MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by gniv | 2025-12-27 16:31:58+00:00
I searched in page for Cărtărescu and was disappointed to find no mention. And then I scroll and see your comment lol.

I read Theodoros this year (in Romanian) and I was really impressed. Best novel I've read in years. I'm currently reading Orbitor III. I bought Solenoid, but don't yet feel ready for it.
by FrankyWoberry | 2025-12-27 16:32:07+00:00
Every job seeker knows the pain: you hit “submit” and then… crickets. Most of the time it’s not your experience, it’s the bots filtering you out first.

Why Most Resumes Never Get Seen

Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS) are used by ~98% of Fortune 500 companies to screen resumes before a human ever reads them. If your resume isn’t ATS-friendly, it may be rejected in ~6 seconds before it reaches a recruiter.

Common ATS blockers include:

Complex layouts with tables or columns

Headers/footers hiding contact info

Images, graphics, or icons

Missing job-specific keywords

Non-standard section headings
These might look great visually but bots can’t parse them.

What the Free ATS Resume Checker Does

This tool simulates what real ATS software sees and gives you actionable feedback in under 30 seconds with no signup required.

Key Features

Instant ATS Compatibility Scoring
Get a 0–100 score showing how likely your resume is to pass automated screening.

Formatting & File Checks
Tests fonts, spacing, file type (PDF, DOCX), and detects elements that confuse ATS.

Keyword Analysis
Identifies missing keywords based on job titles and descriptions so you can optimize your resume content.

Actionable Fixes
See exactly what and how to fix issues not just a vague score.

Real Results from Job Seekers

Users report dramatic improvements after ATS optimization:

Average ATS score increased from ~50% to ~90%+ after fixes.

More interview invitations within weeks of applying optimized resumes.

“My resume was invisible to ATS before. Now recruiters actually see it.” — User review

Why It Actually Helps

You don’t need to reinvent your resume — you need to format it so machines can read it. This free checker focuses on:

ATS parsing compatibility (structure + text extraction)

Keyword matching with real job descriptions

File type review (text-based PDF or DOCX is preferred)

Layout issues that kill ATS parsing
…and delivers concrete fixes, not just a score.

Quick Resume Optimization Tips

Even without a checker:

Use a single-column layout

Stick to standard section headers (e.g., Work Experience, Skills)

Avoid graphics, tables, text boxes

Include keywords from the job description

Save as .docx or clean PDF
These simple tweaks dramatically boost parseability.

Try It Today

If your applications are getting ignored, the problem might be what bots see — not recruiters. Test your resume now, get instant feedback, and fix issues that actually matter.

Check your resume’s ATS compatibility, free, instant, no signup.
by throw10920 | 2025-12-27 16:32:17+00:00
> They had committed to building all of this [a previous modernization effort] on Microsoft PowerApps, a “no-code” tool meant for building simple web apps

> When we met with the developers in Macon, Georgia, OPM's engineering hub, they told us the PowerApps experience was so unfriendly that even they were afraid to make changes. Unless they’ve been specifically trained with PowerApps, most software developers would find it extremely unintuitive to build with, making it hard to apply classic coding skills or iterate quickly.

How much longer is it going to take project managers to realize that no-code tools are inappropriate for large, complex codebases?
by einpoklum | 2025-12-27 16:32:27+00:00
Google is a company which spies on its users, and manipulates search results and recommendations against user interests to further external and internal-corporate interests. This manipulation happens specifically on YouTube. On that platform it also executed the "adpocalypse" in 2017, and other measures.

The intrepid author, however, has not a word to say about any of that. "I just work(ed) here" is the implicit statement. He's preoccupied with his leveling and his personal advancement.

Is that typical of Google software engineers? I wonder.
by keepamovin | 2025-12-27 16:32:54+00:00
I'm building Freelang, a small AOT systems language aimed at security tooling where auditability and deterministic failure matter. It compiles to native x86‑64, avoids libc by default, and keeps concurrency explicit (jobs + wait). There isn’t a public repo yet, but I’d love feedback on the philosophy/roadmap - v happ happ to share details here.
by trashburger | 2025-12-27 16:33:26+00:00
> Ignoring requires-python upper bounds. When a package says it requires python<4.0, uv ignores the upper bound and only checks the lower. This reduces resolver backtracking dramatically since upper bounds are almost always wrong. Packages declare python<4.0 because they haven’t tested on Python 4, not because they’ll actually break. The constraint is defensive, not predictive.

This is clearly LLM-generated and the other bullet points have the same smell. Please use your own words.
by calvinmorrison | 2025-12-27 16:34:13+00:00
> How much longer is it going to take project managers to realize that no-code tools are inappropriate for large, complex codebases?

Really depends. It can work great, I see some really good No/Low code tools in ERP systems. Things like alerts, workflows, custom fields, actions, etc are... you would be surprised the ingenuity of people, but also - yes there are limits.

An ERP is practically an opinionated entire operating system with its own data, conventions, rules, ACLs, etc...
by okanat | 2025-12-27 16:34:15+00:00
As a previous Arch user I don't understand what you mean by "best of both worlds"? The point of Arch is to be mutable to a great extent and shipping vanilla packages.

For example, it is quite annoying to have a sane font setup due to Arch shipping vanilla. Fontconfig sucks, it has bad documentation and Arch Wiki examples go only so far. Among the entire distro universe only Fedora has sane configs. So an immutable Arch goes against immutability.

Moreover OSTree requires a server to receive updates regularly, are you going to put the effort to building the OSTree multiple times a day? Why should we trust a single person?
by glouwbug | 2025-12-27 16:35:07+00:00
In my personal experience, showing emotion has only ever been mistaken for weakness. I did a bit of experimentation and learned that weight lifting and a mastery of marvel-like quips yields a far better social standing than opening up or sharing my struggles.

Again, this is my personal experience. I’ve never been in a room where someone didn’t want some metric of performance from me, whether it was a boss, a worker, a friend, or romantic interest. I’d like for this not to be the case
by nosianu | 2025-12-27 16:35:59+00:00
I've been on the Internet since 1992, directly connected at home (student dorms at the time) vial ethernet cable and university ATM backbone since 1994.

At that time I was an admin of said student network, and at the same time built TCP/IP based network and email infrastructure at a subsidiary of a large German company as a side job.

So I was an admin of routers, switches, various services (email, Usenet server, webservers, fax server).

Funny enough - we only added a firewall in front of the student network to protect against our own student's experiments rather than against outside intrusions, at least initially (for example, one person setting up their own Usenet server brought down DNS by flooding it with queries)!

We never had any problems with spam or attackers. "you just didn't notice the attacks!" - NO. When you go online today you get an eternal stream of automated intrusion attempts, visible in all your log files.

Today does not even remotely compare with the easy-going Internet of the 1990s.

Usenet, forums, email - they were all very much usable with minimal or zero spam, and very basic user management. Today, with such a basic setup like we used to have, you would be 100% and chock-full of spam shortly after putting such a server online.
by yieldcrv | 2025-12-27 16:36:37+00:00
FOSS = free and open-source software

Open Source =/= free or software, just readable

so it wasn't a new campaign, it is at best re-appropriating the term open source in the software community in a way communities outside of software have always been using it, in a way that predates software at all, exists in parallel to the software community, and continues to exist now
by Zigurd | 2025-12-27 16:37:08+00:00
You will have trouble finding genuine comparisons. As a recall, there were some press trips to Austin that compared Tesla Robo taxi to Waymo. But as with any press publicity, it can be a carefully curated experience. Even the much-publicized empty Tesla Robo taxis with no safety driver on board turned out to be followed by a "chase car."

As others on this thread have pointed out, there may be a lot less to Tesla Robo taxi coverage than has been promoted in the press, never mind all the Teslafluencers.
by sebzim4500 | 2025-12-27 16:38:17+00:00
>How do you make sure that the LLM doesn't reward hack a proof using these workarounds?

I'm not sure what you mean exactly? There is no soundness issue here, the fact that `sqrt -1` is defined to be 0 does not have any impact on what statements about `sqrt x` can be proved when `x` is positive.

It just means that if you are working on an intermediate step of a proof and you need the result that `sqrt y >= 0` you don't need to provide a proof that `y >= 0`. If you wanted an intermediate result that `(sqrt y) * 2 = y` then you would still need to provide a proof that `y >= 0`, though.
by alpha_squared | 2025-12-27 16:38:26+00:00
> Two engineers walked into the government six months ago to drag federal retirements from an underground mine onto the Internet. They built retire.opm.gov and are poised to turn six-month waits into near-instant processing for hundreds of thousands of employees.

Written by said engineers about themselves. It's hard to read this as little more than a long-winded self-congratulatory Twitter post before the results are actually visible. It's no wonder their social handles sit at the bottom of the page to funnel followers to their page.
by epec254 | 2025-12-27 16:38:32+00:00
The key part IMO is buried in the article - there happened to be an existing, perfectly accurate database containing all the required info about each employee - the same info that previously had to be manually found for each retirement.

Without this, this effort would not have been possible.

> Fortunately, we stumbled on a critical clue. While poring over old documentation, we discovered that OPM actually had data warehouses that stored historic information about every federal employee. Apparently, these warehouses were created as part of a modernization effort in 2007, and HR and payroll offices all across government have supposedly been regularly reporting into it.

> For some reason however, this was not well known at OPM, and those that knew about it didn’t know what data it held, nor considered how it could be used to simplify retirement processing. Not many had seen the data, and administrators were initially resistant to sharing access.

> From a software perspective, this was the holy grail: a single source of truth that held all the information that the manual redundant steps were meant to review. Because the information was regularly reported by HR and payroll, by the time an employee retired, OPM should already have everything needed to process the retirement, without anyone re-entering or re-verifying information.
by kornork | 2025-12-27 16:39:21+00:00
I've heard this quote before, and I don't get it. This article fails to show me just how complicated that is. When I think "complicated," I think of a multiplicity of interconnected chemical molecular processes like what must happen in the cell, or layers of recursively connected neurons in the brain. Not some mindless cloud of gluons. What they've described seems less "complicated" and more "confusing." "We don't understand this (yet?)" is a lot different than "it's possible to understand this, if your brain is really big."
by newswangerd | 2025-12-27 16:39:48+00:00
Yeah, I'm implementing a couple of things to make my life easier in the future. I don't use any github APIs and I'm setting up my clients to load the plugin repo URLs from my server so I can change them later if I need to. I want all of the resources my clients need to come from my domain name so I can move it around if I need to.
by 867-5309 | 2025-12-27 16:41:28+00:00
What a beautiful face
I have found in this place
That is circling all 'round the sun
What a beautiful dream
That could flash on the screen
In a blink of an eye and be gone from me
Soft and sweet
Let me hold it close and keep it here with me

And one day we will die
And our ashes will fly
From the aeroplane over the sea
But for now we are young
Let us lay in the sun
And count every beautiful thing we can see
Love to be
In the arms of all I'm keeping here with me
by neilfd | 2025-12-27 16:41:51+00:00
My early thoughts on pricing are that the free version allows you to keep a rolling 30 day window of content, it is built to encourage you to post every day, recording your life, with some soft journalling, phot prompts etc, so 30 days gives you a month free. on day 31, you can no longer access the 1st days content, day 32, 1st and 2nd days content is faded, subscription allows you access to your whole timeline, if you unsub, the 30 day window cuts back in. Subscription allows you access to everything - £2-4 a month is what im thinking. Might be dumb, might not be
by d4rkp4ttern | 2025-12-27 16:42:03+00:00
I have both Codex and Claude subs so I wanted one to be able to consult the other. Also it’s useful when you have a cli script that an agent is iterating on, so it can test it. Another use case is for a CLI agent to run a debugger like PDB in another pane, though I haven’t used it much.
by phil294 | 2025-12-27 16:43:06+00:00
I like it and would like to see an entire Linux OS being done in a similar manner. Or shell / wrapper / whatever.

A sane homogeneous cli for once, that treats its user as a human instead of forcing them to remember the incompatible invocation options of `tar` and `dd` for absolutely no reason.

zip my-folder into my-zip.tar with compression level 9
write my-iso ./zip.zip onto external hard drive
git delete commit 1a4db4c
convert ./video.mp4 and ./audio.mp3 into ./out.mp4
merge ./video.mp4 and ./audio.mp3 to ./out.mp4 without re-encoding

And add amazing autocomplete, while allowing as many wordings as possible. No need for LLMs.

One can dream.
by quchen | 2025-12-27 16:43:24+00:00
Noether is one of my heroes. Rising through the ranks to one of the greatest minds we've known, recognized in spite of being a woman in a time where that was unthinkable in science, all odds against her. And yet here she is, the name of one of the most basic, and most beautiful, concepts in physics. The inventor of abstract algebra too (which I hear is as significant, it's just not my domain).

So many great minds have had to fight an uphill battle, but few had it as steep and even fewer were as successful as her doing so.

It really is a shame that she's not as recognized as the Bohrs and Feynmans and Paulis and so on, but at least everyone with a passing interest in theoretical physics ought to know about her.
by ghurtado | 2025-12-27 16:44:12+00:00
In 30 years in tech, I have never once heard anyone use the term "Open Source" to refer to anything other than FOSS.

I have also never once heard anyone use the term FOSS outside of the written form.

So the opposite of what you said, I guess.

You also seem to be saying that the term "open source" existed before software did, so I feel compelled to ask: what do you think "source" stands for in "open source"?
by adamzwasserman | 2025-12-27 16:45:46+00:00
You describe yourself as a materialist, so I'll engage on those terms. First: you're conflating the model with the chatbot. What you interact with is output filtered through RLHF, system prompts, and post-processing layers (much of it traditional imperative code). That "geometry register" originates from this pipeline, not from the LLM itself.

There's no neural introspection because there's nothing to introspect. The LLM is stateless; nothing persists between forward passes. Each inference is independent. A materialist account of consciousness requires something to be continuous. Here there is none.
by estearum | 2025-12-27 16:46:24+00:00
> The shrinking of the federal government is much needed as there is no mechanism to remove dead wood

What do you mean?

The budget is voted on by Congress literally every single year. The mechanism absolutely exists. The political consensus to do so is harder to achieve, but that's only when people actually don't universally agree change is needed (or how specifically to change it).
by andy99 | 2025-12-27 16:47:17+00:00
It’s enterprise software so product managers don’t decide anything. They’re just an automaton charged with implementing whatever complied with the RFP terms that were written by the vendor to wire the procurement. It’s basically a problem with central planning, there’s no easy fix but giving people agency is a big part of it instead of ramming some enterprise crap that was designed to sell to “leaders” or committees down their throats.
by fnordpiglet | 2025-12-27 16:48:09+00:00
Yeah this stuck out at me - the hubris of the stateless web stack supersedes the 18 years of hard unsung work at building and end to end stateful pipeline that ties out to the penny and handles all the complex business logic and reconciliations seamlessly across god knows how many integrations. No fancy diagrams or pictures of the nameless faceless heroes that had accomplished that act of heroism. For sure recognizing the value is something to trumpet, but that’s the Herculean hero story I want to hear - the DOGE bros who tied it all together with JavaScript frameworks, yawn.
by tgsovlerkhgsel | 2025-12-27 16:49:14+00:00
LLMs are a great interface for ffmpeg. Sometimes it takes 2-3 attempts/fixes ("The subtitles in the video your command generated are offset: i see the subtitles from the beginning of the movie but the video is cut from the middle of the movie as requested, fix the command") but it generally creates complex commands much more quickly than manual work (reading the man page, crafting the command, debugging it) would.
by ForceBru | 2025-12-27 16:49:16+00:00
Is it just me or is the phrase "human beings" used more often than simply "humans"? I've just started to notice this: the next word after "human" is very often "beings". Whenever someone wants to emphasize our humanity (as opposed, say, to a horse's horseness), they almost always say "human _beings_" instead of "humans". Somehow "human beings" seems to emphasize the "human spirit/soul".
by adamzwasserman | 2025-12-27 16:50:31+00:00
The Kolmogorov argument gets stronger in the age of LLM assisted coding. Tokenizers chunk camelCase unpredictably: "parseHTTPSURL" might become ["parse", "HTTP", "SUR", "L"] or worse, depending on the model. Snake_case splits cleanly at underscores, preserving semantic boundaries.

This matters because every semantic signal you pass to the model improves code generation quality. When the model sees "user_authentication_token" as three distinct concepts, it reasons about them correctly. When it sees "userAuthenticationToken" as arbitrary subword chunks, you're relying on the model to reconstruct meaning from noise.

The author's point about tooling reliability applies directly: LLMs are just another tool that has to parse your identifiers. And as more of our codebases become conversations between humans and coding assistants, conventions that reduce ambiguity stop being style preferences and start being engineering decisions.
by gus_massa | 2025-12-27 16:50:33+00:00
Looking at your old comments, as a general recommendation in HN, avoid short comments. Try to write like 2 or 3 sentences. Not fillers, interesting sentences. Very short comments are usually not good for HN, but this is not a hard rule, there are plenty of exemptions.

Do you have a example where someone called you AI?

I make a lot of mistakes, but I'm a native Spanish speaker. [Hi from Argentina!] I probably use too many latin-rooted words. Luckily no AI decided to pretend to be a time traveler from Rome.
by idopmstuff | 2025-12-27 16:50:37+00:00
> But when they do that, Draft One erases the initial draft, and with it any evidence of what portions of the report were written by AI and what portions were written by an officer. That means that if an officer is caught lying on the stand – as shown by a contradiction between their courtroom testimony and their earlier police report – they could point to the contradictory parts of their report and say, “the AI wrote that."

This seems solvable by passing a law that makes the officer legally responsible for the report as if he had written it. He doesn't get to use this excuse in the courtroom and it gets stricken from the record if he tries. That honestly seems like a better solution than storing the original AI-generated version, because that can reinforce the view that AI wrote it to jurors, even if the officer reviewed it and decided it was correct at the time.
by skybrian | 2025-12-27 16:51:20+00:00
National Design Studios seems to have been created in August:

https://archive.is/Gv9nC

> Aug 21 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump will appoint Airbnb co-founder Joe Gebbia to spearhead the new National Design Studio that will seek to make digital services at federal agencies more efficient, two officials familiar with the plan said.

> Trump signed an executive order on Thursday to create the studio - a new body that one of the officials said appears to be a stripped-down successor to the controversial Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), formerly headed by billionaire Elon Musk.

The work described in this blog post seems to have been done under its predecessor, DOGE, given that the launch date was June 2. But apparently these engineers moved to the new organization, so that’s why the blog post is there.
by PaulHoule | 2025-12-27 16:51:34+00:00
Also measuring temperature changes over a long period of time is hard which is one of the reasons why it took so long to prove global temperatures are rising. It is not like they have a lot of well-maintained weather stations with consistent instrumentation. When you are doing a complex mash-up of remote sensing data with machine learning in the mix people will be skeptical.

I think it’s an OK paper but lousy title: if I rewrote a title that much I’d expect to get grief for it and that all-caps NO is definitely not HN culture. But there certainly is a tension between the phys.org title which is roughy “Scientists reach important conclusion” and the Nature title which is “We measured something”
by BoingBoomTschak | 2025-12-27 16:51:47+00:00
I use `split[s0][s1];[s0]palettegen=max_colors=64[p];[s1][p]paletteuse=dither=bayer` personally, limiting the number of colors is a great way to transparently (to a certain point, try with different values) improve compression, as is bayer (ordered) dithering which is almost mandatory to not explode output filesizes.
by pjmlp | 2025-12-27 16:52:18+00:00
I have been contributing with C++ code since 1993, with bounded checked collection types in release code, and compiled managed languages since mid 2000's.

Even Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson themselves, went on with Alef, Limbo and Go.

I have been contributing by reducing my C, and C++ footprint on the planet, and security enforcement at various assignments.
by bdangubic | 2025-12-27 16:52:43+00:00
> If you ignore how we got here you will be unable to understand where really are.

Exactly this is core issue with a lot of people here on HN. The argument goes “oh shit, look what the current 2025 looks like, OMG so bad, we were this amazing bastion of freedom before this and now this administration is doing _____” so shortsighted and un-educated