MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by skhameneh | 2025-11-11 21:46:54+00:00
I've been a proponent of upstreaming fixes for open source software.

Why? - It makes continued downstream consumption easier, you don't have to rely on fragile secret patches. - It gives back to projects that helped you to begin with, it's a simple form of paying it forward. - It all around seems like the "ethical" and "correct" thing to do.

Unfortunately, in my experience, there's often a lot of barriers within companies to upstream. Reasons can be everything from compliance, processes, you name it... It's unfortunate.

I have a very distinct recollection of talks about hardware aspirations and upstreaming software fixes at a large company. The cultural response was jarring.
by crazygringo | 2025-11-11 21:46:54+00:00
You're right, those sound idiotic. If someone sent me a hash I needed to look up in a screenshot, if they had access to the selectable text, or code to run, they need to have their head looked at.

But that's not what the blog post was about. It specifically showed a section of code that was having an issue. It's not meant to be copied and pasted, like all of your examples. It's meant to be an easily readable snippet that preserves formatting.

The only problem with the example in the blog post is that the sender didn't also say which file and line number the issue was in. But the screenshot itself is often very helpful, because many times the question can be answered without having to load up anything else.

I'm really assuming that people aren't sharing URL's by screenshot. I've been working in this field a long time and haven't encountered someone dumb enough to do that yet, knock on wood...
by bborud | 2025-11-11 21:47:06+00:00
To some degree, but junk is junk even if it says Issey Miyake on it. But at the price they are asking I'd insist on higher quality materials. Not this junk.

It is like those horrible Louis Vuitton plastic bags. Yes they are expensive and probably better made than most plastic bags, but they are mass produced plastic bags. You can get nice, custom, handmade bags for a fraction of what this pointless junk goes for.

(The only reason I know about Issey Miyake is because years ago I happened to buy a couple of handmade linen suits while visiting Japan. And only later discovered that these suits were "a big deal" when some fashion people I shared an office with saw me wear them as "casual office clothes". To me they were comfortable linen suits that were obviously hand dyed. And they weren't even that expensive)
by lurking_swe | 2025-11-11 21:48:08+00:00
It’s not 2 hours of walking nonstop. Walking to the toilet counts. So does walking to the bus, the grocery store, to lunch, etc.

I think it’s doable if you live in a very walkable city. I routinely hit about 11k steps most days of the week. Some days less of course…like if i’m sore from a workout or just feeling sedentary.
by zahlman | 2025-11-11 21:48:13+00:00
> Your definition of fairness suggests that when someone is born poor, suffers, and dies poor, and someone is born rich, gets to enjoy all the things wealth brings a person in life, and dies rich, even though they did nothing in particular to earn their station in life... That's fair.

No. I said nothing of the sort.

What I said is that when those things happen, and then an employer disregards that history in the course of making a hiring assessment, the employer acted fairly.

It is not incumbent upon the employer to attempt to right prior injustices. It is in fact wrong to expect the employer to do so. Because the employer did not cause them.

> Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.

I am done with this discussion, in all sub-threads, because this is clearly going no where.
by Eisenstein | 2025-11-11 21:48:25+00:00
All you had to do was make a point without saying something untrue. Try this:

> That's not how it is in reality, southern states (not just them though) have been doing that with homeless people too, not just immigrants.

> The south and what would be modern republicans did jim crow in the 50s and 60s, we still talk about it today, ...

Not that difficult, and you could have bypassed the whole lashing at out me for pointing out your error fiasco.
by martin-t | 2025-11-11 21:48:33+00:00
This should be taught in primary school.

I had a realization that logical biases and fallacies form well-known patterns only at uni and only on my own.

I then had a much worse realization - that most people still don't know about them and that they don't care.

You can't make people care, that only comes when they are the ones getting hurt by others being manipulated. But you can give them tools to know what they should care about when that happens.
by renewiltord | 2025-11-11 21:48:43+00:00
That's the Llama license and yeah, a lot of people prefer this approach, but many don't consider it open source. I don't either.

In fact, we are probably just really lucky that some early programmers were kooky believers in the free software philosophy. Thank God for them. So much of what I do owes to the resulting ecosystem that was built back then.
by nyx | 2025-11-11 21:48:43+00:00
You're right, of course, but I don't think blame rests solely on the individual consumer here... I guess it's a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem, wherein Apple makes $200 knitted iPhone scrotes because they know people will line up to buy it, and people will line up to buy $200 knitted iPhone scrotes because Apple made them.

And people have brand loyalty to Apple stuff because quality, or design, or something... but for a product like this, which to me is prima facie a ridiculous, impractical, high-priced, fast-fashion item, you know that the marketers are cashing in on that brand loyalty almost exclusively (in the absence of any intrinsic value).

Half-baked thoughts, I'm sure people have written properly about this. But the conclusion I leap to is that marketing people are the great Satan here. Fuck those guys.
by ahepp | 2025-11-11 21:48:43+00:00
What is the mission of Project Zero? Is it to build a vulnerability database, or is it to fix vulnerabilities?

If it's to fix vulnerabilities, it seems within reason to expect a patch. If the reason Google isn't sending a patch is because they truly think the maintainers can fix it better, then that seems fair. But if Google isn't sending a patch because fixing vulns "doesn't scale" then that's some pretty weak sauce.

Maybe part of the solution is creating a separate low priority queue for bug reports from groups that could fix it but chose not to.
by antirez | 2025-11-11 21:48:47+00:00
Near perfect recall VS fp32, not in absolute terms: TLDR, it's not int8 to ruin it, at least if the int8 quants are computed per-vector and not with global centroids. And also, recall is a very illusionary metric, but this is an argument for another blog post (In short, what really matters is that the best candidates are collected: the long tail is full of elements that are anyway far enough or practically equivalent, since this happens under the illusion that the embedding model already captures the similarity our application demands. This is, indeed, already an illusion, so if the 60th result is 72th, it normally does not matter. The reranking that really matters (if there is the ability to do that) is the LLM picking / reranking: that, yes, makes all the difference.
by akakrsh | 2025-11-11 21:48:56+00:00
I realized I use my Notes app like a junk drawer for my thoughts, ideas, and reminders - but I never look at them again. This app is my solution to that.

Maybe it just solves a very specific problem that perhaps only I have. I welcome any and all feedback, even if you just want to drop in to say that this is a hot piece of garbage!
by jsnell | 2025-11-11 21:49:02+00:00
> When you publicize a vulnerability you know someone doesn't have the capacity to fix according to the requested timeline

My understanding is that the bug in question was fixed about 100 times faster than Project Zero's standard disclosure timeline. I don't know what vulnerability report your scenario is referring to, but it certainly is not this one.

> and name-calling the maintainers

Except Google did not "name-call the maintainers" or anything even remotely resembling that. You just made it up, just like GP made up the the "demands". It's pretty telling that all these supposed misdeeds are just total fabrications.
by rmunn | 2025-11-11 21:49:10+00:00
Have you ever used a piece of software that DID make guarantees about being safe?

Every software I've ever used had a "NO WARRANTY" clause of some kind in the license. Whether an open-source license or a EULA. Every single one. Except, perhaps, for public-domain software that explicitly had no license, but even "licenses" like CC0 explicitly include "Affirmer offers the Work as-is and makes no representations or warranties of any kind concerning the Work ..."
by smackeyacky | 2025-11-11 21:49:22+00:00
It’s a shame that Casio are relentlessly pushing the g-shock watches upmarket. Part of their appeal was that they were affordable and tough. I still put on a g-shock if I absolutely have to know the time and couldn’t be faffed winding an automatic.

The GB-800 is pretty cool, has a step counter and the time can be kept by using the g-shock app including adjusting for daylight saving. The 5600 is my favourite though.
by makeitdouble | 2025-11-11 21:49:37+00:00
Japanese are used to it because TV shows etc. that have the same issue.

If it airs at 2025-11-24 01:00, people will have an easier time to remember it's at a very late after the 23th's midnight, than a crazy early time on the 24th. Most TV or movie guide will show it as 25:00 on the 23th.
by erikerikson | 2025-11-11 21:49:39+00:00
There are some rhetorical slights of hand. If Google does the work to find and report vulnerabilities, great. Nice contribution regardless of who provides it. The OSS developer can ignore it by accepting the consequences that will be. They are not forced to fix it except by themselves.

The many large corporations should be funding these tools they depend on to increase time allocations and thus ability to be responsive but this isn't an either/or. These type of thinking erode the communities of such projects and minds of the contributors.

FWIW I've totally been that developer trapped in that perspective so I empathize, there are simply better mental stances available.
by chemotaxis | 2025-11-11 21:50:06+00:00
And where does it point toward? Other some untenable position such as "ban all plastics", which may very well produce more harm?

The discourse around microplastics is pretty wild. The sport is finding them in random places, often at parts-per-billion or parts-per-trillion levels that we don't really use to look for most other substances. And the implication is essentially "progress bad" or "consumerism bad". No clear evidence of human harm, no realistic policy prescriptions - so what do we expect to happen, exactly? This it not a case of corporate greed or deception.

Our bodies also contain a fair amount of sand. Probably at levels higher than parts-per-billion. Is it bad? Sometimes! Where does the precautionary principle lead us on that?
by jkafjanvnfaf | 2025-11-11 21:50:08+00:00
How accurate is this two-pass approach in general? From my outsider's perspective, it always looked like most of the difficulty in implementing Lanczos was reorthogonalization, which will be hard to do with the two-pass algorithm.

Or is this mostly a problem when you actually want to calculate the eigenvectors themselves, and not just matrix functions?
by fhennig | 2025-11-11 21:50:09+00:00
> Every delivered feature is a liability not an asset.

> If you don’t believe me, consider two products that make customers equally happy and one has half as many moving parts. Which one is more profitable to maintain? The one with less shit. Because the rest is just more liability.

You're mixing up the feature and the moving parts.

A feature is an asset. Moving parts (or code) are the liability. They are not the same.

Sometimes you can even improve the product by removing code, or refactoring things so you have less or clearer code while at the same time improving the product. Maybe you unify some UI, so more functionality is available in more places, while also cleaning up the code, maybe reducing line count.

> So what do you all do when I’m hiking in the woods and the cluster is on fire? Sure would be nice if I collaborated on that functionality wouldn’t it? Then you’d have two other people to ask.

It's a fair point, but depends on the scale I would say. Some smaller things can be easily understood (but maybe that's not the stuff that causes the cluster to be on fire). Also, IMO at least one person should have reviewed the stuff, and therefore be at least a little bit knowledgeable about what's going on.
by petralithic | 2025-11-11 21:50:17+00:00
Exactly, these two sentences seem at first related,

> No deadlines, minimal coordination, and no managers telling you what to do.

> In return, we ask for extraordinarily high ownership and the ability to get a lot done by yourself.

but can be insidious if implemented incorrectly. High ownership to do what you want, but what happens if what you decide goes against the goals of the manager or the company itself? No company can succeed without at least some sort of overarching goal structure, from which employees will naturally avail and seek to benefit themselves.
by stavros | 2025-11-11 21:50:18+00:00
Hm yeah, there isn't really much space for the module, huh. One idea would be to cut the PCB and use castellated edges to solder the module to, which will make it thinner by one PCB height, but it'll be tricky.

Plus, it looks like your module has multiple rows of pads, but I'm not sure about that.
by brightball | 2025-11-11 21:51:00+00:00
> really no rational basis for disagreement

If you want to have a good faith version of this conversation, I've seen many people have voiced rational concerns and be shouted down because people simply don't want to hear it.

Primary example - Many parents, including myself, made sure our kids got every single one of their vaccines...but we wanted to avoided giving more than 2 per month so we altered the schedule slightly.

Fully vaccinated, just took a simple precaution that put our minds at ease.

The number of people who will call you "antivax" for that, for simply questioning the dosing schedule and taking a minor precaution is shocking. And that's what really made all of this so much worse.

Nobody that I saw, prior to the Covid vax at least, questioned whether or not vaccines did what they said they do. People just question whether sometimes there can be side effects. The answer to that is obviously yes. There are vaccine courts and people have been awarded lots of money from them. So the next rational question that anyone would ask is..."If there can sometimes be side effects, in what circumstances are they likely? Are there any precautions that can be taken if we can identify what those circumstances may be?"

It's no different than if somebody is lactose intolerant, has a gluten allergy or a peanut allergy. Some people are predisposed not to respond well to conditions that many of us have no issue with.

That's not a rational basis for disagreeing on the efficacy of vaccines themselves. It is a rational basis to ask about the conditions that can create unintended side effects; we already know they are happening. Denying that is irrational on its own...so why not have the conversation?
by stevage | 2025-11-11 21:51:02+00:00
This is a fun piece, though I definitely don't agree with it for the teams I have been in.

OP seems to assume that code is better than no code. Often this has not been true, and collaboration has either pointed out that a feature already existed, or was a bad idea. So in this metaphor, it stopped the driver...from driving to a bad place.
by equinoxnemesis | 2025-11-11 21:51:54+00:00
I think it's saying there's more microplastics in unhealthy than healthy tissue is all, your interpretation is technically possible but phrasing it that way would be so misleading as to basically be lying.

The reason more microplastics in unhealthy tissue doesn't necessarily mean microplastics cause unhealthy tissue is that unhealthy tissue would be worse at removing substances irrespective of whether the substances cause the harm.
by tigershen23 | 2025-11-11 21:52:01+00:00
Any thoughts on the temperature of plastics? Looks like a takeout container at 95C (soup, for example) can release 50% more particles than at 50C [1], but how much of overall ingestion comes from this source? Several friends of mine avoid takeout for this reason, is that rational?

[1] https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2025/an/d4an0137...
by dang | 2025-11-11 21:52:32+00:00
Please don't hijack competitors' Show HNs to promote your own thing. A single mention is arguably ok, but beyond that it gets too be too much, especially when related accounts are involved or it crosses into multiple threads.

Also, please don't use HN primarily for promotion in general. This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
by TacticalCoder | 2025-11-11 21:52:40+00:00
$5 electric anti-mosquito "tennis" rackets.

I'd install a device if there existed one: say something 2 meters high from the ground that can throw lasers but only on the vertical part of the wall (so above human eye level). A high res camera. Detect mosquito: fire laser.

These little fuckers shall, invariably, fly and land on the upper part of the various walls.

Maybe just a wide (say 2 feet / 60 cm) dual-sided tape: I'd tape happily that to the upper part of the walls in my room. Mosquitoes are bound to land there.

I agree it's insane we're in 2025 and this hasn't been solved yet. The company to solve the mosquito issue is going to be richer than NVidia.

Just invent these things: I'll buy them all. Just as I bought several of these anti-mosquito electric rackets and they're honestly a godsend compared to the "roll a magazine and try to squish the mosquito" from my youth.
by shirro | 2025-11-11 21:53:11+00:00
It could have been. The platform got taken over by a very different culture and has tended to serve different purposes.

The web solves problems that are almost impossible to properly solve with a terminal, particularly with rendering of more complicated languages and display and interaction with sophisticated visualisations.

Pushing the terminal further while maintaining compatibility, performance and avoiding a terminal war with incompatible protocols is going to be a struggle.
by xrd | 2025-11-11 21:53:13+00:00
I wrote a book about GitHub a while back. I interviewed a bunch of GitHub engineers. One comment was really fascinating: at least some teams required the engineer to write up an empty PR (with zero code) about how they were going to do things before writing any code. The team would need to sign off on that PR before any "work" was done. Can anyone describe that in any way other than collaboration? But, that's really smart collaboration and not in progress collaboration.

Getting things done is an important metric.

Getting the right things done is much harder to measure and I think the hive mind helps a lot with this.

If you have good writing skills and can communicate well about what you are working on, feedback and collaboration can be fast and effective. And, is the only barrier to tunnel vision. You cannot be a good engineer without some kind of self absorbed focus on a problem, and you can easily lose sight of the forest in the trees when doing that. Without collaboration it is unlikely you can pull yourself at the optimal time.

"Perseverance bias" or "sunk cost fallacy" and "cognitive entrenchment" are not mentioned in the article, but they should have been.

We've lost focus on the importance of good writing skills and good communication skills. AI is going to make that so much worse. If you can effectively communicate in progress tasks, many of the collaboration problems described here can be avoided.
by halflife | 2025-11-11 21:53:27+00:00
I’m not quite sure. I think that adversarial network works pretty well at image generation.

I think that the problem here is that svg is structured information and an image is unstructured blob, and the translation between them requires planning and understanding. Maybe if instead of treating an svg like a raster image in the prompt is wrong. I think that prompting the image like code (which svg basically is) would result in better outputs.

This is just my uninformed opinion.
by lenerdenator | 2025-11-11 21:53:27+00:00
Because they are making more money in profit than some mid-sized American cities' economies do in a year while contributing nothing back. If they don't want massive security vulnerabilities in their services using FFmpeg, maybe they need to pony up about .1 seconds' worth of their quarterly earnings to the project either in cash or in manpower.

It's not FFmpeg's problem if someone uses a vulnerability to pwn YouTube, it's Google's problem.

Also, in the article, they mention that Google's using AI to look for bugs and report them, and one of them that it found was a problem in the code that handles the rendering of a few frames of a game from 1995. That sort of slop isn't helping anyone. It's throwing the signal-to-noise ratio of the bug filings way the hell off.
by petralithic | 2025-11-11 21:53:40+00:00
> Every delivered feature is a liability not an asset.

> If you don’t believe me, consider two products that make customers equally happy and one has half as many moving parts. Which one is more profitable to maintain?

Wrong analogy, use the word feature in both emphasized terms. Consider two products and one has half as many features, which is more profitable to maintain? Well, it depends whether people are paying for the other half of the feature set or not, as oftentimes people will pay for more features than fewer.
by hinkley | 2025-11-11 21:54:00+00:00
I’m shocked this title is coming from a PostHog employee but more shocked that is seems to be relating not his experiences but a shared one. But as I read I quickly noticed a problem.

Charles isn’t describing Collaboration.

He’s describing people being voluntold to seek validation from other people. That is politicking and blame diffusion and has fuck-all to do with collaboration.

Collaboration is a small number of people reaching a consensus on a thing, understanding how and why the decisions were made, and executing on those decisions. All of these things are necessities in a 24/7 operation. You need a bus number on everything and how are you going to get a bus number without collaboration? It can be done but it’s slow. Often painfully so.
by sethammons | 2025-11-11 21:54:04+00:00
This is simply an awful thought piece and is wrongheaded.

The problem is not collaboration nor feedback. It is the lack of a decider. Deciding by committee is a bad way to run as an org grows. Collaboration is still key.

One person needs to be the person who decides. Decides what? That is the trick. The further down you push decision making, the faster things go. But someone is the decider, not a group.
by romanhn | 2025-11-11 21:54:16+00:00
The author talks about having a clear bias for action (a great thing!) but in the process throws the baby out with the bathwater. Without collaboration you'll end up with silos, overconfident decision-makers, and all sorts of preventable production issues, all in the name of avoiding the dirty C word. How about following the approach of pragmatism and finding a solid middle ground that achieves the best results longterm? I suppose that doesn't tell a great story in company all-hands and corporate blog posts.

On the bias for action front, one trick a previous company implemented that worked wonders was stating (in Slack, meeting, whatever): "I'm planning to do X, any strong objections?". The strong objection part generally dissuaded most lazy bike shedding, especially if paired with "do you really feel strongly about it". Of course if people do, then you have a discussion, but most of the time it's a thumbs up and off you go.