MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by CBMPET2001 | 2025-12-03 23:23:20+00:00
Eh, with something this horrendously egregious I think their customers have a right to know how carelessly their data was handled, regardless of the remediation steps taken after disclosure; that aside, who knows how many other AI SaaS vendors might stumble across this article and realize they've made a similarly boneheaded error, and save both themselves and their customers a huge amount of pain . . .
by johnnyanmac | 2025-12-03 23:24:00+00:00
>There's always this question when Valve comes up of, "why are people more upset about gambling for cosmetics in a game than gambling for power/features in a game?"

Aren't people upset about both? The whole "gamble for features" is pretty much why the mobile market and console market are divorced in audiences (or at least, community).

People are "more" upset about Valve here because this is in the console space. They've long dismissed the mobile scene as lost.
by zubiaur | 2025-12-03 23:24:32+00:00
Some people take find their life meaning through craft and work. When that craft is suddenly less scarce, less special, so does that craft-tied meaning.

I wonder if these feelings are what scribes and amanuenses felt when the printing press arrived.

I do enjoy programming, I like my job and take pride on it, but I actively try for it not to be the life-mean giving activity. I'm a just mercenary of my trade.
by citizenpaul | 2025-12-03 23:24:37+00:00
I know I'm jaded but anytime I see a business situation and they specifically say you must be a MINOR to work with them... I get kinda suspicious.

>Yes, I'm a teenager ,18 and under

So not actually a teenager but a minor is what they mean and use what I would call deceptive language around it. But why?....
by hekkle | 2025-12-03 23:24:43+00:00
> The argument isn't really AI versus non-AI, it's quality work versus shoddy work.

Unfortunately, that's not how most people make decisions on what to purchase. It's all about bean counting; what is cheap, vs what is expensive. Don't believe me? Why is Trump currently putting tariffs on foreign countries? Because it is cheaper to manufacture there, are their products better than American ones? No, but they're cheap.
by evan_a_a | 2025-12-03 23:24:59+00:00
This is a very standard part of responsible disclosure. Hacker finds bugs -> discloses them to the vendor -> (hopefully) the vendor communicates with them and remediates -> both sides publish the technical details. It also helps to demonstrate to the rest of the security world which companies will take reports seriously and which ones won’t, which is very useful information to have.
by alphazard | 2025-12-03 23:25:12+00:00
The article leaves out the fact that corporate research has gone the way of political research. It exists to give cover for some decision that is unpopular, or serves the decision maker more than the company. It doesn't actually inform decisions, it retroactively justifies decisions in the most palatable way.

If anyone actually talked to users and did what they wanted, then software wouldn't suck.
by tshaddox | 2025-12-03 23:25:24+00:00
To me it just looks like unacceptable carelessness, not an indictment of the alleged "lack of explicitness" versus something like gRPC. Explicit schemas aren't going to help you if you're so careless that, right at the last moment, you allow untrusted user input to reference anything whatsoever in the server's name space.
by mrguyorama | 2025-12-03 23:25:33+00:00
Yeah but what evidence is there that what you describe is an engine problem rather than an Arrowhead can't software engineer problem?

As others point out, several other good games were made on this engine, and they do not have such abysmal engineering quality. Vermintide 2 is on the same engine and very much doesn't have problems with constant bugs and regressions.

Arrowhead struggled to fix the lock on for the missile launcher for months, and then claimed that "raycasts are hard* and I just don't think they should be for a game dev. Several patches seem to show that they just do not test at all the release build, and that they don't seem to have functioning version control to keep from breaking things they've already fixed.

>and every month or two a new major bug relating to host client desyncing is found out by the community who then has to have big campaigns badgering the devs to notice and fix it.

This is not a game engine problem. Does fire damage properly work across multiplayer yet?
by Master_Odin | 2025-12-03 23:25:34+00:00
Given how good Proton is, I don't think it's useful to target Linux for most indie devs unless it's a one click build for multiple platforms. Even then, I've definitely had more issues with games with native Linux builds than Proton, where there's been a number of games I've set to use Proton over native to get better performance.
by joshvm | 2025-12-03 23:26:04+00:00
I would also split the concerns:

1. Compliancy with relevant standards. HIPAA, GDPR, ISO, military, legal, etc. Realistically you're going to outsource this or hire someone who knows how to build it, and then you're going to pay an agency to confirm that you're compliant. You also need to consider whether the incumbent solution is a trust-based solution, like the old "nobody gets fired for buying Intel".

2. Domain expertise is always easier if you have a domain expert. Big companies also outsource market research. They'll go to a firm like GLG, pay for some expert's time or commission a survey.

It seems like table stakes to do some basic research on your own to see what software (or solutions) exist and why everyone uses them, and why competitors failed. That should cost you nothing but time, and maybe expense if you buy some software. In a lot of fields even browsing some forums or Reddit is enough. The difference is if you have a working product that's generic enough to be useful to other domains, but you're not sure. Then you might be able to arrange some sort of quid pro quo like a trial where the partner gets to keep some output/analysis, and you get some real-world testing and feedback.
by moefh | 2025-12-03 23:26:10+00:00
It was always considered bad not (just) because it's ugly, but because it hides potential problems and adds no safety at all: a `[static N]` parameter tells the compiler that the parameter will never be NULL, but the function can still be called with a NULL pointer anyway.

That's is the current state of both gcc and clang: they will both happily, without warnings, pass a NULL pointer to a function with a `[static N]` parameter, and then REMOVE ANY NULL CHECK from the function, because the argument can't possibly be NULL according to the function signature, so the check is obviously redundant.

See the example in [1]: note that in the assembly of `f1` the NULL check is removed, while it's present in the "unsafe" `f2`, making it actually safer.

Also note that gcc will at least tell you that the check in `f1()` is "useless" (yet no warning about `g()` calling it with a pointer that could be NULL), while clang sees nothing wrong at all.

[1] https://godbolt.org/z/ba6rxc8W5
by MangoToupe | 2025-12-03 23:26:12+00:00
Sure, but people also find pointers and references confusing (& certainly their distinction). Literally all programming is considered weird if you talk to the right person.

I would argue as a rule of thumb, anyone who focuses on syntax over semantics has little to contribute until they write ten thousand lines in the language. Perl is a great example of how it still fails after this test passes. Rust feels a lot more like java and c++ now, and not in a good way. It could have done more to improve on basic readability than where we ended up, and people still bitch about basic tenets of the language like "lifetimes" and "not being enough like java".
by wholinator2 | 2025-12-03 23:26:38+00:00
I'm curious why a million dollars a year? Wouldn't that create its own problems? We don't want anyone chasing Civil servitude for the money right? Enough to live on while still driving your own car and buying your own groceries is, i feel, the right pay balance for congress, lest they detach even further from the lived experience of civilians.

Their finances should be monitored and heavily restricted. No one should think of money as a benefit of civil service
by _zer0 | 2025-12-03 23:26:55+00:00
Same. I gave up on Windows 11 and removed it. Too many issues, but the final straw was when they deleted GRUB after an update. I kept it around to play games but decided to play on Linux instead and it’s been good so far.

Also, I hated that I kept getting the screen trying to sell me their services after some updates…
by thewebguyd | 2025-12-03 23:27:29+00:00
I also hope its just a blip, but I don't actually think it is.

The democratization of technology was something that had the power to break down class barriers. Anyone could go get cheap, off the shelf hardware, a book, and write useful software & sell it. It became a way to take back the means of production.

Computing being accessible and affordable for everyone = working class power.

That is why its backsliding. Those in power want the opposite, they want to keep control. So we don't get to have open devices, we get pushed to thin clients & locked boot loaders, and we lose access to hardware as it increasingly only gets sold B2B (or if they do still sell to consumers, they just raise prices until most are priced out).

When the wealthy want something, that something becomes unavailable to everyone else.
by klardotsh | 2025-12-03 23:27:40+00:00
Western Washington is very much a "work to live" place, and in a lot of ways there's a feedback loop to ensure it stays that way: surrounded by fellow "work to live" folks who would far rather just get our work done well and head out to the mountains, forests, and seas, the hustle bros will usually leave within a few years. I've watched it happen with quite a number of type-A folks. Exceptions for folks who make it into certain orgs in Amazon or into startup leadership, those seem to be safe places for hustlers around here.

Anyway. I think you're spot on with the "you all are building shit that doesn't make the world better, it just devalues the human" vibe. Regardless of what employers in WA may force folks to build, that's the mentality here, and AI evangelists don't make many friends... nor did blockchain evangelists, or evangelists of any of the spin-off hype trains ("Web3", NFTs, etc). I guess the "cloud" hype train stuck here, but that happened before I moved out west.
by deeebug | 2025-12-03 23:27:40+00:00
> So if the minio maintainers (or anybody that forks the project and wants to work it) can fix any security issues that may occur I don't see any problems with using it.

The concerning language for me is this part that was added:

> Critical security fixes may be evaluated on a case-by-case basis

It seems to imply that any fixes _may_ be merged in, but there's no guarantees.
by digdugdirk | 2025-12-03 23:27:41+00:00
Code Husbandry is a good term for what I've been thinking about how to implement. I hope you don't mind if I steal it. Think automated "mini agents", each with a defined set of tools and tasks, responding to specific triggers.

Imagine one agent just does docstrings - on commit, build an AST, branch, write/update comments accordingly, push and create a merge request with a standard report template.

Each of these mini-agents has a defined scope and operates in its own environment, and can be customized/trained as such. They just run continuously on the codebase based on their rules and triggers.

The idea is that all these changes bubble up to the developer for approval, just maybe after a few rounds of LLM iteration. The hope is that small models can be leveraged to a higher quality of output and operate in an asynchronous manner.
by xpe | 2025-12-03 23:28:08+00:00
I would ask that you more carefully and neutrally reread my comment. Your questions do not match up with what I actually wrote. You seem to have injected your own uncharitable interpretations rather than commenting on what I wrote? This wastes everyone’s time and is against HN guidelines.

I don’t appreciate your sarcastic and snarky final penultimate sentence. If you reread my comment, you probably can see that I would agree there is no one perfect legal entity.

> Why do you assume Mitchell is just doing this without any research or reasoning?

I said nothing of the kind.

> Your laundry list of everything that might possibly go wrong with an open software project is not exactly useful.

I didn’t make any such laundry list (or even a list).

Saying “… that only you can see. Enjoy!” at the end of this is more than unkind; it is a jerk move.

Taken as a whole, the comment above isn’t just uncharitable; it mischaracterizes my comment completely and consistently.
by _sinelaw_ | 2025-12-03 23:28:27+00:00
Completely agree - Claude multiplied my productivity in this case by a factor of 3 at least. It took ~3 weeks "wall clock time" - worked around the clock pretty intensely (got hooked! I love this) so maybe more like 1 month of normal working hours. Would have taken a lot longer than that without Claude Code and I would have given up before reaching this state.
by VirusNewbie | 2025-12-03 23:28:36+00:00
>Capitalism is a scam against the working class.

Huh, I'm looking around at my large house, wonderful life I've provided for my family, nice car, fun job, sure doesn't seem like a scam.

I've noticed that people who have failed a lot or things aren't going well like to blame external factors, and often reach for simpler ones.
by ralusek | 2025-12-03 23:28:41+00:00
It genuinely makes me see the value in private companies. Public companies must grow. They're accountable to so many different interests. Private companies can be happy sitting at whatever profit level they want. They can take time to tinker on something that they care about. If it doesn't pay off, that's fine.

I think I would say it this way: private companies can be good or bad, but public companies must ultimately become bad.
by stocksinsmocks | 2025-12-03 23:28:43+00:00
Most enterprise software I use has serious defects. Professional CAD software for infrastructure is awful. Many are just incremental improvements piled upon software from the 1990s. Bugs last for decades because nobody can understand how the program works so they just work on one more little VBA plugin at a time. Meanwhile, the capabilities of these programs have fallen completely behind game studios with no budget and no business plan. Where are the results of this human excellence and code quality process? There are 10s of thousands of new CVEs every year from code hand crafted by artisans on their very own MacBooks. How? Perhaps there is the tiny possibility that maybe code quality is mostly an aesthetic judgment that nobody can really define, and just maybe this effort is mostly spent on vague concepts like maintainability or preferential decisions instead of the basics: does it meet the specification? Is the performance getting better or worse?

This is the game changer for me: I don’t have to evaluate tens or hundreds of market options that fit my problem. I tell the machine to solve it, and if it works, then I’m happy. If it doesn’t I throw it away. All in a few minutes and for a few cents. Code is going the way of the disposable diaper, and, if you ever washed a cloth diaper you will know, that’s a good thing.
by WarOnPrivacy | 2025-12-03 23:29:51+00:00
Considering executive outlays apart from shareholder outlays omits most of the parasitic picture.

"Top healthcare companies spend 95% of profits on shareholders, study finds"

ref: https://www.healthcare-brew.com/stories/2025/02/21/top-healt...

Executives and shareholders are effectively one organism, with execs serving the function of disrupting the host for optimal extraction.
by dkdcio | 2025-12-03 23:30:00+00:00
totally fair. I do think a lot of the learnings remain relevant (stuff I learned back in April is still roughly what I do now), and I am increasingly seeing people share the same learnings; tips & tricks that work and whatnot (i.e. I think we’re getting to the dust settling about now? maybe a few more months? definitely uneven distribution)

also FWIW I think healthy skepticism is great; but developers outright denying this technology will be useful going forward are in for a rude awakening IMO
by tshaddox | 2025-12-03 23:30:03+00:00
> It seems that Amazon are playing this much like Microsoft - seeing themselves are more of a cloud provider, happy to serve anyone's models, and perhaps only putting a moderate effort into building their own models (which they'll be happy to serve to those who want that capability/price point).

Or, as a slight variation of that, they think the underlying technology will always be quickly commoditized and that no one will ever be able to maintain much of a moat.
by inferiorhuman | 2025-12-03 23:30:09+00:00
You sound like a lawyer grasping at straws instead of someone with a reasonable perspective that wouldn't be hypocritical when flipped around.

What lawyer speak? You're throwing a temper tantrum over a situation entirely of your own making. That there's a Windows port of Zig and sufficient users to justify its continued existence pretty clearly shows your hyperbole isn't representative in the way you claim.

Were I in a situation where I needed to work with something not expecting LF line termination I'd either configure my dev environment appropriately or find tools that do what I want.

No one has to care about zig, it's a niche language that doesn't care about its users, it's irrelevant except for hacker news threads.

So when it's your tool selection nobody has to care? But when someone else makes a decision you disagree with it's the end of the world? Gotcha. Don't check that checkbox. Stay mad, bro.
by citizenpaul | 2025-12-03 23:30:38+00:00
> it just makes software engineering into bothering supervisor job.

I'm pretty sure this is the entire enthusiasm from C-level for AI in a nutshell. Until AI SWE resisted being mashed into a replaceable cog job that they don't have to think/care about. AI is the magic beans that are just tantalizingly out of reach and boy do they want it.
by phendrenad2 | 2025-12-03 23:30:43+00:00
That's easy to say. But they do prevent some cheating. Don't believe me? Consider the simplest case: No anti-cheat whatsoever. You can just hook into the rendering engine and draw walls at 50% transparency. That's the worst case. Now, we add minimal anti-cheat that convolutes the binary with lots of extra jumps and loops at runtime. Now, someone needs to spend time figuring out the pattern. That effort isn't free. Now, people have to pay for cheats. Guess what? Visa doesn't want to handle payment processing for your hacks & cheats business. So now you're using sketchy payment processors based out of a third-world country. Guess what else? People will create fake hacks & cheats websites that use those same payment processors, and will just take people's money and never deliver the cheats. You get to try to differentiate yourself from literal scammers, how are you going to do that? You can't put the Visa logo on your website. Because you're legit, and you don't want to get sued. Then, the anti-cheat adds heuristic detection for cheat processes. The anti-cheat company BUYS the cheats and reverse-engineers them and improves the heuristics. then the game company makes everyone sign up with a phone number, and permabans that phone number when they're caught cheating. Now some gamers don't want to risk getting banned. Saying that these factors simply don't exist or are insignificant is certainly one of the opinions of all time.
by defrost | 2025-12-03 23:30:46+00:00
Congrats to China:

Fishman points out that China “needs” all the renewable energy it generates to “come online” to limit emissions growth. “That’s why UHV lines are now more important than ever,” he emphasizes. China’s CO₂ emissions fell 1.6% year-on-year in the first quarter of 2025 and 1% over the past 12 months. This is the first time a reduction has been directly linked to increased renewable energy capacity without a slowdown in energy demand, according to a study published in May by Carbon Brief.

From an on the ground field PoV ..

That PV array is a lot of acerage - regularly spaced concrete posts (maybe automated placement) - with a single elevated base rail per line of panels and what looks like slide on cross support rails for panel edges .. folowed by manual(?!!) slide in and lock per panel.

The last photo Workers install photovoltaic panels at the Tengger Desert solar plant in China in May 2024 seems a little staged - awkward angle, just two workers, and seems a tad clumsy for the sheer volume of fit already done and still to do.
by waterTanuki | 2025-12-03 23:30:49+00:00
> Healthcare has to be rationed.

In a society that values McDonald's staying cheap and Coca-Cola superbowl ads, maybe this is true, but it's not a universal rule at all. On the other end of the spectrum from kidney transplants are regular checkups and ability to walk into any doctor's office to get your flu/cold checked out. Rationing healthcare at these stages is only going to make it worse as people wait until they need an emergency room visit to get care.
by jacquesm | 2025-12-03 23:30:52+00:00
The actor model proves that that isn't really as fundamentally a difference as you make it out to be. Write synchronously, execute asynchronously, that's the best of both worlds. To have the asynchronous implementation details exhibit themselves at the language level is just a terribly leaky abstraction. And I feel that if it wasn't a fashionable thing or an attempt to be more like JavaScript that it would have never been implemented in the way it was in the first place.

Async makes everything so much harder to reason about and introduces so many warts in the languages that use it that I probably think it should be considered an anti-pattern. And I was writing asynchronous code in C in the 90's so it's not like I haven't done it but it is just plain ugly, no matter what syntactic sugar you add to make the pill easier to swallow.
by beepbopboopp | 2025-12-03 23:31:16+00:00
> Will there be the same overutilisation occurring if users have to financially support the infrastructure, either through subscriptions or intrusive advertising? > I doubt it.

Yea, I think this is wrong. The analogy is more like the App Store, in that there is very little to do currently other than a better Google Search with the product. The bet is that over time (short time) there are much more financially valuable use cases with a more mature ecosystem and tech.
by lumost | 2025-12-03 23:31:25+00:00
There are 100 senators controlling a budget over 4 trillion effecting more than 300 million per year. To be a senator, you must run a 10-100 million dollar political campaign and make friends with every important person in your state.

Anyone capable of doing the above competently can make 10+ million per year in the private sector. Underpaying for these positions simply invites corruption or plutocracy.