MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ElectricalUnion | 2025-12-17 10:46:21+00:00
If both programs do support unicode, they should just work. This entire post exists because legacy programs do not. And you are using Win32 because of those legacy programs.

That is also why Win32 seems to be the most stable API for userland programs, while constant recompiles of the entire userland are very much the norm and required so your desktop and apps can keep working on other *NIX.
by flanked-evergl | 2025-12-17 10:46:21+00:00
From the government report:

> Of these contact offences, an estimated 17,100 are ‘flagged’ as child sexual exploitation in police recorded crime data.

> New police data, the Complex Organised Child Abuse Dataset (COCAD), while suffering a number of limitations, has identified around 700 recorded offences of group-based child sexual exploitation in 2023.

> Given the lack of a prevalence survey and how under-reported child sexual exploitation is, the flaws in the data and confusing and inconsistently applied definitions and data sets, it is highly unlikely that this accurately reflects the true scale of child sexual exploitation, or group-based exploitation.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-audit-on...

---

Child H (2008) was 11 years old when she came to the attention of the Police. She disclosed that she and another child had been sexually assaulted by adult males. When she was 12, she was found drunk in the back of a car with a suspected CSE perpetrator, who had indecent photos of her on his phone. Risky Business became involved and the Locality Team did an initial assessment and closed the case. Her father provided Risky Business with all the information he had been able to obtain about the details of how and where his daughter had been exploited and abused, and who the perpetrators were. This information was passed on to the authorities. Around this time, there were further concerns about her being a victim of sexual exploitation. She was identified as one of a group of nine children associating with a suspected CSE perpetrator. Her case had not been allocated by children’s social care. The Chair of the Strategy meeting expressed concern about her and considered she needed a child protection case conference. This does not appear to have been held. Three months later, the social care manager recorded on the file that Child H had been assessed as at no risk of sexual exploitation, and the case was closed. Less than a month later, she was found in a derelict house with another child, and a number of adult males. She was arrested for being drunk and disorderly (her conviction was later set aside) and none of the males were arrested. Child H was at this point identified as being at high risk of CSE. Risky Business, social care workers and the Police worked to support Child H and her father and she was looked after for a period. She suffered a miscarriage while with foster carers. Her family moved out of the area and Child H returned home. Some of the perpetrators were subsequently convicted.
by orwin | 2025-12-17 10:47:54+00:00
The data you linked doesn't show that. If I were on my computer, I would download crude oil prices/US shale oil extraction data and look for correlations.

My intuition seeing this is that the lack of openness of Venezuelian economy made it impossible to recover from the crude oil price drop circa 2014, because of a lack of access to capital and new tech (and probably corruption). Also, if you want to nationalizes, you better have a plan like Norway had, and Venezuela didn't. If your goal is only profit, better let a private company take care of it, that's the thing they're good for.
by tgv | 2025-12-17 10:48:05+00:00
Don't count on it. Have you ever seen how much time and effort has been put in making Firefox, Safari and Chrome compliant and performant? It'll take Ladybird ages to get anywhere near.

Someone could try to merge e,g, V8 and Servo, once that's in decent shape. But even then it'll be time consuming to build an acceptable UI, cookie and history management, plugin interface, etc.
by pas | 2025-12-17 10:48:09+00:00
multiple things can be true at once.

is that too much money for one person? well, apparently it depends on who do you ask. and even if the board members who approved it might thought it's too much, it still could have been cheaper than to fire the CEO and find a new one and keep Mozilla on track.

CEO compensation is usually a hedge against risks that are seen as even more costly, even if the performance of the CEO is objectively bad.

https://www.ecgi.global/sites/default/files/working_papers/d...

framing Mozilla/Firefox as some kind of bastion is simply silly - especially if it's supplied by the gigantic fortress kingdom of G, and makes more money on dividends and interest than on selling any actual products or services.

it's a ship at sea with a sail that's too big and a rudder that's unfortunately insignificant.

but whatever metaphor we pick it needs to transform into a sustainable ecosystem, be that donation or sales based.
by Bender | 2025-12-17 10:48:23+00:00
Is your main objection to it that it can obfuscate login activity since many systems track login/connection events at the sshd level and are oblivious to SSH multiplexing?

No, it means anyone that can get your team to execute a script can log in as you in any data-center you have authenticated to regardless of multi-factor authentication without using credentials. It means firewalls do not exist, CVE's not required and credentials are not required.

I personally find it extremely useful

Absolutely, not using credentials and riding the existing channels will always be faster. Removing authentication requirements will always reduce friction.
by gr4vityWall | 2025-12-17 10:48:35+00:00
> You wouldn't calculate the expected RoI of killing adblockers if killing adblockers was never considered.

I agree, although if someone isn't the kind of person who would calculate that, they're probably not the person who will become the CEO of a company that size in the first place. I don't think organizations have the right incentives in place to push people with those values to the top.
by raxxorraxor | 2025-12-17 10:48:57+00:00
I use Gitea and think it is superior to GitHub. Can be quite well integrated in the usual Microsoft corporate environment easily as well, so you don't even need to create users. Perhaps setup two or three groups and you are done. Can be up and running in a few little hours if you start with nothing aside your domain controller.

It also doesn't randomly fail and if it would, you can probably fix it yourself.

I don't think actions on a git repository host is a good way to fix poor deployment strategies if it goes beyond pushing a package to npm and co. Just to poke at the wound again.

But Gitea has interfaces here as well, didn't try them though.
by fijuv | 2025-12-17 10:49:22+00:00
I think it's too late for Mozilla, since it seems they already squandered most of their good will, userbase and money.

At any rate, I think their only good path of to get rid of Gecko.

The best would be to replace it with a finished version of Servo, which would give them a technically superior browser, assuming Google doesn't also drop Blink for Servo. It may be too late for this, but AI agents may perhaps make finishing Servo realistic.

The other path would be to switch to Chromium, which would free all the Gecko developers to work on differentiating a Chromium-based Firefox from Chrome, and guarantee that Firefox is always better than Chrome.
by ofalkaed | 2025-12-17 10:49:30+00:00
I used Windows 11 almost daily for a month, but I never connected it to the internet so it never bothered me with asking about random stuff. I just played a few games for old times sake because I can't be bothered to install wine and 32bit compat stuff these days, and I was sort of procrastinating on backing up and transferring everything from the old laptop. Good chunk of that time was spent on the library level of Halo, I have never been able to get that level down and I kind of hate it. My only real complaints were that battery life sucks, the windows key that I regularly hit on accident (part of why the library took me so long to beat) and not a fan of the file browser. Probably would have felt differently about it had I connected it to the internet.
by markus_zhang | 2025-12-17 10:50:30+00:00
On one hand, I think the students are just wasting their money and time learning no-skills by purchasing essays. After all many courses do need reading and writing essays.

On the other hand, I think the students are wasting their money and time being forced to take many courses in universities, anyway. Back in the university an undergraduate usually takes 90-120 which represents 30-40 courses to get a degree, which is a total BS.

So yeah, whatever.
by Silhouette | 2025-12-17 10:50:46+00:00
My point is that it was never the GDPR that required any sort of "cookie banner" in the first place.

The cookie banner requirement is itself a widespread misconception because the actual rule is neither specific to cookies (it would also cover other locally stored data) nor universal (for example it doesn't require specific consent for locally storing necessary data like session/login mechanics or the contents of a shopping basket).

The requirements for consent that do exist originate in the ePrivacy Directive. That directive was supposed to be superseded by a later ePrivacy Regulation that would have been lex specialis to the GDPR - possibly the only actual link between any of the EU law around cookies and the GDPR - but in the end that regulation was never passed and it was formally abandoned earlier this year.

So for now rules about user consent for local data storage in the EU - and largely still in the UK - do exist but they derive from the ePrivacy Directive and they are widely misunderstood. And while there has been a lot of talk about changes to EU law that might improve the situation with the banners so far talk is all it has been.
by ben_w | 2025-12-17 10:51:07+00:00
To add to your point:

Even if everyone's fit and has a good diet, maternity care is medically important and starting a family in a free country** definitely counts as a lifestyle choice because some choose not to do it.

Human childbirth without any care has quite a high fatality rate*; no childbirth, no next generation to cover the pensions of today's taxpayers.

* I don't know if South Sudan had something weird going on to push their lifetime rate of fatal complications from maternity to 35% in the worst years, but even if they're an outlier there were plenty of other countries trending at around 10% in 1985: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/lifetime-risk-of-maternal...

** Not so in places without women's reproductive rights.
by Epa095 | 2025-12-17 10:51:26+00:00
No, I don't get 'this', because you have not actually said anything. Across this post and the ones above it you have pretty much only insulted me witouth saying anything I can either understand or misunderstand, because there is no content.

In a sibling I see that you actually drop the name of a book, as if you expect the world to read a book to respond to you.

I propose you formulate your argument, if you actually have something to say. Even if it is a summary of a book, summarise it into a argument which is relevant for this conversation. Who knows, maybe even I manage to understand you then.
by Iolaum | 2025-12-17 10:51:27+00:00
The web without ublock origin is a hellscape. Whenever I try another browser, I immediately go back to firefox.

Do these people even know their users?

For example: Fedora Silverblue default Firefox install had an issue with some Youtube videos due to codecs. So I tried watching youtube on Chromium. Ads were so annoying I stopped watching by the second time I tried to watch a video. Stopped watching youtube until I uninstalled default firefox install and added Firefox from flathub. If the option to use a good adblocker gets taken away I 'll most likely dramatically reduce my web browsing.

P.S. Maybe someone ports Vanadium to desktop Linux? If firefox goes away that 'd be my best case desktop browser. Using it on my mobile ;)
by fjfaase | 2025-12-17 10:51:52+00:00
Yes, the primary reason being the bootstrapping problem. But because Dafny can already can generate C# code, that should not be a major problem. It also allows for a gradual conversion where more and more parts are generated from Dagny sources.

I know that maintaining a compiler in its own language poses some problems when you want to extend that language with additional features.

Because compilers are rather complex problems, they can be viewed as a testing stone for a language.

I think it would be nice to have a formally verified compiler. That is a bit more than proving that the sources are correct. But because formally verified compilers are rare, it could promote the usages of Dayne.

I am aware that it would be quite an effort to make it self-hosted and even more to formally verify it correctness.
by lelanthran | 2025-12-17 10:51:54+00:00
I wouldn't mind see a collection of objectives and the emitted output. My experience with LLM output is that they are very often over-engineered for no good reason, which is taxing on me to review.

I want to see this code written to some objective, to compare with what I would have written to the same objective. What I've seen so far are specs so detailed that very little is left to the discretion of the LLM.

What I want to see are those where the LLM is asked for something, and provided it because I am curious to compare it to my proposed solution.

(This sounds like a great idea for a site that shows users the user-submitted task, and only after they submit their attempt does it show them the LLM's attempt. Someone please vibe code this up, TIA)
by npoc | 2025-12-17 10:52:15+00:00
How are you measuring the value of gold? How are you sure it's not the value of the quote asset that fluctuating wildly. If everything was priced in gold do you really think that the prices of everything would fluctuate wildly? For what reason? The only reason for any sudden changes in value of gold are due to demand, which is caused as people move their wealth out of fiat currencies which are collapsing in value.
by littlecranky67 | 2025-12-17 10:52:21+00:00
You can't kill ad-blockers in a browser, unless you don't allow running AI models in browsers (which will become very soon an integral part of your browsing usage - for some of us it already is, mostly through extension).

I will one day just add "Remove all ads on the page I am browsing" into my BROWSER_AI.md file.
by 1313ed01 | 2025-12-17 10:53:09+00:00
There are many 1:76 sets as well, even if 1:72 is more common.

Anecdotally, wargamers do not use those minis much. Some older gamers started out with playing more or less improvised wargames using 1:72 (mainly Airfix) figures in the 1960's or so, or playing games like Fewtherstone's wargames perhaps, but it is rare to see them now. Historical minis as a whole are less common now, but those that still play either use metal figures or figures from more wargame-specific companies (usually using more common game scales like 10mm, 15mm, or 28mm).

Most 1:72 ranges seen on that site (that I spent many hours on) are not that great for gaming. Lots of useless poses that are more for dioramas (or as kids toys maybe?). For gaming you need more just simple infantry walking or firing in some kind of good combat pose, but you often only get a handful of those in a set of 40+ figures, so it does not become very cost effective. Many poses look good, but not what you probably want to build armies for a tabletop.
by Barathkanna | 2025-12-17 10:53:32+00:00
What’s interesting here is that Claude isn’t acting like a utility-maximizing agent at all, it’s behaving like a policy trained to model cooperative human norms. In repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma setups, that looks like tit-for-tat or conditional cooperation, but it’s really an artefact of training and prompt framing rather than strategic reasoning. It’s a good reminder that LLMs in game theory experiments are sampling from learned social distributions, not solving the game in its classical sense.
by h3half | 2025-12-17 10:54:22+00:00
Even then... the reason we use the aero toolbox is because everybody in the aero industry trusts that MATLAB's results are accurate. I don't need to prove that the ECEF<->Keplerian conversions are correct, I can just show that I'm using the toolbox function and people assume it's correct. The aero toolbox is trusted.

When I've had to write similar code in Python, it's a massive pain to "prove" that my conversation code is correct. Often I've resorted to using MATLAB's trusted functions to generate "truth" data and then feeding that to Python to verify it gets the same results.

Obviously this is more work than just using the premade stuff that comes with the toolbox.

Any MATLAB alternative faces the same trust issue. Until it reaches enough mindshare that people assume that it's too popular to have incorrect math (which might not be a good assumption but it is one that people make about MATLAB) then it doesn't actually mimic the main benefit of MATLAB which is that I don't need to check its work.
by GTP | 2025-12-17 10:55:02+00:00
I doubt some of this article's claims.

> At present, a human with specialist expertise still has to guide the process, but it’s not hard to extrapolate and imagine that process becoming fully automated in the next few years.

We already had some software engineers here on HN explain that they don't make a large use of LLMs because the hard part of their job isn't to actually write the code, but to understand the requirements behind it. And formal verification is all about requirements.

> Reading and writing such formal specifications still requires expertise and careful thought. But writing the spec is vastly easier and quicker than writing the proof by hand, so this is progress.

Writing the spec is easier once you are confident about having fully understood the requirements, and here we get back to the above issue. Plus, it is already the case that you don't write the proof by hand, this is what the prover either assists you with or does in full.

> I find it exciting to think that we could just specify in a high-level, declarative way the properties that we want some piece of code to have, and then to vibe code the implementation along with a proof that it satisfies the specification.

And here is where I think problems will arise: moving from the high level specification to the formal one that is the one actually getting formally verified.

Of course, this would still be better than having no verification at all. But it is important to keep in mind that, with these additional levels of abstractions, you will likely end up with a weaker form of formal verification, so to speak. Maybe it is worth it to still verify some high assurance software "the old way" and leave this only for the cases where additional verification is nice to have but not a matter of life or death.
by orwin | 2025-12-17 10:55:09+00:00
No. Currently it's still better than in Syria and Libya before their regime change. If a insurrectionist force existed, you would have a point, but even then it doesn't work when too much foreign meddling happens, just look at Libya. But Syria is probably the best example: foreign power meddling made everything worse for years. Foreign power switch target because of October 7th, let free reign to insurgent group, the regime change took what, 8 weeks? And it seems way more stable than expected.
by philipallstar | 2025-12-17 10:55:23+00:00
> Using types in a prototyping language is madness.

It's not a prototyping language or a scripting language or whatever. It's just a language. And types are useful, especially when you can opt out of type checking when you need to. Most of the time you don't want to be reassigning variables to be different types anyway, even though occasionally an escape hatch is nice.
by piltdownman | 2025-12-17 10:57:35+00:00
The Mandela Effect isn't used to describe coping mechanisms around the faulty recollection of an individual; rather it categorises a systemic and widespread incidence of false collective memories.

There's no satirical or arrogant component inherent in this phenomenon. For example, pick any five people at random in your life and ask them if they remember any of the following iconic lines:

* Snow White "Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the fairest of them all?" * ST:TOS "Beam me up, Scotty" * Star Wars "Luke, I am your Father" * Wizard of Oz "Fly my pretties, fly" * Casablanca "Play it again, Sam."

I've done about 50-100 of these 5x5 samples in casual groups/workshops and have never had a single all-negative response. Problem is, none of the lines above were ever said.
by pplonski86 | 2025-12-17 10:58:39+00:00
This is amazing. Porting library from one language to one language are easy for LLMs, LLMs are tired-less and aware of coding syntax very well. What I like in machine learning benchmarks is that agents develop and test many solutions, and this search process is very human-alike. Yesterday, I was looking into MLE-Bench for benchamrking coding Agents on machine learning tasks from Kaggle https://github.com/openai/mle-bench There are many projects that provide agents which performance is simply incredible, they can solve several Kaggle competitions under 24 hours and be on medal place. I think this is already above human level. I was reading ML-Master article and they describe AI4AI where AI is used to create AI systems: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.16499
by RossBencina | 2025-12-17 10:58:46+00:00
> It feels off-mission.

That's supposedly The Verge paraphrasing the CEO (Unfortunately I can't verify because the full article requires subscription.) I would like to know what the CEO actually said because "it feels off-mission" is a strange thing for the leader of the mission to say. I would hope that they know the mission inside out. No need to go by feels.
by ookdatnog | 2025-12-17 10:59:42+00:00
It depends on what you're working on. If you're doing real algorithmic work, often the algorithm is a lot more complex than its spec because it needs to be fast.

Take sorting a list for example. The spec is quite short.

- for all xs: xs is a permutation of sort(xs)

- for all xs: sorted(sort(xs))

Where we can define "xs is a permutation of ys" as "for each x in xs: occurrences(x, xs) = occurrences(x, ys)"

And "sorted(l)" as "forall xs, x, y, ys: (l = xs ++ [x, y] ++ ys) => x < y".

A straightforward bubble or insertion sort would perhaps be considered as simple or simpler than this spec. But the sorting algorithms in, say, standard libraries, tend to be significantly more complex than this spec.
by sjw987 | 2025-12-17 10:59:52+00:00
A GPS that can track where you are, a microphone that can track what you say, and high enough usage from the average person (3 hours 45 minutes per day) to essentially track the thoughts, mood, and actions, all neatly tied to various accounts that can identify them.

The smartphone is the ultimate tracking device for any nation state to use to monitor its population. I'm surprised they even bother with other forms of surveillance at this point.
by tgv | 2025-12-17 11:00:39+00:00
I got a bit into SPARK (a subset Ada of that has formal verification) with AoC, and while it can be tricky, SPARK is quite flexible in how much you prove. Dafny sounds interesting, but I can't find a comparison between the two. There's obviously a difference in memory management, but the rest looks quite similar at first sight, and their niche is quite similar. Does anyone know of a (deeper) comparison between both languages?