MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Timon3 | 2025-12-16 13:44:58+00:00
I've thought the same multiple times over the last few years. I can't remember all the events, but it was at least four separate times, most notably with January 6th. Every time it went like this:

1. Users on /r/conservative (& other conservative forums) show a surprisingly negative reaction to something done by the GOP

2. Over the next few days, their media starts repeating individual social media responses that seem to find agreement. They don't have to make sense, they just have to terminate the thought.

3. In the communities more and more voices spread those same responses while shouting down reasonable commenters from 1., declaring them "non-MAGA" or "RINOs"

4. After a few days/weeks, all opposing voices have been drowned out, and their moderation teams delete any posts that could sway their opinion/goes against the current.
by JoeAltmaier | 2025-12-16 13:45:03+00:00
Fines don't scale. The Australian mining company, fined a thousand bucks for every native rock drawing they destroy? They counted them up, paid the fine, and blasted a road through. All gone.

Fines becomes a business calculation. Not a deterrent, not if it matters to the big corporation. Which at some scale, it will become cost-effective.
by braza | 2025-12-16 13:46:36+00:00
> My take away from this is that you can't change the culture

I've seen the culture changing in some special circumstances a couple times in previous companies, and honestly all of them were ugly: 1) Demographic replacement (having more people saying yes and out-vote the legacy employees)

2) Hired guns from the top to the bottom to shake the system (we called in a company those managers "007" because they used to have licence to fire).

3) Non-compliance stable as a discipline method for the "legacy employees" (very adopted in Central Europe)

4) "Train-your-replacement" as a coercion method for collaboration

5) Some modified version of the "madogiwa-zoku" but instead of looking to the window, they push people to go for the "metawork," like organizing events, being a developer advocate in conferences, assuming roles as "community managers," or being used as a "donkey token" to be used in conferences or panels of "_______________ in tech."
by redleader55 | 2025-12-16 13:46:42+00:00
I think it's more complicated than this. People with incurable diseases are desperate and sometimes resort to unproven, dangerous and very expensive treatments. Unfortunately, most people don't have enough money for that, so in order to afford them they try to obtain donations to pursue the treatment they think will save them. Places like Turkey, China, etc are heavens for this kind of medicine.
by camgunz | 2025-12-16 13:46:53+00:00
"Take some ordinary, off-the-shelf servers. Treat them as dumb, untrusted pipes. Their job is just to relay information. They don’t own the keys—you own your keys. You sign messages with your key, then post them to one or more relays. Other users follow one or more relays. When they get a message, they use your key to verify you sent it. That’s it!"

This is NNTP.
by rPlayer6554 | 2025-12-16 13:46:59+00:00
Just to be clear, they are NOT deactivating IntelliSense which suggests classes and functions.

This is an AI inline code suggestion tool using local LLMs.

Not great but may or may not impact your workflow. I love using agents, but Intellijs inline code suggestions (also based on a local LLMs) are usually useless to me.
by t-3 | 2025-12-16 13:47:13+00:00
Sanctions don't never work, but they certainly must be used judiciously. They can and will be anticipated and countered, as Russia has shown. Their overuse has pushed the intended victims into a trading bloc rather than isolating them. I want a competent and effective government, even if it's one that kills innocent people for profit and destroys democracy in other countries. Instead we just get sanctions that do nothing and evil for profit.
by ArkhamMirror | 2025-12-16 13:47:26+00:00
I didn't think a video would be very exciting. It did feel like deep magic when I tested it though. For the scenario in the screenshots, I provided the question, "Did we really land a man on the moon?" and the null hypothesis "We landed on the moon in 1969", and the low value piece of evidence "My dad told me he saw Stanley Kubrick's moon landing set one time and he never lies." Literally everything else the LLM generated on demand for me based on its existing training data, offline. It gave me hypotheses, challenges, evidence, filled out the matrix, did the calculations, everything.
by horsawlarway | 2025-12-16 13:47:49+00:00
> If a substance already exists in nature and has been in use for a long time, then it's reasonable to take the position that it is probably within harm limits.

Reasonable, but wrong.

Simple case: Did you know that occupational sawdust exposure is strongly associated with cancer in the paranasal sinuses and nasal cavity?

There's also some pretty compelling evidence that coronavirus's (so common cold & flu) are associated with dementia/Alzheimer's.

Alcohol increases cancer rate more than some of the "chemicals" people will complain about. So does Bacon. So does sunlight.

All of which have been floating around in Human contact for a LONG time.

Again - we do a pretty good job at filtering out the stuff that's fast acting and harmful. It's just really difficult to tease out information that requires long term monitoring and involves small/moderate increases in risk.

Think about how long it took us to figure out that lead exposure is really nasty. We used lead for thousands of years prior, and it's literally a base element.

---

As for

> Also, if a chemical is known to be toxic, then rigorous testing should be performed before allowing it to be widely distributed and used.

No one is arguing otherwise, and normally large and expensive studies are done on short term harm (extensive animal testing). But you tell me how we can reasonably and ethically do longitudinal studies on large groups of humans to determine if a new substance is going to cause small/moderate cancer rate bumps over 50+ years?

This is just genuinely a difficult problem to address, and it's not simply like we can go "wait 50 years and see"! Because usually we're trying to use these things to address existing problems. Ex - pesticides and fertilizers might still be net positives even with the cancer risk - do we avoid them and let people starve today? Or feed everyone now and have a 10% bump in cancer rates 50 years later? There's no golden ticket here.
by ItsKaranKK | 2025-12-16 13:48:01+00:00
Hi, I’m Karan, a frontend dev who loves UI and animation.

I've noticed that many developers hate writing CSS, but still want their apps to look premium and animated. I felt the same pain rebuilding motion-heavy components again and again.

I spent approximately six months building ogBlocks — an animated UI library for React with copy-paste components (Motion + Tailwind) that are fully customizable and production-ready.

Built it mainly for indie hackers and agencies shipping fast. Happy to answer questions.
by mbesto | 2025-12-16 13:48:06+00:00
> I understand why it's unpopular to relate the fact that applications for serious surveillance/espionage CNE work at NSA are competitive, and that the USG is very open about soliciting those applications.

And I'm not challenging you on that, at all. I actually believe you are correct because you typically provide very thoughtful answers from a position of authority and usually bring evidence to back your assertions. In this case, you're not. Your comments are childish and makes your position way less believable and hence why I'm pushing you.

> It remains a fact.

Just because you say it's a fact doesn't mean it is. The fact that you've done nothing but say "I know its a fact so therefore it is" doesn't help your position either.

> What I'm not going to do is write you an apology for confronting you with that information.

Yeesh. Chill out. I never asked for an apology. Your discourse is belittling and unproductive.
by lsofzz | 2025-12-16 13:48:50+00:00
> I'm a Tech Lead, and nobody listens to me. What should I do?

TL;DidntRead

Precisely. Take the `TL` title out the door. Take the `ego` out the door.

Then, step in the door - as a friend, with empathy, proactive listening and support the engineers.

Round-table `discussions`. Not Waterfall.

My 2 cents.
by Bender | 2025-12-16 13:48:51+00:00
I doubt this would ever be accepted upstream. That said if one wants speed play around with lftp [1]. It has a mirror subsystem that can replicate much of rsync functionality in a chroot sftp-only destination and can use multiple TCP/SFTP streams in a batch upload and per-file meaning one can saturate just about any upstream. I have used this for transferring massive postgres backups and then because I am paranoid when using applications that automatically multipart transfer files I include a checksum file for the source and then verify the destination files.

The only downside I have found using lftp is that given there is no corresponding daemon for rsync on the destination then directory enumeration can be slow if there are a lot of nested sub-directories. Oh and the syntax is a little odd for me anyway. I always have to look at my existing scripts when setting up new automation.

Demo to play with, download only. Try different values. This will be faster on your servers, especially anything within the data-center.

ssh mirror@mirror.newsdump.org # do this once to accept key as ssh-keyscan will choke on my big banner mkdir -p /dev/shm/test && cd /dev/shm/test lftp -u mirror, -e "mirror --parallel=4 --use-pget=8 --no-perms --verbose /pub/big_file_test/ /dev/shm/test;bye" sftp://mirror.newsdump.org

For automation add --loop to repeat job until nothing has changed.

[1] - https://linux.die.net/man/1/lftp
by Miraltar | 2025-12-16 13:49:42+00:00
> if you do not have enough grip, you may unfortunately spill the coffee on the floor. If you don't have enough grip while doing a sharp turn, it could be literally fatal. As a result, it is wise for the absolute majority of people in high-risk situations to exert more power than necessary. The energy investments are small, but changes in probabilities are significant.

Yes but there's still a sweet spot to find, you're not gripping your cup or your wheel as hard as you can. Over-gripping in uncertain conditions can be good but only to a certain extent.

I still agree with you though, a good example of this is climbing stairs — if you have strong legs it's much less effort to go 2 by 2 but I'd never tell someone struggling to do that, it would make no sense.
by usernamed7 | 2025-12-16 13:49:47+00:00
the AI hallucinated and somehow it's rails fault?

GID's are great - i think the issue is with how they leveraged rubyLLM for something they should inherently not be using LLMs for.

> Remember that GIDs were made for facilitating ActiveJob serialization - they are a system-level facility, not a product-level facility.

I think this is somewhat obvious given the signature like gid://awesome-app/Post/32; there is no scoping to the user or account so it should be treated like a global lookup. If you need scoping to a user/account you can build that.

Honestly I think this is a matter of the author using poor design decisions and over leveraging LLMs. But this is not the fault of Rails, it is working as expected.

Be careful with LLMs!
by the_snooze | 2025-12-16 13:49:52+00:00
That's an incomplete view. Office is a strong incumbent not because it's a good product, but because there's decades of processes built around it. To take a small slice from my world, if you do any kind of government-funded research, you must use Microsoft Office because government funding agencies have in-house templates for budgets and technical reports. They'll reject proposals and contractually-obligated deliveries if you don't use their template. Those templates break in spectacular and unpredictable ways on non-MS-Office suites.

People use MS Office because other people use MS Office. It's network effects.
by rayiner | 2025-12-16 13:50:32+00:00
Trump has a far-reaching policy stance. His thesis is that American success is due to Americans and what is distinctive about them, and our engagement with foreigners on the present terms is not good for America. That has implications for everything from immigration policy, to trade policy, military positions, to how to teach kids in schools. Closing the border, deporting all illegal immigrants, screening legal immigrants, abandoning unfounded foreign policy commitments, using tariffs as a tool of trade policy, shutting down USAID, pushing patriotic education, etc., are all concrete policies consistent with that thesis.

If you buy into liberal universalism, sure you don’t agree with the policy. If you think the only difference between an Iowan and a Bangladeshi is the need for sunscreen and external factors outside people’s control—you don’t see how the policy is a good one. But to say that there’s no policy there is absurd.
by capacity_guy | 2025-12-16 13:50:49+00:00
I’m 70, and this is company #7.

After decades building software - and living with ADHD/dyslexia - I finally put language to a problem I kept running into personally and professionally:

Most tools assume humans operate at steady, peak capacity. We don’t.

Capacity (mental, emotional, physical bandwidth) fluctuates constantly. When it drops, predictable things happen: thinking degrades decisions get harder tools that rely on reflection or discipline stop working.

That’s why meditation apps are useless at 3 a.m., and productivity systems fall apart by mid-afternoon.

I built a small system around this idea: identify your current capacity state (Green / Yellow / Red / “Can’t-Even”) only use tools that match that state don’t try to “think your way out” when capacity is low.

There’s an AI-guided, step-by-step reset protocol designed to help people restore capacity when they’re overloaded. The system adapts the sequence and pacing based on current capacity, rather than assuming people can reflect, plan, or power through.

~2,000 hours of content development so far, ~25 active beta users. It seems to help some people recover faster when they’re stuck, but I don’t yet know how broadly this generalizes across different roles or work contexts.

I’m looking for professionals willing to actually use this when they’re struggling and give blunt feedback on what works, what doesn’t, and where the framework breaks.

I’m not trying to build a unicorn. I’m trying to build something that works for the large number of people who report being under pressure work most days.

If you’re curious or skeptical and want to test it: https://app.emergentskills.com/

Happy to answer questions about the framework, what I’ve tried before, or why I’m still building at 70.
by NalNezumi | 2025-12-16 13:50:53+00:00
The last one made me chuckle. Worked in Japan, didn't see many madogiwa zoku (probably because I only worked at startups) although it was talked about a lot. But I guess community manager-esque position did exist, and now it makes sense why so many big company blokes that went to tech meetup came off as very incompetent
by mxmlnkn | 2025-12-16 13:50:58+00:00
I never understood why the recommended replacement for ß is ss. It is a ligature of sz (similar to & being a ligature of et) and is even pronounced ess-zet. The only logical replacement would have been sz, and it would have avoided the clash of Masse (mass) and Maße (measurements). Then again, it only affects whether the vowel before it is pronounced short or long, and there are better ways to encode that in written language in the first place.
by latentsea | 2025-12-16 13:51:04+00:00
I've found assigning issues to GitHub Copilot on GitHub itself to be a real step-wise change from one off requests to a chat based interface that has no awareness of my codebase. Maybe it's just me, but I'm getting significantly more realworld value out of AI these days. I've been working through doing an implementation of a spec using GitHub Copilot mostly from my phone, and it has been a really instructive exercise in how to squeeze as much out such a narrow interface as possible. I still dip into a full desktop + IDE from time to time, but for like 90% of it I've been doing it in my phone. Slowly but surely working my way from "vibe coded in a weekend" level initial AI slop quality to nice, clean architecture, excellent dev tooling, production grade multitenant SaaS. I've still got a ways to go, but I'm able to make quite a lot of progress just using my phone during my commute, on my lunch breaks, in between meetings, and bathroom breaks etc.
by steer_dev | 2025-12-16 13:51:58+00:00
OP here. Last week I posted a discussion ("The Confident Idiot Problem") about why we need deterministic checks instead of just "LLM vibes" for reliability.

That thread [1] blew up, so I’m sharing the open-source implementation (v0.2) that solves it.

Steer is an active reliability layer for Python agents. It sits between your LLM and the user to enforce hard constraints.

Unlike passive observability tools that just log errors, Steer creates a feedback loop:

1. Catch: It uses deterministic verifiers (like Regex, AST parsing, JSON Schema) to block hallucinations in real-time.

2. Teach: You fix the behavior in a local dashboard (`steer ui`).

3. Train: v0.2 adds a "Data Engine" that exports these runtime failures into an OpenAI-ready fine-tuning dataset.

The goal isn't just to block errors; it's to use those errors to bootstrap a model that stops making them.

It is Python-native, local-first, and framework agnostic.

Repo: https://github.com/imtt-dev/steer

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46152838
by taneliv | 2025-12-16 13:51:59+00:00
Hasn't this been the Russian agenda for decades? I don't think it's a secret, or a fringe theory. They have worked on it long term, and seemingly finding success now.

I don't think China is against this change, but their agenda seems to be more focused on international trade and internal growth, rather than specific strategy against the US.

The EU is definitely not benefiting from it in the short term. While some argue it needs this change in the long term, it is difficult to imagine that the EU wants it to happen so arbitrarily and quickly.

Those holding any meaningful power in the US are either benefiting from this change, at least in the short term or personally, or oblivious to it, possibly also due to influence from the agents of change.

It's an opportunity for other states to gain influence. And in particular for Russia to advance their geopolitical ambitions, since this is from their playbook.

It would be in the interests of the United States to alter the course, and regain the influence already lost. The leaders seem to have chosen to ignore her interests, though.
Show HN: WeekInPapers – A Modern ArXiv Reader
by mox111 | 2025-12-16 13:52:06+00:00
Hello,

I built weekinpapers.com to address what I saw as a "discoverability" problem for arXiv papers in Computer Science.

As the course of the calendar week progresses, the homepage will update to show newly-published papers as they come in. The process will start again the following week.

Each entry features a AI-generated "ELI5" summary, in an attempt to demystify, and make explicit, any keywords or assumed knowledge. I see this as a valid use-case for LLMs. The hope is, that cutting edge research becomes accessible to a broader audience.

Matt
by vdupras | 2025-12-16 13:52:10+00:00
That's why I said "set it on fire". This whole economic speak is just a cover to avoid saying that trade imbalance is a fealty payment to the US. It's ridiculous to say that a country that was previously sending out stuff for free to the US would suddenly have a big existential problem when they suddenly don't have to do it anymore. They will have other problems due to a changing world order, that's for sure, but figuring out what to do with that production won't be one of them.
by smallmancontrov | 2025-12-16 13:53:38+00:00
> Taking the US dollar as world reserve currency for granted.

It's the exact opposite: US citizens got fed up with the domestic problems created by Triffin's Dilemma and wanted out.

Remember, the "imperial revenue" in our model doesn't get helicoptered into the economy, it pumps assets. Stocks, bonds, and real estate. Your share of the imperial loot is proportional to the value of the assets that you own, and worse, even if you don't have a big house and fat brokerage account you still have to compete with people who do and they're going to bid up the price of anything that doesn't have highly elastic supply. Health care, housing, and education are the ones creating problems. America got a great deal, but most Americans got a raw deal: costs went up, income didn't, misery ensued.

Pumped bonds allow (force, really) the government to run deficits (homework: what breaks if they don't? It happened in Clinton's term, you can go and check) and to some extent that distributes the money. There's the whole services narrative which held that the services sector would pump hard enough to backfill manufacturing, but it never did. The people who got the door slammed in their face are no longer convinced that the door is their path to prosperity and now they want to tear the whole thing down.

If you want to hear an actual economist talk about this, see "Trade Wars are Class Wars" by Klein and Pettis.
by ethbr1 | 2025-12-16 13:53:49+00:00
All US automakers are doing the same thing. There's gentle up-marketing collusion.

The issue at root is that auto demand is a finite, population-based amount. Automakers are all pretty good at margin and manufacturing cost control.

So that leaves the only independent variable that can influence revenue and profits as {average sold vehicle price}.

New entrants face a scale issue: it's difficult to compete with the larger manufacturers' production costs with orders of magnitude less sales volume.

Which is why you historically only saw state-sponsored new manufacturers break into the market (read: Japan, Korea, China).

Electrification turned some of this on its head, but not completely. GM, Ford, et al. can still build just enough mid-market electrics to spoil others volumes, without attempting to build something really good and cannibalizing their own luxury vehicles.
by mohsen1 | 2025-12-16 13:54:07+00:00
Folks with big titles will always write comments that sound smart and thoughtful but in reality hinder the process. For example:

- This architecture binds us to AWS. Have we estimated the engineering effort to remain cloud-agnostic in case we need to move to Azure next year?

- I see we're using Postgres. Have we considered how we’ll handle horizontal sharding if our user base grows by 1000x in Q4?

- This synchronous API call introduces tight coupling. Shouldn't this be an event-driven architecture to handle back-pressure?

All sound like things that are easy to ask, sound prudent to management, but are impossibly expensive to answer or implement for a feature that just needs to ship.
by daturkel | 2025-12-16 13:54:17+00:00
Thanks! Optimization was something I'd played with in previous rounds of coding up AYTO simulations, but not in the most recent version. (See the bottom section of this notebook [0]). There's also a very thorough treatment of the problem in a blog post from 2018 by SAS (the software company) [1]. It's surprising how many people have been drawn in by the allure of AYTO!

[0]: https://github.com/daturkel/pyto/blob/master/AYTO_S8.ipynb [1]: https://blogs.sas.com/content/operations/2018/08/14/are-you-...