MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by troupo | 2025-11-20 09:37:07+00:00
> However, this generation is beginning to learn

"This generation" lol. I'm 45.

What I'm learning that this generation will find way to justify any and all activity by any and all industries using any number of logical leaps and non-sequiturs, and will fight any way to make the world even a slightly better place because "low-birth and non-0 interest rate" or something. Or that 15000 invasive trackers have to keep my precise geolocation data for 12 years because "scarcity".
by masfoobar | 2025-11-20 09:37:09+00:00
> but circumstances beyond my control ended up throwing me into the deep end a lot quicker than I expected

As a Linux user since 2006/7, I totally understand. I had atleast 1 computer at home that would dual-boot to either Windows or Linux. Regardless, I had to have a Windows system.

My reasons may not be the same as yourself - but I do still get stuck and HAVE to use Windows from time-to-time. It's not just for playing games or work related. It's sometimes a simple file I have to download, fill in and email back. The file is likely a Microsoft Excel or Word file and while OpenOffice/LibreOffice is good most of the time, there is bound to be something off.

Sometimes my kids will have homework (going back a few years now) and it would only work on Internet Explorer despite the fact Chrome was dominant back then.

(I remember, back in 2008, I would ensure the websites I created had decent support for Firefox as well as Internet Explorer, despite my boss telling me "everyone uses Internet Explorer" - that soon changed by 2010 with Chrome)

Thing is these problems are not the fault of Linux, or the Office suite, or the web browsers. The problem was the people using files specific to a brand, or focusing on specific web browser, etc. However, many people wont view it like that. In these scenarios.. Linux was the problem.

I always remember writing my Resumes for recruitment agencies. I would hand over it is 3 formats. ODT, PDF, and DOCX. I did this because I was not sure how the DOCX version would look on Microsoft Word. Of course, it looked great in Open/Libre Office.

I always encouraged the PDF version.

> I'm really enjoying Linux. It's one of those things that makes me somewhat passionate about computing for the first time in a long time.

100%!
by tcfhgj | 2025-11-20 09:37:51+00:00
> Element X has a single field, that supposedly takes both passphrases and recovery keys, but if I enter the recovery key I'm directed to a "Verify with another verified device" screen, even if I had logged out from all other sessions.

I have just tried this on Android.

I am directed to

1) "Device verified - Now you can read or send messages securely, and ... - [Continue]"

2) "Help improve Element X ... [OK] [Not now]"

3) list of chats

Element X Android fyi. No problems logging in using Firefox.
by buggi23 | 2025-11-20 09:38:07+00:00
To add to this, there's a great set of resources by Joe Pasquale explaining the mathematical theory behind how various functions can be computed by slide rules:

* https://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~pasquale/Classes/SlideRule/

* Mathematical Foundations of the Slide Rule (PDF): https://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~pasquale/Papers/IM11.pdf

* Why Does A Slide Rule Work? (PDF): https://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~pasquale/SlideRuleTalkLasVegas14.pd...

The gist of it is:

1. First, define a way to represent any univariate monotonic function f(x) on a graduated scale. (Specifically: select a discrete set of x values, and for each of these x values, place a mark with label x at a distance proportional to (f(x) - f(x_L)) from the left endpoint, where x_L is the leftmost x value.)

2. Then, if we have two such scales f(x) and g(x) that can slide relative to each other, we can compute functions of the form h(x, y, z) = f_inverse(f(x) + g(y) - g(z)).

It ends up being surprisingly versatile -- the above resources show how you can compute:

1. Multiplication: x * y using f(x) = log(x) and g(y) = log(y), with z fixed at 1

2. Hypotenuse: sqrt(x^2 + y^2) using f(x) = x^2 and g(y) = y^2, with z fixed at 0

3. Parallel resistors: 1/(1/x + 1/y) using f(x) = 1/x and g(y) = 1/y, with z fixed at +infinity

4. Exponentiation: x^(y/z) using f(x) = log(log(x)) and g(y) = log(y)
by aswegs8 | 2025-11-20 09:38:08+00:00
While I think that is true and this thread here is about senior productivity switching to LLMs, I can say from my experience that our juniors absolutely crush it using LLMs. They have to do pretty demanding and advanced stuff from the start and they are using LLMs nonstop. Not sure how that translates into long term learning but it definitely increases their output and makes them competent-enough developers to contribute right away.
by defrost | 2025-11-20 09:38:32+00:00
Notepad++ (popular with some on Windows) does optional Byte Order Marks on text files (subtitles, bash scripts, anything UTF-8 etc).

Not my editor of choice but some swear by it and are prone to work cross platform across NAS's and SSH terminals with either windows or some *nix as 'primary' work space.

I'm sure other editors have this as an option, the time I ran into BOM issues I traced it back to the use of Notepad++ by a third party.
by lenkite | 2025-11-20 09:40:32+00:00
I like the article's theme. Coding in Rust does indeed suck brain-power and even after 2 years of off-and-on attempts, I am still faster (and less tired) in other languages (including C++). But the LLM generated text is just deeply pissing me off, sorry. Why use snarky LLM slop here ? Use straightforward, ordinary human-developer language for this.
by jacquesm | 2025-11-20 09:41:02+00:00
Sure, but that's exactly where it fails: that oversight. So you end up with all of this data in the hands that you least want to have it, and never mind the criminals that gain access to it in the inevitable data leaks and then all of that data gets used against you.

There is zero correlation between these cameras being installed or not and crime incidence rates or the number of cases solved.

Ironically, what did reduce crime - considerably so, even - was COVID. But I don't see anybody arguing for a curfew to reduce crime either.
by johnisgood | 2025-11-20 09:42:13+00:00
I agree with this, but not the rest. It is not a security vulnerability, and I am not sure it being a privacy-sensitive endpoint either. Like someone pointed out, if you check one of your contacts and they have WhatsApp, you can tell, and you can message them from there. This is a feature.

I agree that there should be rate limiting of some sort.
by daotoad | 2025-11-20 09:42:14+00:00
I think you're right about the significance of PHP.

PHP kicked Perl's butt in the shared web-hosting environment.

You could do amazing stuff with mod_perl, but it was not possible to run a shared host with mod_perl without exposing every customer to every other customer's code. You could still do cool stuff with vanilla CGIs. Perl was practically synonymous with CGI back in the day. Once you grew past what a simple CGI would handle, it suddenly got a lot harder and a lot more expensive.

Meanwhile, PHP had simple Perl-like syntax and ran nicely in shared hosting. Better yet, you didn't have to choose from one of the 400 different Perl templating systems. No need to choose between TemplateToolkit, HTML::Mason, or Embperl. You just used the standard, built in templating.

PHP won because it was worse, you didn't have the power or choice Perl provided, but it was more than good enough and it was cheaper to grow with.

On Perl vs Python: - Perl was weird and proud of it, it promised creative power and flexibility - Python promised regularity and clear rules

- Perl tried to make hard things easy - Python tried to make routine things routine

- Perl had weird primitives that let you build whatever magical OO nonsense you wanted. - Python supported writing glorified struct OO that was fashionable at the time

- Perl was difficult to integrate with C libraries - Pyton integrated much more easily with C libraries

That being said, I like Perl much more than Python. Using Perl still feels magical, even if some of the syntax is odd. Using Python feels like I have my shoes on the wrong feet.
by Yokohiii | 2025-11-20 09:44:05+00:00
I don't think this is an error originating from a single human. At CF scale I'd expect that multiple humans saw that code and gave it a pass. Rust or not, but an experienced dev could have seen this can lead to issues. Panicking without restoring a healthy state is just not an option in this case. They *know* that.

I guess you are right, likely a social issue, but certainly not a single exhausted parent.
by npteljes | 2025-11-20 09:44:14+00:00
I'm sure there's a lot they could do, but I think even is the worst scenarios, SteamOS would still be a vibrant indie platform, with many major releases from studios who dgaf about Microsoft specifically.

We'll see for sure, especially if the Gabecube sells well. Right now, SteamOS is still not among the largest players, when looking at units sold. I'm sure Microsoft will ramp something up when it gets more popular.
by metalman | 2025-11-20 09:44:28+00:00
rock wool, and other names are used for basalt fibre insulation, which is quite brittle, and turns to dust with very little manipulation must be produced useing a different chemistry and process, but the same bulk feed stock, which I believe is just a certain type of foundry slag that is dumped in the millions of tons per anum range, while still molten, which is where the incentive comes from to utilise it then and there
by Validark | 2025-11-20 09:45:16+00:00
I liked the article, but I found the random remark about RISC vs CISC to be very similar to what the author is complaining about. The difference between the Apple M series and AMD's Zen series is NOT a RISC vs CISC issue. In fact, many would argue it's fair to say that ARM is not RISC and x86-64 is not CISC. These terms were used to refer to machines vastly different from what we have today, and the RISC vs CISC debate, like the LISP machine debate, really only lasted like 5 years. The fact is, we are all using out-of-order superscalar hardware where the decoder(s) of the CPU is not even close to the main thing consuming power and area on these chips. Under the hood they are all doing pretty much the same thing. But because it has a name and a marketable "war" and that people can easily understand the difference between fixed-width vs variable-width encodings, people overestimate the significance of the one part they understand compared to the internal engineering choices and process node choices that actually matter that people don't know about or understand. Unfortunately a lot of people hear the RISC vs CISC bedtime story and think there's no microcode on their M series chips.

You can go read about the real differences on sites like Chips and Cheese, but those aren't pop-sciencey and fun! It's mostly boring engineering details like the size of reorder buffers and the TSMC process node and it takes more than 5 minutes to learn. You can't just pick it up one day like a children's story with a clear conclusion and moral of the story. Just stop. If I can acquire all of your CPU microarchitecture knowledge from a Linus Tech tips video, you shouldn't have an opinion on it.

If you look at the finished product and you prefer the M series, that's great. But that doesn't mean you understand why it's different from the Zen series.
by totetsu | 2025-11-20 09:45:24+00:00
https://docs.nginx.com/nginx/admin-guide/security-controls/t...

Like let’s say you have a proxy server like Nginx on a server with a public facing ip address and then it also has access to a private subnet where your application servers are running. A visitor to your website’s browser make a secure https connection the nginx server where https would be terminated and then it would proxy traffic in plain http over your internal private subnet to the app server. And your are in a five eyes country where your intelligence services took it on themselves to follow the nsa or fbis instructions and plug a network device into those private subnets of all the big service providers inside their datacenters that is configured in something like a promiscuous way so it receives all the packets for any device on the network. Then those packets somehow end up in a big nsa datalake.. or something along those lines
by oersted | 2025-11-20 09:45:43+00:00
The thing is that it didn't work for that objective. It didn't seem to have any meaningful impact on all on the Metas and Googles out there. They control the user base and people depend on their products, it was trivial for them to get full consent like they've always done with their Terms & Conditions.

At the same time, it was a heavy burden for data-oriented EU startups like mine. I've spent a few hundred hours dealing with GDPR, it felt like it was designed to stick it to the big companies without any thought on how it would affect the rest.

And it's been a low-level but ever present friction for users.
by spwa4 | 2025-11-20 09:45:50+00:00
But ... what's missing from this comparison: Kimi-K2.

When ChatGPT-3 exploded, OpenAI had at least double the benchmark scores of any other model, open or closed. Gemini 3 Pro (not the model they actually serve) outperforms the best open model ... wait it does not uniformly beat the best open model anymore. Not even close.

Kimi-k2 beats Gemini 3 pro on several benchmarks. On average it scores just under 10% better then the best open model, currently Kimi-K2.

Gemini-3 pro is in fact only the best in about half the benchmarks tested there. In fact ... this could be another llama4 moment. The reason Gemini-3 pro is the best model is a very high score on a single benchmark ("Humanity's last exam"), if you take that benchmark out GPT-5.1 remains the best model available. The other big improvement is "SciCode", and if you take that out too the best open model, Kimi K2, beats Gemini 3 pro.

https://artificialanalysis.ai/models

And then, there's the pricing:

Kimi K2 on OpenRouter: $0.50 / M input tokens, $2.40 / M output tokens

Gemini 3 Pro: For contexts ≤ 200,000 tokens: US$ 2.00 per 1 M input tokens, Output tokens: US$ 12.00 per 1 M tokens For contexts > 200,000 tokens (long context tier): US$ 4.00 per 1 M input tokens , US$ 18.00 per 1 M output tokens

So Gemini 3 pro is 4 times, 400%, the price of the best open model (and just under 8 times, 800%, with long context), and 70% more expensive than GPT-5.1

The closed models in general, and Google specifically, serve Gemini 3 pro at double to triple the speed (as in tokens-per-second) of openrouter. Although even here it is not the best, that's openrouter with gpt-oss-120b.
by tcfhgj | 2025-11-20 09:46:08+00:00
> I tried out an alpha client once & can’t get the stupid pop-up about unverified devices to go away now.

Open app with device management (e.g. Element Desktop) and remove the unverified devices you don't intend to verify.

Regarding XMPP: With the lack of Cross Signing, key backup and consistent storage of messages, it can't be expected to provide the convenience Matrix does for the foreseeable future - just my personal opinion. The matrix-rust-sdk should it also make easy to get started with a client.
by rincebrain | 2025-11-20 09:46:29+00:00
I think what people misunderstand is that this is probably an active goal of theirs.

Similar to how Microsoft has decided there's no money to be made in console hardware and is trying to spin their Xbox brand into a software service brand they can slap on other things, I think they've decided that making a consumer OS has no money in it, and all the minmaxing of squeezing at the moment is them trying to extract the last drips of money while trying to drive people elsewhere.

I could be wrong, I'm not a journalist with sources at the company or something, but looking at it from the outside, this seems like the moves you'd make to drive people off your platform over time so you can kill it while having plausible deniability that you're not trying to do that, you definitely genuinely believe everyone wants you to opt them into everything every time you push an update.

In particular, I don't think having the kinds of enormous tire fires on update releases over this long without radical reinvestment in avoiding that happening in the future is what you do if you're trying to build something you're still dealing with another 10-20 years from now.
by palata | 2025-11-20 09:46:38+00:00
I'm guessing that in many cases, it's not one software developer who decides. Most people are told what to do, and for many websites I'm guessing that it's just some kind of Wordpress add-on.

Someone realised that they sold more add-ons if they implement those dark patterns, so they did it ("it's not me, I offer a good one but they buy the evil one"). In my experience in startups, the website was managed by marketing people who honestly had no clue: they seemed to genuinely believe that they needed those cookies ("I am in marketing, I need the data") and they did not understand the consequences. "I just install this Google thing, and then Google gives me nice data for free".

Why do people build weapons? That's a lot worse than a cookie popup, but I'm sure every single person in that industry will tell you that they "save lives".
by codeflo | 2025-11-20 09:46:45+00:00
It's easily imaginable that there are new CPU features that would help with building an efficient Java VM, if that's the CPU's primary purpose. Just from the top of my head, one might want a form of finer-grainer memory virtualization that could enable very cheap concurrent garbage collection.

But having Java bytecode as the actual instruction set architecture doesn't sound too useful. It's true that any modern processor has a "compilation step" into microcode anyway, so in an abstract sense, that might as well be some kind of bytecode. But given the high-level nature of Java's bytecode instructions in particular, there are certainly some optimizations that are easy to do in a software JIT, and that just aren't practical to do in hardware during instruction decode.

What I can imagine is a purpose-built CPU that would make the JIT's job a lot easier and faster than compiling for x86 or ARM. Such a machine wouldn't execute raw Java bytecode, rather, something a tiny bit more low-level.
Show HN: Lazygotest – Terminal UI for running Go tests interactively
by acc_10000 | 2025-11-20 09:47:05+00:00
Hi HN! I'm the creator of lazygotest. I built this because I love lazygit's UX and wanted the same smooth experience for Go testing. Instead of switching between terminal and editor, or scrolling through verbose test output, you can now: Browse packages and tests with vim-style navigation (j/k, gg/G) Run tests with Enter and watch real-time results in split panes Track test history and quickly rerun failed tests with 'r' Filter tests with '/' to focus on what matters Technical highlights: Built with tview (https://github.com/rivo/tview) for the TUI framework Catppuccin Mocha color scheme, WCAG 2.1 AA compliant for accessibility Auto-detects go.mod by walking up parent directories Supports Docker for isolated testing environments The interface has 4 panes: Packages (left), Tests (top-right), History (middle-right), and Log (bottom). The status bar shows context-sensitive keyboard shortcuts. Looking for contributors! Here are some areas where I'd love help: CI/CD integration: GitHub Actions workflow for running tests in lazygotest Benchmark mode: Support for go test -bench with visual graphs Coverage visualization: Show code coverage % per package/test Test generation: Auto-generate table-driven tests from function signatures Plugin system: Allow custom commands and key bindings If you're interested in contributing, the codebase follows Clean Architecture with clear separation between domain/application/infrastructure layers. PRs are welcome – I aim for small, focused changes (≤20 lines when possible) with tests included. I'd love to hear your feedback, especially from fellow gophers who spend a lot of time running tests! Install: go install -tags tview github.com/YuminosukeSato/lazygotest/cmd/lazygotest@latest
by 0xCE0 | 2025-11-20 09:47:25+00:00
I know what you mean by charting/mapping the problems and their solution. But I think/feel this method doesn't work anymore, it feels like "2012-2022 world". How can one sell something that doesn not exist even by the seller? You are selling just the idea, not the implementation. Of course that could lead deal also, but it's more of people-to-people trust/business, than about real existing products.

And now in the "post-AI" reality, trusting anything people sell is hard.
by ErroneousBosh | 2025-11-20 09:47:56+00:00
> I'm hearing more and more people outside the tech world talk about the AI bubble, and predicting it's going to pop

I'm juuust about old enough to remember the end of the Lisp Machine bubble (we had one or two at uni in the early 90s, and they were archaic by then). But obviously Lisp machines were the wrong way to go, even if they were a necessary step - obviously, hardware-mediated permanent object storage is the way forwards! POP! Ah, maybe not. Okay but can't you see we need to run all this on a massive transputer plane? POP! Oh. Okay how about this, we actually treat the microcode as the machine language, so the user-facing opcodes are like 256 bits long, and then we translate other instruction sets into that on the fly, like this - the Transmeta Crusoe! It's going to revolutionise everything! POP! Ah, what? Okay well how about...

And we're only up to the early 2000s.

It's bubbles, all the way back. Many of these things were indeed necessary steps - if only so We Learned Not To Do That Again - but ultimately are a footnote in history.

In 30 years' time people will have blog posts about how in the mid-2020s people had this thing where they used huge sheds full of graphics cards to run not-working-properly Boolean algebra to generate page after page after page of pictures of wonky-looking dogs and Santa Clauses, and we'll look at that with the same bemused nostalgia as we do with the line printer Snoopy calendars today.
by aaronmdjones | 2025-11-20 09:47:57+00:00
> and file lookup through $PATH (which is not done by the kernel, maybe it's some shell trickery)

It's libc. Specifically, system(3) and APIs like execvp(3) will search $PATH for the file specified before passing that to execve(2) (which is the only kernel syscall; all the other exec*() stuff is in libc).
by gwd | 2025-11-20 09:48:35+00:00
> There is a prevailing mentality that LLMs make it easy to become productive in new languages, if you are already proficient in one.

Yes, and: I've found this to be mostly true, if you make sure you take the time to deeply understand what the code is doing. When I asked an LLM to do something for me in Javascript, then I said, "What if X happens, wouldn't that cause Y? Would it be better to restructure it like so and so to make it more robust?" The LLM immediately improves it.

Any experienced programmer who was taking the time to review this code, on learning that unwrap() has a "panic" inside, would certainly change it. But as you say, reviewers are already stretched thin.
by RyJones | 2025-11-20 09:49:05+00:00
1: This one isn't about open source, but: the guy that said this and that about how 64 bit ARM was never going to happen? We were working on exactly that at the time.

2: One of my test rigs (not for 64 bit, just AllJoyn): https://www.flickr.com/photos/88509406@N00/53897032602

3: later evolution: https://www.flickr.com/photos/88509406@N00/53898288044
by RamblingCTO | 2025-11-20 09:49:18+00:00
Honestly, you all are just trying to pick me apart when we all know what to buy and what not to buy. Of course cocoa powder (raw) and coffee is ok. You can look up the research on these ingredients beforehand. Some foods need processing to become edible. Salt is also somewhat processed. But there's industrial salt with additional ingredients and then there's sea salt. Do your own research and apply common sense. Easy