MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Weves | 2025-11-25 16:02:40+00:00
Some of the key differences:

1/ large connector suite + good RAG. Answers at scale is hard, and from our enterprise search roots, we've spent a lot of time with it. It's something that many teams expect from their chat UI.

2/ deep research + open-source code interpreter.

3/ simpler UX. LibreChat has a lot of customizability exposed front and center to the user, which is great for the power user but can be overwhelming for someone new to using AI systems.
by hedora | 2025-11-25 16:02:42+00:00
The sigils in Rust (and perl) are there to aid readability. After you use it a bit, you get used to ignoring them unless they look weird.

All the python programs I've had to maintain (I never choose python) have had major maintainability problems due to python's clean looking syntax. I can still look at crazy object oriented perl meta-programming stuff I wrote 20 years ago, and figure out what it's doing.

Golang takes another approach: They impoverished the language until it didn't need fancy syntax to be unambiguously readable. As a workaround, they heavily rely on codegen, so (for instance) Kubernetes is around 2 million lines of code. The lines are mostly readable (even the machine generated ones), but no human is going to be able to read them at the rate they churn.

Anyway, pick your poison, I guess, but there's a reason Rust attracts experienced systems programmers.
by twistedpair | 2025-11-25 16:02:50+00:00
That one stumped me. Why not just encrypt with a hardcoded public key, then only the attacker can get the creds.

The simple B64 encoding didn't hide these creds from anyone, so every vendor out there's security team can collect them (e.g. thinking big clouds, GitHub, etc) and disable them.

If you did a simple encryption pass, no one but you would know what was stolen, or could abuse/sell it. My best guess is that calling node encryption libs might trigger code scanners, or EDRs, or maybe they just didn't care.
by jschorr | 2025-11-25 16:02:53+00:00
I'd start with reading the Zanzibar Paper. We built an annotated version [1] that provides additional guidance on some of the denser sections and how we interpreted them.

Then, I'd take a look at the history of SpiceDB [2] for how we developed the system over time.

Finally, if you have any questions, feel free to jump into our Discord [3] and ask: we're happy to answer!

[1]: https://zanzibar.tech/ [2]: https://spicedb.io [3]: https://discord.gg/spicedb
Show HN: Romforth Ported to the IBM 1130
by romforth | 2025-11-25 16:03:34+00:00
romforth is a dialect of Forth which is meant to be easily portable.

The IBM 1130 holds a special place in Forth history since it was one of the earliest systems on which Chuck Moore prototyped his initial versions of Forth.

I wanted to retrace Chuck Moore's footsteps as he created Forth on the IBM 1130 and decided to try porting romforth to the IBM 1130 (using the excellent SIMH/ibm1130 simulator available from https://github.com/open-simh/simh)
by neilv | 2025-11-25 16:03:50+00:00
Does anyone else feel odd skimming real HN this morning, noticing how similar it is to the LLM regurgitation and some archetypes?

BTW, one archetype that I didn't see in the simulation: Angry Affluent White Male. Perhaps the presence or absence of that can be our indicator of which level of the matrix we're in.
by Zak | 2025-11-25 16:03:51+00:00
I've certainly run into websites that were doing something nonstandard and my browser of choice didn't work as intended. Sometimes when I've complained to the site operator, they've told me that browser isn't supported.

I can (and have) told them they should build to web standards rather than specific browsers, but they're only motivated to care if it impacts a large enough percentage of users.

So markets determine the outcome even when standards exist.
by mothballed | 2025-11-25 16:03:53+00:00
Yes that model has been inverted.

The family used to tax the grown or mostly-grown children in the form of farm labor. The government in many prior centuries taxed like 2-5% total and the rest was intrafamilial support.

Now it is flipped on its head. Everyone else's families tax your child for their social security, socializing the benefits while still you retain most the costs privately.

Thus tragedy of the commons situation. Why make that investment when you can just tax everyone else's kids and rest assured of your own social security, if they don't pay it you can just have them tossed in a cage or their assets seized, no need to have children yourself.
by hylaride | 2025-11-25 16:03:57+00:00
I'll answer because some people are probably genuinely curious to some of these.

> 1. What happened to the deadly radioactivity?

It mostly decayed out. Generally speaking, 8 half-lives mean that it's essentially decayed to "gone". High-level atmospheric tests usually cause it to spread out and depending on wind patterns can dissipate enough to be essentially harmless - though with precision instruments you can measure the differences throughout the whole world. Steel from shipwrecks from before the first explosion can be desirable for some of this equipment.

With explosions closer to or below ground level, there can be longer-lasting elements baked into the ground, like Trinitite (a green glass like material) that can have trace amounts of cesium-137, with a half-life of 30 years, which going by the 8 times rule means that it'll be "dangerous" for ~240 years.

Also the type of bomb matters to what is left behind. A uranium bomb will leave different radioactive byproducts than a plutonium bomb.

To break it down to layman terms, nuclear explosions are also designed to emit energy extremely fast, meaning the radioactive chain reaction "burns" through elements very fast. This is different that the fuel in a nuclear reactor, which is designed to burn hot and slow, meaning there are more longer-lasting byproducts left over and why Chernobyl is a no go zone for thousands of years, but we can live in Hiroshima.

Most of the cancers that happened were from people downwind from the explosion. Most of these elements that caused the cancers and sicknesses decayed away within a couple of years.

> 2. Would exploding the equivalent amount of TNT look exactly the same?

No. It wouldn't produce anywhere near the amount of heat/light. The TNT equivalent is usually used to measure the destructive force equivalent of the explosion.

> 3. Would USA fake having a single bomb that destroys an entire city?

The US may "fake" having a number operating bombs ready, etc. But obviously there's no need to fake it as the US destroyed 2 cities at the end of world war 2 and exploded hundreds of test bombs since.

> 4. What happened to the deadly radioactivity in Japan?

The bombs dropped were exploded high in the atmosphere to spread the explosive force of the bombs. Most of the radioactive material was carried away by the winds and/or had a short half-life. Most radioactive material from the bombs decayed away and there is no longer a statistically significant higher risk of cancer in either Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

> 5. What is carpet bombing?

It's when you have a fleet of bombers drop massive amounts of traditional bombs on a city, as was done to Germany and Japan during world war 2 (and by the Germans to a few cities like Rotterdam).

> 6. Would USA fake having a single bomb that destroys an entire city?

Same as question 3.
by dredmorbius | 2025-11-25 16:04:07+00:00
Gregory Clark's A Farewell to Alms is among the books that discusses this.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Farewell_to_Alms>

Cities simply could not grow without net in-migration until the development of sewerage, municipal waste removal, fresh-water systems, and public health in general.

Another favourite illustration, "The Conquest of Pestilence in New York City", showing the overall decline in mortality from 1800 to present:

<https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uTWEATUzgxk/TXQoTibILtI/AAAAAAAAA...>

From: <https://economicspsychologypolicy.blogspot.com/2011/03/conqu...>

Note that for all the vaunted advances of 20th century medicine, the needle hardly moved at all from 1920 through 1990, and mortality increased from 1950 -- 1970. There has been substantial improvement from 1990 through 2000.
by kropot7 | 2025-11-25 16:04:22+00:00
WwwylyMowwDEmowwwyLowow64parOSpirayTSingooNowwnoWoEUsinQwertyoReSaiAS2en2nueroWwwyld*laiCookooBayseFromENai mcontent rawTar7&&syphaDEphANgolENgoLashRUqruDescryptLANgoWwwai!
by luxcem | 2025-11-25 16:05:32+00:00
The whole issue, as clearly explained by the maintainers, isn't that the code is incorrect or not useful, it's the transfer of the burden of maintaining this large codebase to someone else. Basically: “I have this huge AI-generated pile of code that I haven't fully read, understood, or tested. Could you review, maintain, and fix it for me?”
by hvs | 2025-11-25 16:05:49+00:00
You certainly don't need to have someone in your life -- as someone who married late and has two kids now I sometimes look back on my long period of begin single with fondness -- but I would also recommend being very honest with yourself. Very few people are totally undesirable and expecting others to meet some predetermined standard is very common among people that don't interact socially very often (I speak from experience). While I'm lucky that my wife is very bright (and in many ways much smarter than me) the most important thing that she has given me is new perspectives on life and seeing that it's more important to be kind and helpful than smart.

It's very hard to see outside of our early conditioning without outside perspectives. We may have a vague sense that we might not have been given the best tools for social development (we may even be brutally aware of it), but having someone that has the skills that we are missing is often more important than that they have equal skills in areas we are strong in. Having a good partner can make you realize things about yourself and open you up to things that you never even realized were there.
by xpe | 2025-11-25 16:06:05+00:00
Product lines with market sales are downstream of markets. The degree of per-product profit matters.

If you want to add “politics” to your causal map, that’s fine too. Reality is multi-factor. I do not deny that leaders make (to varying degrees) political and-or command-and-control decisions. This was already baked into the conversational context. Please take the conversational history into account.
by wrsh07 | 2025-11-25 16:06:21+00:00
> There's a really big trend you're missing by focusing on old anecdotes.

We're talking about the same trend: the transformation of the publishing industry across all different types of media.

I'm not missing it. I'm paying attention to the context of this transformation and what it implies for all of the participants, not just individuals.

The point I was making in my original post is that an author in the 80s did not have the same options as a creator today. You have repeatedly responded by talking about how creators today have so much power.

Please, go read a piece about the smiling curve from Ben Thompson, because it's important. This trend implies that margins accrue to the two ends of the spectrum. Yes, individuals with low costs win, but also there is another side to the smiling curve. While life can be good as a YouTuber, TikTok, Meta, and Google are not taking risks on content like the publishers of old but they still reap the profits from media production. It is the creators who now bear the risks.

This also means that the traditional mechanisms of funding your book through an advance are fundamentally different (they exist, yes, but they're different)

And because the smiling curve implies a hollowing out of the middle, it is harder to survive as small publisher (see the transformation and aggregation of magazines, newspapers, tv stations)

Am I excited about this future? Yes! But it's not an unmitigated good. And one can't understand it if they don't know any of the historical context or see what's happening to other players in the industry
by orwin | 2025-11-25 16:06:31+00:00
I know the author make good point, i know it is unjust, i know individuals are bad at predicting risk and are pushed by culture and peer pressure into those "get rich quick" schemes, i know unregulated markets are predatory.

Intellectually, i should agree with the author here (minus a last point [0]).

And yet emotionally, i just can't care. They made their bed, they lie in it is my honest gut feeling. I know it's unjust, i just can't stop myself.

[0] That kind of "only available by gambling" skins were getting regulated out of existence soon, Valve just took a step before getting called out publicly. Anybody in the CSGO legendary skin market should have seen it coming. It was talked about in Brussels in 2019, and when Riot game made the Arcane skin only available by gambling but "if you gamble enough (500€ i think), you automatically get this skin" was a pretty clear warning shot.
by wavemode | 2025-11-25 16:06:44+00:00
> decades of industry experience have shown that the governing principles of even modern C++ make it incredibly hard (expensive) to deliver high quality software

How can "decades of experience" show the deficiencies of Modern C++, which was invented in 2011?

If you've worked on a project built entirely on the technologies and principles of modern C++, and found that it caused your software to be low-quality, then by all means share those experiences. C++ has no shortage of problems, there is no doubt. But hand-waving about "decades" of nondescript problems other people have had with older C++ versions, is somewhat of a lazy dismissal of the article's central thesis.
by ImPostingOnHN | 2025-11-25 16:06:54+00:00
> First off, what I stated is a view held by reputable scholars such as Noam Chomsky, Jeffrey Sachs, and John Mearsheimer

You have named 3 people out of 8 billion alive, so 0.00000004%. That doesn't sound like a consensus, or even a majority. It sounds like 3 dudes saying a thing.

> The timeline is: 2007 Putin’s Munich speech warning against NATO expansion to Eastern Europe...

So as far back as 2007, we have recordings of putin threatening other countries against exercising their sovereign rights, in violation of international law. Not great for russia.

Unfortunately for the world, the timeline starts far before that, with russian invasions and annexations of their neighbors. If we look further back, we see russian genocide of Ukrainians during the holodomor. If we look even further back, we see russian ethnic cleansing of Ukrainian Tatars.

Based on this history, and the admissions of russian officials, we can conclude that russia just wants what Ukraine has, and hates Ukrainians for saying no.
by jswelker | 2025-11-25 16:07:12+00:00
The productivity gains go to:

- an ever increasing standard of living

- stonks go up to prevent a pensioner revolt and to inflate egos of billionaires

We are kind of equivocating about "the grind" though. There is the grind of a student keeping their heads in books and activities while friends play video games or party or whatever. This grind has a light at the end of the tunnel in the form of obvious graduation dates and similar rites of passage.

Then there is the grind of working at McDonalds or Walmart because that is the only opportunity left to you, and that is a grind that might easily go on forever unless you win the hunger games and get into a management track rat race.
by libraryofbabel | 2025-11-25 16:07:22+00:00
It is one of the most striking things that makes life in the premodern past so unimaginably different from today. To be a parent was to suffer continuous tragedy. An example: Queen Anne of Great Britain (1665-1714). She was pregnant 18 times, and not one of her pregnancies resulted in an adult child to inherit her throne. Miscarriages, stillbirths, and five children born alive. Four died in infancy from various causes. One, Prince William Duke of Gloucester, lived to age 11, when he died of an infectious disease - probably smallpox. His death was one of the key events that led to the House of Hannover (the current British royal family) inheriting the throne in 1714.

Smallpox probably killed about a billion people, many of them children, before its eradication in the 1970s due to a global vaccination campaign. You can see it is listed in the Bills of Mortality in TFA, always with a high number of deaths.
by TurkTurkleton | 2025-11-25 16:07:23+00:00
Hi, American here and "how" + "to look like" makes my teeth itch. However, people generally find grammar corrections to be needlessly pedantic when the erroneous grammar does not impede comprehension, so I've personally decided to choose my grammatical battles and simply fume about people talking about "how something looks like" in private instead.
by Weves | 2025-11-25 16:08:01+00:00
Agree that's a lot of other projects out there, but why do you say the Vercel option is more advanced/mature?

The common trend we've seen is that most of these other projects are okay for a true "just send messages to an AI and get responses" use case, but for most things beyond that they fall short / there a lot of paper cuts.

For an individual, this might show up when they try more complex tasks that require multiple tool calls in sequence or when they have a research task to accomplish. For an org, this might show up when trying to manage access to assistants / tools / connected sources.

Our goal is to make sure Onyx is the most advanced and mature option out there. I think we've accomplished that, so if there's anything missing I'd love to hear about it.
by paganel | 2025-11-25 16:08:11+00:00
> violence, feminism and racism. She sneers down on Roman notions of virtue and patriarchy.

Which is a very anachronistic way of looking at things and very unscholarly, too bad, I really wanted to get into her books. I guess the Protestant moralism and virtue-signalling got to her (there are exceptions to this, especially in the German world, but it is my impression that the Anglos never really fully adopted the Romans and the Roman worldview, and I'm including Gibbon in here).
Show HN: Email Verifier CLI/Library
by hazzadous | 2025-11-25 16:08:43+00:00
friend and i were curious what's actually involved in email verification services like usebouncer.com. turns out the basics aren't that complicated.

vibe coded a simple npm package in (mostly) one shot that does:

- syntax validation

- mx record lookup

- smtp mailbox check (without sending emails)

- catch-all domain detection

npx email-reachable user@example.com

https://github.com/yolodex-ai/reachable

works as a library too:

import { verifyEmail } from 'email-reachable' const result = await verifyEmail('user@example.com')

bouncer probably does way more, feedback welcome.
by yoyohello13 | 2025-11-25 16:08:52+00:00
> It seems to me that we ought to have a system-level language which builds upon the learnings of the past 20+ years

I mean, Rust does. I builds on 20+ years of compiler and type system advancements. Then Syntax is verbose if you include all then things you can possibly do. If you stick to the basics it's pretty similar to most other languages. Hell, I'd say a lot of syntax Rust is similar to type-hinted Python.

Having said that, comparing a GC'd dynamic language to a systems programming language just isn't a fair comparison. When you need to be concerned about memory allocation you just need more syntax.
by aprilthird2021 | 2025-11-25 16:08:57+00:00
> It is a little absurd that we expect an 18 year old to navigate the world with the same competence as a 40 year old.

I don't think it is. 18 year olds are smarter than most people give them credit for. They probably know math better than most 40 year olds just given their adjacency to math practice in school.
by vacuity | 2025-11-25 16:09:26+00:00
I can't speak for everyone, or even the majority, but I know that oftentimes large projects focus on build times, undergoing refactorings as you describe, and their compile times are still high. To make up some numbers, maybe the fraction of projects that have unacceptable compile times could be reduced from 80% to 40% (at what effort?), but that 40% remainder probably includes many large, popular crates.
by nradov | 2025-11-25 16:09:34+00:00
It's always been financially complicated for most people. The notion of a nuclear family prospering with a single income was mostly only possible for a limited slice of the US population during a few decades post-WWII. If you take a broader historical view that was a brief anomaly.

And it's really weird that anyone would think of something amorphous and uncertain like climate change as a reason not to have children. Even the unlikely worst case scenarios are still going to have less impact than the major wars and plagues that our species has lived through. Some people just lack a sense of perspective.
by Fire-Dragon-DoL | 2025-11-25 16:09:39+00:00
Just a heads up, the female brain changes are reverted 1 year after giving birth (that's what the health professionals told us). They also discovered that the male brain changes too.

I felt way more empathetic during the first year my son and my daughter were born, but I feel like I lost that part of me. I kinda miss it
by pbohun | 2025-11-25 16:10:09+00:00
The first Go proverb Rob Pike listed in his talk "Go Proverbs" was, "Don't communicate by sharing memory, share memory by communicating."

Go was designed from the beginning to use Tony Hoare's idea of communicating sequential processes for designing concurrent programs.

However, like any professional tool, Go allows you to do the dangerous thing when you absolutely need to, but it's disappointing when people insist on using the dangerous way and then blame it on the language.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAAkCSZUG1c
by pyridines | 2025-11-25 16:10:19+00:00
Animal intelligence is often underestimated, (e.g. there's a famous test that shows that chimpanzee working memory is better than ours) but our use of language is qualitatively different from other animals. Some animals have rudimentary communication, but no other animal is capable (as far as we know) of recursive, infinitely variable language structure like us.
by jewayne | 2025-11-25 16:10:53+00:00
> Many of the parents I know are deeply and profoundly unhappy.

As a childless person, I believe this is a societal problem, not a biological one. We've broken apart the tribe and made just two people (at most) responsible for most of child rearing. And worse, we pretend the parents are directly responsible for a child's safety and development at all times, even though we all know some kids are just way easier or harder to raise, right out of the box.
by TheGamerUncle | 2025-11-25 16:11:00+00:00
>I am not the kind of person who thinks AI will replace actors blah blah blah. But I am glad these tools exist, because this video wouldn’t exist without AI.

>In no world would I ever have put together a real cast and crew to remake a 15 year old inside joke video for Googlers, but I was able to make it with AI.

BUT IT DID !! and part of the charm is that this involved real people talking, mutual understanding and a shared culture. That world existed it can still exist unless we surrender to the depravity of conformity and comfortability.
by jandrese | 2025-11-25 16:11:05+00:00
I think Perl-esque is apt, but that's because I've done quite a bit of Perl and think the syntax concerns are overblown. Once you get past the sigils on the variables Perl's syntax is generally pretty straightforward, albeit with a few warts in places like almost every language. The other area where people complained about Perl's opaqueness was the regular expressions, which most languages picked up anyway because people realized just how useful they are.
by juliangmp | 2025-11-25 16:11:16+00:00
This is a real problem but I wouldn't blame the existence of good tooling on it. Sure you don't have this issue with C or C++, but thats because adding even a single dependency to a C or C++ project sucks, the tooling sucks.

I wholly blame developers who are too eager to just pull new dependencies in when they could've just written 7 lines themselves.