselves lead to high cholesterol. It was not the salt in the food but the quality of the nutrition itself.

However blaming salt was quick and easy so that’s what the people with money did.

Historically speaking salt has been such a scarce and valuable resource. I have read accounts how in the balkans people would resort to selling kids to slavery just so the family could have enough salt to survive (sacrificing one kid to save the rest).

When I started reading about how salt was bad for you it never made any sense.
by re-lre-l | 2025-11-15 10:54:48+00:00
Don’t get me wrong, but what’s the problem with scrapers? People invest in SEO to become more visible, yet at the same time they fight against “scraper bots.” I’ve always thought the whole point of publicly available information is to be visible. If you want to make money, just put it behind a paywall. Isn’t that the idea?
Ask HN: Open-source AI browser extension vs. keep closed for full Chromium fork?
by denis4inet | 2025-11-15 10:55:32+00:00
Solo founder building *Vibe* — 3-tier AI copilot system: 1. *Chrome extension* (current MVP — API key, page commands) 2. *Chromium fork* (full browser with native AI copilot) 3. *Playwright agent* (headless, full DOM + accessibility tree access)

*Key insight:* - Extension = limited (no accessibility tree, weaker context) - Browser + Playwright = full power (HTML tree, real-time DOM, automation)

I was going to open-source the extension (MIT) to get traction/contributors. But now: *90% of future value is in the browser + agent*, not the extension.

*Dilemma:* - OSS extension → community grows shell, but I lose control of the real product - Keep all closed → slower feedback, harder to validate

*Options:* 1. *Source-available extension* (public code, no forks/commercial use) 2. *OSS only the extension SDK* (API to plug into Vibe Browser) 3. *Stay fully closed*, launch browser beta first

LangFuse: MIT core + paid EE Raycast: closed core, open extensions

*HN:* - Should I OSS the weak part (extension) to build mindshare? - Or keep everything closed until browser MVP ships? - How to get early users without giving away the moat?

SF, 2 months runway. Repo (coming): https://github.com/VibeTechnologies/VibeWebAgent Pitch: pitch.vibebrowser.app

What would you do?
by nly | 2025-11-15 10:55:36+00:00
The reason you wouldn't do that is IP doesn't give you a mechanism to share an IP address with multiple processes on a host, it just gets your packets to a particular host.

As soon as you start thinking about having multiple services on a host you end up with the idea of having a service id or "port"

UDP or UDP Lite gives you exactly that at the cost of 8 bytes, so there's no real value in not just putting everything on top of UDP
by ErrantX | 2025-11-15 10:56:31+00:00
I wouldn't call that accidental complexity? It's just a set of preferences.

Your last point; feels a bit idealistic. The point of code is to achieve a goal, there are ways to achieve with optimal efficiency in construction but a lot of people call that gold plating.

The setup these prompts leave you with is boring, standard, and something surely I can do in a couple of hours. You might even skeleton it right? The thing is the AI can do it both faster in elapsed time but also, reduces my time to writing two prompts (<2 minutes) and some review 10-15 perhaps?

Also remember this was a simple example; once we get to real business logic efficiencies grow.
by metalman | 2025-11-15 10:56:35+00:00
there is plenty of evidence that drug boat crews are in no way involved in the manufacture, marketing or most importantly, miney laundering of the drug proffits, and that the crews are often bieng held hostage and or blackmailed/extorted or trafficked, and tricked, sad basterds who needed a job, would have been happy to run a shovle planting shruberies, executed by desperate politicians and there underlings, cunning lawyers pointing out the legal "grey" areas of international law. We all know that it's a big messy mean-oll-worl, and everbody get to make there own mistakes, but that it is never, ever, ok for the ones at the top to burn alive those at the bottom, on a whim. So how does the cumulative trillion dollars of drug proffits magicaly vanish without a single arrest of a senior banker ever?
by silvestrov | 2025-11-15 10:57:12+00:00
Poor for high speed connections () or very unreliable connections.

) compared to when TCP was invented.

When I started at university the ftp speed from the US during daytime was 500 bytes per second! You don't have many unacknowledged packages in such a connection.

Back then even a 1 megabits/sec connection was super high speed and very expensive.
by jjav | 2025-11-15 10:57:39+00:00
> It is always a wonder to me when people downplay something that is "just" 1.5% of nearly $7 TRILLION

If (assuming correct) it is 1.5%, then it is 1.5%

Which is a tiny percentage. That's how percentages work. Adding that it is a large number out of a huge number doesn't change anything, it is still 1.5% which means not much at all.
by antegamisou | 2025-11-15 10:57:44+00:00
> If everyone makes noise about how the other side hasn't quieted down yet so they won't the only outcome is it gets ever louder

Yes, we shouldn't be pointing out the low-value content and enshittification brought upon by this superior technology, or even question why isn't research focused on addressing challenges like disease and poverty eradication, cause we bring more attention to any potential negative aspects, which are obviously very minimal and exaggerated. We should just accept dogmata about having to reconcile with the idea that humans have eventually lost in some absurd creativity/imagination race against the superior AGI machines and it's perfectly reasonable having negative IQ CEOs laying off thousands because AI does their job "better" (costs cheaper) than them. I'm sure paying no attention and magically letting it die on its own is the solution. Just like it has historically happened with other subjects like phrenology, scientific racism, antisemitism etc.

What are you even doing here, enjoy another trite useless application offered to you as another breakthrough that I'm obviously responsible for having 1.5K upvotes cause I can't shut up.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45930151
by keyringlight | 2025-11-15 10:58:00+00:00
This sounds like how most moddable games of the era released their SDKs. You could make a mod that changed gameplay and/or assets, but you needed the needed the original game itself for the engine and original assets as a foundation/runtime. One step further would be a 'total conversion' that replaced all the assets but you still needed the engine, and then you get later releases like the id GPL releases of the engine so you could have engine+gameplay+content all by yourself. Even then you'd still need to abide by the license of the original game or the GPL engine, unless you went and signed a different license with them including if you wanted to sell anything derived from their work.
by nextaccountic | 2025-11-15 10:58:15+00:00
Thank you for that. I absolutely love that this uses tantivy.

I was previously leaning torwards VictoriaMetrics and VictoriaTraces (I will need both) but I think that OpenObserve is even simpler. Later I found Gigapipe/qryn https://github.com/metrico/gigapipe

Does OpenObserve ships something to view traces and metrics? (it appears that Gigapipe does). Or am I supposed to just use Grafana? I want to cut down on moving pieces.
by StopDisinfo910 | 2025-11-15 10:58:34+00:00
You are not alone. I also personally find Teams more than ok even if I wish it was more snappy.

Meetings work great. Compatible equipment in room makes everything feel seem less. Collaborative editing and file sharing are both awesome.

Every time it’s brought up on HN I get the feeling that people here use collaborative tools in a very different way I do. They mostly want something to chat via text which I and most of the people in my area of work use very little. I think that’s where the disconnect comes from.

Teams is not primarily a text chat software. It’s not built for this purpose as that’s not how most office workers collaborate. That’s quite obvious.
by swannodette | 2025-11-15 10:59:15+00:00
Some research on this topic http://edgarmatias.com/papers/hci96/

On OS X you can achieve this with Keyb, Karabiner Elements, etc. It's also easy to do with a programmable keyboard with ZMK/QMK. I've set up my Kinesis 360 Pro this way, being symmetrical means I can access every key easily. Hardware support for sticky keys also helps quite a bit.
by plqbfbv | 2025-11-15 11:00:42+00:00
I'm also seriously considering dropping Grafana for good for the same reasons stated in the post. Every year I need to rebuild a dashboard, reconfigure alerts, use the shiny new toy, etc etc. I'm tired.

I just want the thing to alert me when something's down, and ideally if the check doesn't change and the datasource and metric don't change, the dashboard definition and the alert definition should be the same for the last and the next 10 years.

The UI used to have the most 4-5 important links in the sidebar, now it's 10 menus with submenus of submenus, and I never know where to find the basics: Dashboards and Alerts. When something goes off I don't have time to re-learn the UI I look at maybe once a month.
by skydhash | 2025-11-15 11:00:51+00:00
The thing is that the parallels you are drawing is for things that is very explicitly not the source of the code, but exists alongside it. Code is the ultimate truth. Documentation is a more humane way to describe it. Tests are there to ensure that what is there is what we want. And linters are there to warn us of specific errors. None of these create code.

To go from spec to code requires a lot of decisions (each introducing technical debt). Automating the process remove control over those decisions and over the ultimate truth that is the code. But why can't the LLM retains the trace of the decisions so that it presents control point to alter the results. Instead, it's always a rewrite from scratch.
by larusso | 2025-11-15 11:01:02+00:00
The mirror board is an interesting idea as it allows to start with a normal keyboard and one could then switch to a smaller board with the muscle memory trained. I would prefer a different switch key though. I use cap lock as a layer switch on my keyboards. But I will think about it and try out a few things. It could already be useful in situation where I need to keep my hand over the mousepad.
by stevekemp | 2025-11-15 11:02:05+00:00
I think you could replace tail with awk, if you absolute needed to. This is a naive attempt:

cat /etc/passwd | \ awk -v n=10 '{ lines[NR] = $0 } END{ for (i = NR - n + 1; i <= NR; i++) if (i > 0) print lines[i] }'
Show HN: MuseGen – Tired of juggling AI tools, I built a unified creative studio
by qinggeng | 2025-11-15 11:02:57+00:00
I'm the creator of MuseGen. Like many here, I've been experimenting heavily with generative AI. My workflow quickly became a mess of browser tabs: one for music, another for images, a third for video, each with its own UI, credit system, and quirks. The context switching was killing my creative flow.

My goal was to build a clean, unified front-end for a curated set of high-quality generative models, allowing a user to go from idea to a multimedia concept within a single session.

MuseGen is my first pass at solving this.

Here's what it can do:

AI Music: Generates full, high-fidelity songs (with vocals) or instrumentals from a text prompt. I've integrated a best-in-class model to ensure the output quality is top-tier.

AI Video: Creates short, coherent video clips from text. The backend uses a state-of-the-art model focused on maintaining visual consistency.

AI Image: Access to multiple models, with options optimized for different needs, like creative style or character consistency.

AI Lyrics: A utility to quickly generate lyrical ideas, verses, and hooks to overcome writer's block.

The frontend is built with React/Next.js, and the backend is a Node.js server that orchestrates calls to the various third-party APIs. One of the more interesting challenges was designing a normalized credit system to abstract away the different pricing and usage metrics of each underlying model (e.g., per-second of video vs. per-image). Roadmap:

The long-term vision is to build an "agent" layer on top of this. I want to enable a single, high-level prompt (e.g., "create a cinematic trailer for a sci-fi movie") to automatically generate and assemble the video scenes, a fitting musical score, and a script. I'm also constantly evaluating and swapping in new and improved models as they become available.

I would be incredibly grateful for any feedback, critiques, or technical questions from the HN community. I'll be here all day. Thanks for checking it out.
by xorcist | 2025-11-15 11:05:16+00:00
> caring, at the very least, that it's either TCP or UDP.

You left out ICMP, my favourite! (And a lot more important in IPv6 than in v4.)

Another pretty well known protocol that is neither TCP nor UDP is IPsec. (Which is really two new IP protocols.) People really did design proper IP protocols still in the 90s.

> Can I just make up a packet and send it to a host across the Internet?

You should be able to. But if you are on a corporate network with a really strict firewalling router that only forwards traffic it likes, then likely not. There are also really crappy home routers which gives similar problems from the other end of enterpriseness.

NAT also destroyed much of the end-to-end principle. If you don't have a real IP address and relies on a NAT router to forward your data, it needs to be in a protocol the router recognizes.

Anyway, for the past two decades people have grown tired of that and just piles hacks on top of TCP or UDP instead. That's sad. Or who am I kidding? Really it's on top of HTTP. HTTP will likely live on long past anything IP.
by mattmanser | 2025-11-15 11:05:19+00:00
Seems like you are all just redefining what spec and waterfall means.

A spec was from a customer where it would detail every feature. They would be huge, but usually lack enough detail or be ambiguous. They would be signed off by the customer and then you'd deliver to the spec.

It would contain months, if not years, worth of work. Then after all this work the end product would not meet the actual customer needs.

A day's work is not a spec. It's a ticket's worth of work, which is agile.

Agile is an iterative process where you deliver small chunks of work and the customer course corrects as regular intervals. Commonly 3/4 week sprints, made up of many tickets that take hours or days, per course correct.

Generally each sprint had a spec, and each ticket had a spec. But it sounds like until now you've just been winging it, with vague definitions per feature. It's very common, especially where the PO or PM are bad at their job. Or the developer is informally acting as PO.

Now you're making specs per ticket, you're just now doing what many development teams already do. You're just bizarrely calling it a new process.

It's like watching someone point at a bicycle and insist it's a rocketship.
by constantcrying | 2025-11-15 11:06:42+00:00
The spec is the problem.

The delay is just irrelevant. It has nothing to do with it working ot not.

>b) no (cheap) way to iterate or deliver outside the spec

You could always do this in a waterfall project. Just make whatever changes to the code and ship. The problem is the same for SDD, as soon as you want quick changes you have to abandon the spec. Iterating the spec and the code quickly is impossible for any kind of significant complex project.

Either the spec contains sufficient details to make implementation feasible and iteration times become long and the process of any change becomes tedious and complex or the spec is insufficient in describing the complexity of the project, which makes it insufficient to guide an LLM adequately.

There is a fundamental contradiction here, which LLMs can not resolve. People like SDD, for a exactly the reason Managers like waterfall.