MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by vel0city | 2025-12-17 19:10:59+00:00
It takes however long I need to charge it to reach my next destination, whether that be the final destination or the next charging stop. Maybe I'm charging for 10 minutes, maybe I'm charging for 20. When I'm on a road trip, there's rarely a reason to charge for more than 20 minutes at any given stop.

The rate of charging is a curve, where at a low state of charge you can dump a lot of energy into very rapidly. When its nearly full, you can't charge it as fast without risking damaging the battery.

This is a massive simplification and not quite what's really going on, but think of the battery having a lot of holes to stick electrons in. If the electrons you're pumping in don't smoothly find a hole, it might damage the battery. When the battery is low, there's lots of holes, electrons can just fly in and they'll probably hit an empty spot. When its nearly full, you have to carefully put the electrons into the holes or else you'll damage it. This is kind of what's going on with charging speeds.

So you probably see these charging times of over an hour or whatever to go 0-100%, but the more important stat to look at is the 0-80% charge time which is often like 20 minutes. That 0-80% time will often be like 20min but the 80-100% can often be another hour or more on top of that.

When I stop to charge the car on a road trip the time I take is usually like 10-20 minutes. There's no reason to spend more time than that, because the charging speed drops dramatically that its not usually worth it unless I really need that last 20% of range. Which I usually don't, because there's usually other spots to charge. And then I get where I'm going and the car will be sitting for a few hours and can charge at whatever speed it wants, I'm not needing it.

FWIW though, I spend way more time in my life pumping gas in my ICE than I do waiting on my EV to charge, even including the time I've spent on road trips on the EV. This is even with my EV having significantly more miles on it over the past few years. Its a question of if I spend an extra 15 minutes a few times a year or more than five minutes every other week.
by whartung | 2025-12-17 19:10:59+00:00
Also, just so I'm clear, there's no requirement to share passkeys. Or even have passkeys enabled on all devices, right?

If I log in to a site from my machine, and set up a passkey, but then log into that site from another machine, it'll just see no passkey present and ask for my password, yes?

A passkey is a local password on a device that could be shared through all the password manager gymnastics, but its not required as I understand it.
by louiereederson | 2025-12-17 19:11:04+00:00
i think the most important part of google vs openai is slowing usage of consumer LLMs. people focus on gemini's growth, but overall LLM MAUs and time spent is stabilizing. in aggregate it looks like a complete s-curve. you can kind of see it in the table in the link below but more obvious when you have the sensortower data for both MAUs and time spent.

the reason this matters is slowing velocity raises the risk of featurization, which undermines LLMs as a category in consumer. cost efficiency of the flash models reinforces this as google can embed LLM functionality into search (noting search-like is probably 50% of chatgpt usage per their july user study). i think model capability was saturated for the average consumer use case months ago, if not longer, so distribution is really what matters, and search dwarfs LLMs in this respect.

https://techcrunch.com/2025/12/05/chatgpts-user-growth-has-s...
by ChrisArchitect | 2025-12-17 19:11:06+00:00
The Academy Partners With YouTube for Exclusive Global Rights to the Oscars® and Other Academy Content Starting in 2029

https://press.oscars.org/news/academy-partners-youtube-exclu...

Hollywood’s biggest night is coming to YouTube

https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/hollywoods-biggest-nigh...
by treyd | 2025-12-17 19:11:17+00:00
> And a bug in one crate can cause UB in another crate if that other crate is not designed well and correctly.

Yes! Failure to uphold invariants of the underlying abstract model in an unsafe block breaks the surrounding code, including other crates! That's exactly consistent with what I said. There's nothing special about the stdlib. Like all software, it can have bugs.

What the proof states is that two independently correct blocks of unsafe code cannot, when used together, be incorrect. So the key value there is that you only have to reason about them in isolation, which is not true for C.
by duped | 2025-12-17 19:11:43+00:00
> Demanding permanent ostracization for supporting a majority position is fairly anti-democratic.

It depends a lot on what that position is. Donating your personal wealth to discriminate against a marginalized group, which includes many of your employees is worth calling out.

Segregation was once a "majority position" in this country. Shaming segregationists was a really effective way to change that. For example, George Wallace, who eventually redeemed himself.
by crazygringo | 2025-12-17 19:12:04+00:00
For average consumers, I think very much yes, and this is where OpenAI's brand recognition shines.

But for anyone using LLM's to help speed up academic literature reviews where every detail matters, or coding where every detail matters, or anything technical where every detail matters -- the differences very much matter. And benchmarks serve just to confirm your personal experience anyways, as the differences between models becomes extremely apparent when you're working in a niche sub-subfield and one model is showing glaring informational or logical errors and another mostly gets it right.

And then there's a strong possibility that as experts start to say "I always trust <LLM name> more", that halo effect spreads to ordinary consumers who can't tell the difference themselves but want to make sure they use "the best" -- at least for their homework. (For their AI boyfriends and girlfriends, other metrics are probably at play...)
by sowbug | 2025-12-17 19:12:15+00:00
My dad has been telling the same story for ten years. He wants to take a trip around US national parks, sleeping in the back of the car, under the stars, which is why his car needs a 500-mile range and must be fueled by gasoline. This conversation always comes up at family gatherings when he asks how I like my electric car.

He's in his mid-80s with prostate problems. He has never taken the trip.
by n2d4 | 2025-12-17 19:12:30+00:00
I recommend you read Greg Koah-Hartman's thread instead of this article: https://social.kernel.org/notice/B1JLrtkxEBazCPQHDM

> Rust is is not a "silver bullet" that can solve all security problems, but it sure helps out a lot and will cut out huge swatches of Linux kernel vulnerabilities as it gets used more widely in our codebase. > That being said, we just assigned our first CVE for some Rust code in the kernel: https://lore.kernel.org/all/2025121614-CVE-2025-68260-558d@gregkh/ where the offending issue just causes a crash, not the ability to take advantage of the memory corruption, a much better thing overall. > Note the other 159 kernel CVEs issued today for fixes in the C portion of the codebase, so as always, everyone should be upgrading to newer kernels to remain secure overall.
by CharlieDigital | 2025-12-17 19:13:24+00:00
I argue that there is a strong, strong benefit to reading the docs: you often pick up additional context and details that would be missing in a summary.

Microsoft docs are a really good example of this where just looking through the ToC on the left usually exposes me to some capability or feature of the tooling that 1) I was not previously aware of and 2) I was not explicitly searching for.

The point is that the path to a singular answer can often include discovery of unrelated insight along the way. When you only get the answer to what you are asking, you lose that process of organic discovery of the broader surface area of the tooling or platform you are operating in.

I would liken AI search/summaries to visiting only the well-known, touristy spots. Sure, you can get shuttled to that restaurant or that spot that everyone visits and posts on socials, but in traveling that way, you will miss all of the other amazing food, shops, and sights along the way that you might encounter by walking instead. Reading the docs is more like exploring the random nooks and crannies and finding experiences you weren't expecting and ultimately knowing more about the place you visited than if you had only visited the major tourist destinations.

As a senior-dev, I have generally a good idea of what to ask for because I have built many systems and learned many things along the way. A junior dev? They may not know what to ask for and therefore, may never discover those "detours" that would yield additional insights to tuck into the manifolds of their brains for future reference. For the junior dev, it's like the only trip they will experience is one where they just go to the well known tourist traps instead of exploring and discovering.
by Tadpole9181 | 2025-12-17 19:13:35+00:00
Why would you buy a car to use it thrice a year? You'll end up paying a thousand dollars a trip, amortized, on the sticker cost alone. Multiples if you buy a new top-line pickup? Let alone the maintainence nightmare from leaving your poor clunker sitting around for months.

Also, you must understand that your use case here isn't even remotely the norm.
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 | 2025-12-17 19:13:47+00:00
Amid polarization, opposition to Michigan data centers cuts across political lines

https://www.mlive.com/news/2025/12/amid-polarization-opposit...

Data center proposed for Downtown Lansing would be first of its kind in US

https://www.wilx.com/2025/11/05/data-center-proposed-downtow...

At least 16 sites eyed for data centers in Michigan amid AI boom. Here's where

https://www.mlive.com/news/2025/12/at-least-16-sites-eyed-fo...

"The man from Deep Green, who earlier repeatedly reiterated his intention to be a "good neighbor," responded by saying "I get it, you're Luddites."

https://www.lansingcitypulse.com/stories/opinion,171738

Residents protest data centers outside Michigan Capitol as debates rage on

"One of the speakers, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, took the podium first."

https://www.wilx.com/2025/12/16/data-center-protest-outside-...

Michigan data center developments raise concerns over water and power use

https://www.9and10news.com/2025/12/12/michigan-data-center-d...

Activists seeking a statewide moratorium on new AI data centers to rally in Lansing next week

https://michiganadvance.com/briefs/activists-seeking-a-state...

At the same time, data center being proposed for Lansing, NY also drawing opposition from local residents

https://www.sierraclub.org/atlantic/finger-lakes/blog/2025/1...
by woodruffw | 2025-12-17 19:14:12+00:00
I think unsafe Rust is harder to write than C. However, that's because unsafe Rust makes you think about the invariants that you'd need to preserve in a correct C program, so it's no harder to write than correct C.

In other words: unsafe Rust is harder, but only in an apples-and-oranges sense. If you compare it to the same diligence you'd need to exercise in writing safer C, it would be about the same.
by rafaelmn | 2025-12-17 19:14:12+00:00
No, trying stuff out is the valuable process. How I search for information changed (dramatically) in the last 20 years I've been programming. My intuition about how programs work is still relevant - you'll still see graybeards saying "there's a paper from 70s talking about that" for every "new" fad in programming, and they are usually right.

So if AI gets you iterating faster and testing your assumptions/hypothesis I would say that's a net win. If you're just begging it to solve the problem for you with different wording - then yeah you are reducing yourself to a shitty LLM proxy.
by lapcat | 2025-12-17 19:14:57+00:00
> This is not true - Safari also supports passkeys managed by third-party password managers.

I think you know what I meant and are just being pedantic here for no good reason.

Do you think I'm unaware of 1Password? I don't want to use 1Password any more than I want to use iCloud Keychain.

Technically, pendantically, Safari "supports" anything that third-party Safari extensions support. I'm a Safari extension developer myself. But this is totally different from how Safari supports the use of passwords, which is all built in, requires no third-party software, can be local-only, allows plaintext export/import, etc.

> This will change: https://1password.com/blog/fido-alliance-import-export-passk...

This is literally what I meant by the so-called "secure credential exchange" in my previous comment.
by SomaticPirate | 2025-12-17 19:15:06+00:00
Wow, "hardened image" market is getting saturated. I saw atleast 3 companies offering this at Kubecon.

Chainguard came to this first (arguably by accident since they had several other offerings before they realized that people would pay (?!!) for a image that reported zero CVEs).

In a previous role, I found that the value for this for startups is immense. Large enterprise deals can quickly be killed by a security team that that replies with "scanner says no". Chainguard offered images that report 0 CVEs and would basically remove this barrier.

For example, a common CVE that I encountered was a glibc High CVE. We could pretty convincingly show that our app did not use this library in way to be vulnerable but it didn't matter. A high CVE is a full stop for most security teams. Migrated to a Wolfi image and the scanner reported 0. Cool.

But with other orgs like Minimus (founders of Twistlock) coming into this it looks like its about to be crowded.

There is even a govt project called Ironbank to offer something like this to the DoD.

Net positive for the ecosystem but I don't know if there is enough meat on the bone to support this many vendors.
by 2b3a51 | 2025-12-17 19:15:19+00:00
If (and I mean only if it would be interesting to you, no other reason and no implied 'ought') you wanted, I'm pretty sure that there are people out there who would like to return things like telescope mountings, old focusers, mechanical devices of all kinds to a working state. Over here in the UK, people volunteer at steam engine workshops and even in jewellery workshops to restore things. And they get a supply of interesting items to make...
by lvl155 | 2025-12-17 19:15:25+00:00
7/10 senior devs (usually fellas 50+) will get mad at you for trying to use Claude Code. Me: “dude it writes better code than crap you write in your mush middle-age brain.” Also me: “I also have mush brain.”

I think LLM is a reflection of human intelligence. If we humans become dumber as a result of LLM, LLMs will also become dumber. I’d like to think in some dystopian world, LLM’s trained from pre 2023 data will be sought after.
by JKCalhoun | 2025-12-17 19:15:37+00:00
I've seen seniors bring up novel ideas to juniors—well, novel to the juniors anyway.

Just an example. I've been in so many code bases over the years… I had a newer engineer come aboard who, when he saw some code I recently wrote with labels (!) he kind of blanched. He thought "goto == BAD". (We're talking "C" here.)

But this was code that dealt with Apple's CoreFoundation. More or less every call to CF can fail (which means returning NULL in the CF API). And (relevant) passing NULL to a CF call, like when trying to append a CF object to a CF array, was a hard crash. CF does no param checking. (Why, that would slow it down—you, dear reader, are to do all the sanity checking.)

So you might have code similar to:

CFDictionary dict = NULL;

dict = CFCreateDictionary();

if (!dict)

goto bail;

You would likely continue to create arrays, etc—insert them into your dictionary, maybe return the dictionary at the end. And again, you checked for NULL at every call to CF, goto bail if needed.

Down past 'bail' you could CFRelease() all the non-null instances that you do not return. This was how we collected our own garbage. :-)

In any event, goto labels made the code cleaner: your NULL-checking if-statements did not have to nest crazy deep.

The new engineer admitted surprise that there might be a place for labels. (Or, you know, CF could have been more NULL-tolerant and simply exited gracefully.)
by fwip | 2025-12-17 19:16:02+00:00
I've seen (and said) "if it compiles it works," but only when preceded by softening statements like "In my experience," or "most of the time." Because it really does feel like most of the time, the first time your program compiles, it works exactly the way you meant it to.

I can't imagine anybody seriously making that claim as a property of the language.

(edit: fixed a comma and a forgotten word)
by dpark | 2025-12-17 19:16:15+00:00
I’m not convinced that most of the passionate denouncers are actually part of the Mozilla user base. There’s a lot of “I can’t believe Mozilla would do this, which is why I’m going to keep using [esoteric browser] instead!”

I don’t understand the backlash, either. It seems like a bunch of nothing. New CEO is on the AI bandwagon? Wow. This is both shocking and offensive to my sensibilities.
by louthy | 2025-12-17 19:16:27+00:00
> If your protection is to "understand the implementation" it means buggy code.

Hilarious. Understanding the code is literally the most important thing. If you don't understand the code then you can't understand any unit tests you write either. How could you possibly claim test coverage for something you don't understand?

I suspect you primarily develop code with dynamic languages where you're reinventing type-systems day-in day-out to test your code. Personally, I try to minimise the need for unit-tests by using well-defined types and constraints. The type-system is a much better unit-tester than any human with a poor understanding of the code.
by happyopossum | 2025-12-17 19:16:29+00:00
> Safari requires iCloud keychain for passkeys

Repeating this doesn’t make it true. https://developer.apple.com/documentation/authenticationserv...

All of the 3rd party credential managers I’ve used that support passkeys work with safari, and through the APIs that Apple offers the credential managers you can even pick your default CM and never think about iCloud again…
by dfabulich | 2025-12-17 19:16:31+00:00
No, passkeys haven't added a new general lockout issue, because Apple, Google, etc. don't allow you to create an account where you can only login via passkey with no external authentication factor. They require you have something outside the Google account, whether that's a password, a hardware key, etc.

People keep falsely imagining that Google is setting people up with passkey-only accounts, with no way to backup their login credentials. Gosh, wouldn't that be terrible?

That would be like 1Password letting you create a passkey-only account with no password, storing the only passkey in 1Password. The whole idea makes no sense. 1Password doesn't do that, and neither does Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc. (We can all imagine them doing something that stupid, but, it turns out, they don't.)

Pre-passkeys, the most common lost-credential scenario was creating a fresh Gmail address on a new device (an Android phone) with a password and forgetting both your Google password and your password for your cellular-phone carrier (AT&T, T-Mobile, etc). Your Google password would be stored locally on your phone and in Google's cloud, but when you lose your phone and forget your passwords, no backups remain.

At that point, you're pretty much screwed. Google can't email you a reset-password link, because Gmail is your email. Google can't send you a 2FA SMS until you get a new phone with the same number, but you can't convince AT&T to do that, because they want to send a reset-password link to your email, which you don't have, or SMS to your phone, which you don't have.

(The cellular carriers don't even allow you to show government ID at a physical store. They don't allow you to take over a phone number that way, because people could then threaten/bribe a T-Mobile store representative to falsely claim that you presented valid government ID, taking over other people's accounts. If you walk into a store, they'll just put you on the phone with customer service, where they'll insist that you provide your AT&T password, or reset your password via email or SMS. If you've lost your email and your phone and all your passwords, you're completely out of luck.)

If Google allowed you to create a passkey-only account, with no SMS 2FA and no way to backup your passkey, that would be even worse.

But, luckily for all of us, they don't even allow that, and they're certainly not pushing it unilaterally on billions of people.
by ChrisArchitect | 2025-12-17 19:16:36+00:00
Related:

Mozilla appoints new CEO Anthony Enzor-Demeo

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46288491

Is Mozilla trying hard to kill itself?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46299934

No AI* Here – A Response to Mozilla's Next Chapter

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46295268*
by alexgotoi | 2025-12-17 19:16:40+00:00
The thing people miss in these “replace juniors with AI” takes is that juniors were never mainly about cheap hands on keyboards. They’re the only people in the org who are still allowed to ask “dumb” questions without losing face, and those questions are often the only signal you get that your abstractions are nonsense.

What AI does is remove a bunch of the humiliating, boring parts of being junior: hunting for the right API by cargo-culting Stack Overflow, grinding through boilerplate, getting stuck for hours on a missing import. If a half-decent model can collapse that search space for them, you get to spend more of their ramp time on “here’s how our system actually fits together” instead of “here’s how for-loops work in our house style”.

If you take that setup and then decide “cool, now we don’t need juniors at all”, you’re basically saying you want a company with no memory and no farm system – just an ever-shrinking ring of seniors arguing about strategy while no one actually grows into them.

Always love to include a good AI x work thread in my https://hackernewsai.com/ newsletter.
by skydhash | 2025-12-17 19:16:45+00:00
Do you honestly think that’s how people learn?

This is an example of a book on Common Lisp

https://gigamonkeys.com/book/practical-a-simple-database

What you usually do is follow the book instructions and get some result, then go to do some exploration on your own. There’s no walk in the dark trying to figure your own path.

Once you learn what works, and what does not, then you’ll have a solid foundation to tackle more complex subject. That’s the benefit of having a good book and/or a good teacher to guide you to the path of mastering. Using a slot machine is more tortuous than that.