MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by rauljordan2020 | 2025-11-05 02:40:47+00:00
Singaporeans have insanely high quality of life and high pride in their system and people. They have an immense number of negative freedoms that the average person across the world could only dream of: freedom from violence, freedom from the devastating effects of drug addiction on families and society, freedom from poverty, freedom from corruption, freedom from instability. For the average person looking to raise a family, build a quality life, and just live well, Singapore is the perfect social contract. Don't like it? They have the most powerful or second most powerful passport in the world and can move anywhere else they see fit, yet they see their country as the best place they could be
by morcus | 2025-11-05 02:40:49+00:00
Most of the time, and to a lot of people, it doesn't matter. I have a fast mobile data plan and fast home Internet. But even I have encountered the following circumstances where I wish sites were smaller:

- on an underground subway with slow and spotty connection

- on slow airplane WiFi

- on slow hotel WiFi

- on a slow mobile network while traveling internationally
by em-bee | 2025-11-05 02:41:18+00:00
you can't transfer money to non-Chinese-citizens at all!

that's not true. you just have to document and explain the transfer, if it is a foreign bank account. if it is a local one then the citizenship of the account holder does not even matter.

Western countries put enormous value on personal liberty

in everyday life the limits on personal liberty in china are hardly noticeable. and they are contrasted with safety even when walking through dark neighborhoods at 3am in the morning.
by musicale | 2025-11-05 02:42:21+00:00
I thought option-resize was supposed to resize the default (new document) window?

My recent pet peeve is that macOS doesn't seem to remember window sizes and locations properly. Things are certainly complicated by multi-monitor setups, but it seems like some sensible default behavior could be implemented.

I don't dislike the column browser, but I wish macOS would preserve/revive its spatial UI in both the Finder and document window positions.
by classichasclass | 2025-11-05 02:43:12+00:00
Then they started loading the protection code from disk doing tricky things. One I cracked recently was a pair of Commodore 1541 sectors that appeared to be the same logical sector (because the drive head is blind). It needed to hit both of them to compile the next portion of the loader. Naturally the segment up to that point was encrypted as well, but nothing survives a VICE breakpoint. https://oldvcr.blogspot.com/2023/08/cracking-designwares-gra...

Obviously this is nothing on things like V-MAX! and Rapidlok which even nowadays have variations that are tough to remaster.
by youknowone | 2025-11-05 02:45:12+00:00
The article is a bit misleading.

The new law requires the installation of solar panels in all *public* parking lots operated by the government. I checked this through local news sources.

In South Korea, there are already incentives to install solar panels on buildings, including parking lots. If you operate a solar power system with a capacity of over 20 kW, you can sell the generated electricity at prices higher than the market rate thanks to government support programs.

Despite these benefits, many parking lots in South Korea still do not install solar panels. This is mainly because, given the country’s high population density, most parking lots are located on land that is considered potential development sites. Once solar panels are installed, it becomes more difficult to change the land use later for development purposes, and the owners would also have to bear additional costs for removing the panels.
by jlaternman | 2025-11-05 02:45:21+00:00
I agree with almost all of this.

IMO the issue is we won't be able to adequately answer this question before we first clearly describe what we mean of conscious thinking applied to ourselves. First we'd need to clearly define our own consciousness and what we mean by our own "conscious thinking" in a much, much clearer way than we currently do.

If we ever reach that point, I think we'd be able to fruitfully apply it to AI, etc., to assess.

Unfortunately we haven't been obstructed from answering this question about ourselves for centuries or millennia, but have failed to do so, so it's unlikely to happen suddenly now. Unless we use AIs to first solve that problem of defining our own consciousness, before applying it back on them. Which would be a deeply problematic order, since nobody would trust a breakthrough in the understanding of consciousness that came from AI, that is then potentially used to put them in the same class and define them as either thinking things or conscious things.

Kind of a shame we didn't get our own consciousness worked out before AI came along. Then again, wasn't for the lack of trying… Philosophy commanded the attention of great thinkers for a long time.
by TulioKBR | 2025-11-05 02:45:23+00:00
I used AI to respond to longer texts in a language that is not my native language, and that doesn't make my project invalid for anyone. After all, all the responses were written and reviewed by me, and every single comment answered was done by a system that knows 100% of my project. There's no problem for me... as long as I can adapt it to respond in a language I don't master, I will do it, simple as that. It doesn't invalidate what I'm making available.
by octaane | 2025-11-05 02:47:36+00:00
This is probably the worst way a plane could go down in terms of damage caused. Maximum effect in term of damage. Cargo plane apparently reached V1 (go/no go speed) on the runway, and suffered a catastrophic engine failure. They passed V1, so they knew they were going down. Engine was shedding large debris, including the housing (!!!) which is a shrapnel shield.

They were on fire just as they reached V1.

Plane was fully loaded with 38,000 LB of fuel for 12 hour flight to hawaii. Worst case scenario.

Pilots did the heroic thing - they tried to take off instead at 160 MPH to minimize collateral damage (highway and warehouses at the end of the runway) and crash and die somewhere else, instead of go beyond the runway at that speed. Accelerating a fully loaded jet plane at ground level beyond the runway has obvious consequences. They had one choice.

Instead, they clipped the UPS factory because they were so low, they tried to clear it but did not. Plane then hit the ground port wing down, shearing it off entirely, smearing a fireball of jet fuel across half a mile (not an exaggeration) before the plane flipped. Crew were likely dead by before this, footage shows the cockpit being slammed into the ground like a mousetrap by the flip once the port wing was gone and gravity took the starboard wing over.

Physics took over. Plane flipped and rolled upon loss of port wing, smearing a rolling fireball of the remaining fuel load from the starboard wing for another half a mile.

Louisville is now a firestorm as a result.

Respect to the flight crew; rest in peace, they made the best they could out of a really shitty scenario. They flew it all the way down.

Footage:

https://x.com/osinttechnical/status/1985845987684855969?s=46

https://x.com/faytuksnetwork/status/1985849267152699741?s=46

https://x.com/faytuksnetwork/status/1985848132500885995?s=46

https://x.com/faytuksnetwork/status/1985843126934614297?s=46
by octaane | 2025-11-05 02:47:53+00:00
This is probably the worst way a plane could go down. Maximum effect in term of damage. Cargo plane apparently reached V1 (go/no go speed) on the runway, and suffered a catastrophic engine failure. They passed V1, so they knew they were going down. Engine was shedding large debris, including the housing (!!!) which is a shrapnel shield.

They were on fire just as they reached V1.

Plane was fully loaded with 38,000 LB of fuel for 12 hour flight to hawaii. Worst case scenario.

Pilots did the heroic thing - they tried to take off instead of accelerate past the runway at ground level at 160 MPH to minimize collateral damage (highway and warehouses at the end of the runway) and crash and die somewhere else.

Instead, they clipped the UPS factory because they were so low, they tried to clear it but did not. Plane then hit the ground port wing down, shearing it off entirely, smearing a fireball of jet fuel across half a mile (not an exaggeration) before the plane flipped. Crew were likely dead by then, footage shows the cockpit being slammed into the ground by the flip once the port wing was gone and gravity took the starboard wing over.

Plane flipped, continued to smear half of the fuel load for another half a mile.

Louisville is now a firestorm as a result.

Footage:

https://x.com/osinttechnical/status/1985845987684855969?s=46

https://x.com/faytuksnetwork/status/1985849267152699741?s=46

https://x.com/faytuksnetwork/status/1985848132500885995?s=46

https://x.com/faytuksnetwork/status/1985843126934614297?s=46
by cjonas | 2025-11-05 02:48:30+00:00
"Code interpreters" are incredibly powerful tools for agents as it allows them to process large amounts of data without actually having to move the tokens through it's context window.

However, I don't actually see what any of this has to do with MCP. It's more-so just tool calling + code interpreter design patterns. If anything, the MCP hype has resulted in a lot of BAD tools being written that return ridiculous number of tokens.

SQL is really a perfect solution for allowing the agent to access data, but in most applications, it's not realistic to provide it with a db connection. Your either need RLS and user connection pooling (like supabase) or strict application tenant filtering (which is tricky) and even then, you still can't efficiently join data from multiple sources.

I recently built a system using tenant isolated S3 "dataponds", populated with parquet files, that the agent queries with duckdb.

The VM (agent core) gets an short lived "assume role" STS token injected so it can only access buckets the user is entitled to (also VPC networking so no other ingress/egress). Each location has a `manifest.json` file that describes the contents and schema. The agent can query the parquet files using duckdb, do additional processing with pandas and then share files back to user by writing it to S3 in special predefined display formats (data-table, time-series, etc).

The file ids, along with a sample of the data is pass back the LLM. It can then embed the file in it's response using a special tag and a custom markdown renderer displays it back to the user.

From what I can tell, this is basically what Chat-GPT has done for a long time (minus the preconfigured "datapond" and special response formats), but it's pretty awesome how "low-effort" a system like this can be built today.
by jcelerier | 2025-11-05 02:49:03+00:00
As the article says:

> “International standards have a special status,” says Phil Wennblom, Chair of ISO/IEC JTC 1. “Even though RISC-V is already globally recognized, once something becomes an ISO/IEC standard, it’s even more widely accepted. Countries around the world place strong emphasis on international standards as the basis for their national standards. It’s a significant tailwind when it comes to market access.”
by apitman | 2025-11-05 02:49:46+00:00
> wasm outside the browser for compile-once-run-anywhere usecases with sandboxing / security guarantees

I've been using it this way for DecentAuth[0]. It's awesome. I compile a single native codebase to wasm, and I can use my library from JS, Go, or Rust. New host languages only require about 1000 lines of glue. I don't have to worry at all about building for different architectures.

[0]: https://github.com/lastlogin-net/DecentAuth
by em-bee | 2025-11-05 02:50:26+00:00
a one party state is not the problem. you don't need multiple parties to allow multiple opinions and dissent. all they would need to do is to allow dissenting votes within the party (which, as another commenter noted, the don't, so that's hardly lack of trying), and allow everyone to join the party without requiring any allegiance to party rules that go beyond allegiance to the country itself.

china could do the same btw. china also, as far as i heard, does allow dissent within the party.
by throwaway106382 | 2025-11-05 02:51:00+00:00
Basically it boils down to:

Is your time worth more than what the fully managed services on AWS cost? And I mean that quite literally in the sense of your billable hours.

If you like spending time tinkering with manually configuring linux servers, and don't have anything else that generates better value for you to do - by all means go for it.

For small pet projects with no customers, a cheap Hetzner box is probably fine. For serious projects with customers that expect you to be able to get back on your feet quickly when shit hits the fan, or teams of developers that lose hours of productivity when a sandbox environment goes down, maybe not so much.

Is AWS more expensive than the salary of the infra guy you would need to hire to do all this stuff by hand? Probably not.
by pxc | 2025-11-05 02:51:39+00:00
Sure it is¹ (kinda):

--no-upgrade Do not upgrade packages; when used in conjunction with install, no-upgrade will prevent packages on the command line from being upgraded if they are already installed. Configuration Item: APT::Get::Upgrade.

The canonical way to do the thing you want via apt-get is `apt-get install`. And if you read the man page from start to finish, it'd be clear to you... but it is tucked away there in the most obtuse, indirect, ungreppable way. :'D

That would be a great addendum to an EXAMPLES section! In the meantime, this is documented well and clearly in the tldr page for apt-get².

Fwiw, apt-get not only sucks, but has been known to suck for many, many years (more than a decade at least). Its interface sticks around because it's basically plumbing at this point. But you, as a user, should never use it (or `apt-cache` or `apt-*`, if you can avoid it.

Aptitude is preferable for a whole host of reasons, not least of which being that its upgrade commands have the semantics you'd intuitively expect³. They take packages as an optional list of positional args, and upgrade everything only if you don't pass any. (Aptitude also has a ton of other nice features and I highly recommend it.)

There's also an official new porcelain in APT itself, aptly called "apt". It preserves⁴ the semantics of apt-get's `upgrade` command, but its usage message actually matches that syntactically— hopefully it'll barf if you tell it `apt upgrade windsurf` or whatever.

But automation needs to rely on the ugly, old, disparate APT commands that have been around forever and can't really change. That probably goes, too, for things guides want you to copy and paste, or instructions handed over to LLMs.

(This is one reason that if you only learn to use APT from guides/tutorials whose primary concern is something other than documenting or teaching how to use Debian-based systems, you'll probably never learn to use the correct tools (the nicer, newer ones).)

--

1: https://manpages.debian.org/trixie/apt/apt-get.8.en.html

2: https://tldr.inbrowser.app/pages/linux/apt-get

3: https://manpages.debian.org/trixie/aptitude/aptitude.8.en.ht...

4: https://manpages.debian.org/trixie/apt/apt.8.en.html
by more_corn | 2025-11-05 02:52:04+00:00
I mean people suck at it too.

The only way we’ve learned is through referencing previous established trustworthy knowledge. The scientific consensus in merely a system that vigorously tests and discards previously held beliefs when they don’t match new evidence. We’ve spent thousands of years living in a world of make-believe. We only learned to emerge relatively recently.

It would be unreasonable to expect an LLM to do it without the tools we have.

It shouldn’t be hard to teach an LLM if you can’t verify it by reference to an evidence based source it’s not fact.
by CyberDildonics | 2025-11-05 02:54:07+00:00
Do you have a technical background?

Do you?

WASM offers a false sense of portability only because it is basically useless.

That doesn't have much to do with this project or what I talked about. It is a bytecode meant to be JIT compiled. It has nothing to do directly with supporting an API, and none of this has anything to do with running on the GPU.

lagging severely behind present-day Vulkan.

So what? What does this have to do with anything? What point are you trying to make?

And it's not even well-supported across browsers.

It's new and already works in chrome. What is your point?

To suggest that all of this is a "sofware update" away seems very naive. The kind of thing somebody without a technical background would suggest.

There is no substance here, just you saying "nu uh".

My recommendation, as someone with a technical background, is that you try it with chrome. It's easy to install, just search for install chrome then download the executable, then double click.

I think you misunderstood everything that I was saying though, your reply doesn't seem to connect to the idea that using an API then making the benefits of the API the unique aspect of the software is a bad idea.
by loeg | 2025-11-05 02:54:22+00:00
I think you're looking at the left wing (number 1) engine; GP is talking about either the tail or right wing engine. (I think tail is number 2 on MD-11.) There's a brief explosion visible through the smoke at about 1-2 seconds in, to the right of the engine visibly on fire; that's probably what he's talking about.

Freeze frame: https://imgur.com/a/c3h8Qd3
by musicale | 2025-11-05 02:55:18+00:00
> If AI spending isn’t directly contributing to sales in some fashion, then you’re just clowning around by pushing money from payrolls to revenue. Your company hasn’t innovated, your product hasn’t become more attractive or competitive, and your business is just as profitable as it was prior to the AI spending.

If revenue remains the same and costs (such as labor costs) go down, then profits increase.

This is very attractive to business owners; it's probably the most effective pitch for any kind of automation.
by theturtletalks | 2025-11-05 02:58:05+00:00
We sell the software. Openfront is open source e-commerce platforms for every vertical (retail, restaurants, salons, hotels). Businesses get the full source code, self-host or host with us. That's our business.

This marketplace doesn't charge transaction fees because stores already have their own infrastructure. We're just connecting to it. Marketplace operators who fork this can charge flat listing fees or affiliates, but the model works because discovery is separate from infrastructure.

On discovery being solved: social sends traffic to your site, but checkout still happens on your platform. Same here. The difference is stores aren't locked in. They expose a standard interface once and automatically work with every marketplace using that protocol. One store can be listed on multiple marketplaces serving different audiences without any extra integrations.

You're right that businesses pay for more than software. But they also shouldn't have to pay 15-30% transaction fees when they already own the checkout stack. That's the shift.
by tguvot | 2025-11-05 02:59:25+00:00
US military aid is around 1% of budget. The consensus in Israel is to stop accepting this aid from USA.

Iron Dome is Israeli weapon system. Out of all weapons that Israel gets from USA the only things that Israel doesn't produce domestically are planes (Usa killed Israeli fighter jet project 40 years ago) and helicopters. All other weapon systems are domestically produced. Israel is eighth largest arms exporter in world
by michaelgiba | 2025-11-05 02:59:25+00:00
Interesting idea. Although I wouldn't consider `but restrict the data set to publications from <= year 1600` "easy".

If you did have access to a high-quality pretraining dataset and you could explore training up to 1600, then up to 1610, 1620, ... 1700 and look at how the presence of calculus was learned over that period. Running some tests with the intermediate models to capture the effect
by rich_sasha | 2025-11-05 03:00:14+00:00
Illiberal government moves the ceiling of what is possible, in particular for crime fighting but not only, without a guarantee of success.

At this level it's almost a tautology. Liberal governments choose not to do things because they would be illiberal, and illiberal governments don't mind.

It doesn't mean illiberal governments are better - on average, data would probably say otherwise, causation or correlation.

But undoubtedly, there are illiberal governments that achieve very good outcomes for their residents through illiberal means - surveillance, "streamlined" decision making etc. You can push the envelope of what the gov can do, at the expense of liberal values, and still achieve something else that's objectively good.

And the US is pushing this envelope for no benefit for its citizens, it would seem.
by TZubiri | 2025-11-05 03:01:52+00:00
I don't find this to be always the case, there's many relationships were the nature of work cannot be established beforehand and we have open accounts, if you ever received an invoice you were part of such an account.

The proposal is simple, if you ever need a service and you request it of me, I will send you an invoice. It is implied in the request of my service that I would get paid, absent any negotiation for payment, I will send my best estimation.

Similarly if you download my software, absent any license, I have the right to send you an invoice. The fact that there's a license that explicitly mentions this is a nail on the coffin on the part of Oracle, but even without it there's quantum meruit.
by wickberg | 2025-11-05 03:02:09+00:00
Newer airports usually try to have space, that's the only thing helping with the physics involved here.

Older airports might have EMAS [1] retrofitted at the ends to help stop planes, but that's designed more for a landing plane not stopping quickly enough (like [2]) - not a plane trying to get airborne as in this case.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engineered_materials_arrestor_... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southwest_Airlines_Flight_1248
by themafia | 2025-11-05 03:02:46+00:00
Is there a way to predict when central banks aren't "good enough" then?

Point is, for a 100% positive case rate, I have to tolerate a 22% false positive rate. What exactly is the complaint here? Was this line of logic meant to make people who make these predictions look stupid or foolish somehow? To me, it mostly fails to.
by pyuser583 | 2025-11-05 03:02:48+00:00
Isn’t that a quote from The Mandalorian?

> It is a shame that your people suffered so. Just as in this situation, it was all avoidable. Why did Mandalore resist our expansion? The Empire improves every system it touches. Judge by any metric. Safety, prosperity, trade, opportunity, peace. Compare Imperial rule to what is happening now. Look outside. Is the world more peaceful since the revolution? I see nothing but death and chaos.
by nebula8804 | 2025-11-05 03:05:11+00:00
You are proposing to "Just pull over." What a ridiculous thing to have to do. There is this problem that is a potential safety issue and your response is to have the OP adjust his "workflow" to compensate for this? Carplay is just another bug prone layer.

An alternative solution is to not have to deal with these bugs in the first place by eliminating that extra layer. Thats what I am proposing. Direct connection of the phone to an AUX port is not carplay. It is the app running directly on the phone with its own context. Is it 100% bug proof? no because only a paper map would solve that problem. But far more testing has been done on the apps running directly on the phone vs the phone having to connect through the manufacturer's implementation of Carplay.
by risingsubmarine | 2025-11-05 03:06:08+00:00
An 11" version of this proposed A-series chip Macbook is exactly what I would want to see, and would more likely expect to see from Apple's sales perspective, than an iPad that is capable of running MacOS.

A tiny Macbook that I can slip into a sling bag is more preferable to me than an iPad for many tasks.