MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Teever | 2025-12-24 07:02:47+00:00
Absolutely. The other comments replying to your original comment that are nitpicking over implementation details miss the purpose and importance of this step.

The fact that this release process is missing this key step is significant too imho. It makes it really clear that the people running this didn't understand all of the dimensions involved in releasing a redacted document like this and/or that they weren't able to get expert opinions on how to do this the right way, which just seems fantastical to me given who we're talking about.

In other threads people are discussing the possibility of this being intentional, by disaffected subordinates, poorly vetted and rushed in to work on this against their will. And that's certainly plausible in subordinates but I have a hard time believing that it's the case for the people running this who, if they understood what they were tasked with would have prevented an entire category of errors by simply tasking subordinates to do what you described regardless of how they felt about the task.

So to me that leaves the only possibility that the people running this particular operation are incompetent, and given the importance of redacting that is dismaying.

Regardless of how you feel about the action of redacting these documents, the extent to which it's done and the motives behind doing it, the idea that the people in charge of this aren't competent to do it is not good at all.
by atoav | 2025-12-24 07:04:36+00:00
Not only lonely, this feels downright anxiety-driven.

A secure person who has their shit together knows that some people do in fact have valuable opinions and they won't be afraid to ask in public. And they know that too: two thirds of their HN submissions are questions for advice after all.

So this isn't about actual value of opinions, this is about a certain fright of how you appear to others and strategies to control that.
by throwaway290 | 2025-12-24 07:06:37+00:00
This is false.

Colonization of eastern parts of russia involved forced conversion to christianity, violence, rape, mass murder, but not language extermination

Even culture extermination is an exaggeration, sure some areas got forcibly "converted" to christianity (if they were unlucky to be invaded before USSR) but you will see mosques/buddha statues/whatever is applicable and all the local traditions and beliefs mostly going like before

Actually in areas where local languages exist they kept schools teaching local languages and official signs are duplicated in both local and Russian all the way from USSR. I know this first hand;) but even the article you linked will tell you that.

So it was maybe not as good as support for indigenous languages in Canada but not extermination

Only since 2018 it is optional to teach local language in schools, previously there were at least some schools that teach it in every area like that. thank Putler for that too.
by charcircuit | 2025-12-24 07:06:47+00:00
>If someone does encounter an example, they are free to correct it by adding sourced material or by removing unsourced material (preferably after a notice on the talk page).

How can I correct it if it is sourced, but not true? Since I'm a primary source, I can't simply say it's untrue and remove it, even if I provide evidence. It's my understanding that I would need to wait for a reliable secondary source to write that it's not true. And since it is unlikely for someone to write about a dead community, such a valid article may never be written.
by spike021 | 2025-12-24 07:06:59+00:00
I struggle with this a lot. I'm currently about ten years in to the career and technically at my org I'm a "senior".

One issue I have quite often is I'll know I have a problem with understanding something and so I ask my team but then the response can be something like "you should know X" or "you should know this because of Y context" and it can be discouraging. I think a lot of the time I notice people conflate experience level with amount of context I have with something.

I'm still struggling with these kinds of challenges and I would readily admit it could be my own weakness but I also wonder if it's a team culture issue; but I've noticed this across my current org and my last one so maybe it's more of a me-problem.
by ankit219 | 2025-12-24 07:07:42+00:00
I am saying that if you force Apple to move away from integrated devices to something which has to be generic (modular like Intel) which does not know which hardware it will pair up with and hence needs baseline performance, it turns into android to a large extent. Other businesses may have legit incentives to reach those customers, but unless Apple makes drastic changes to current setup, the software would not support other manufacturers to the same extent. So they will go to EU and then Apple will write a more generic code - to ensure all manufactures are similarly supported, and it takes them away from integrated system they currently have. Competition wins, but customers dont.
by bob1029 | 2025-12-24 07:08:56+00:00
I think if you need something more reliable than us-east-1 that you should be hosting on prem in facilities you own and operate.

There aren't that many businesses that truly can't handle the worst case (so far) AWS outage. Payment processing is the strongest example I can come up with that is incompatible with the SLA that a typical cloud provider can offer. Visa going down globally for even a few minutes might be worse than a small town losing its power grid for an entire week.

It's a hell of a lot easier to just go down with everyone else, apologize on Twitter, and enjoy a forced snow day. Don't let it frustrate you. Stay focused on the business and customer experience. It's not ideal to be down, but there are usually much bigger problems to solve. Chasing an extra x% of uptime per year is usually not worth a multicloud/region clusterfuck. These tend to be even less resilient on average.
by bsder | 2025-12-24 07:09:23+00:00
> Lots of systems I grew up with were 1-indexed and there's nothing wrong with it. In the context of history, C is the anomaly.

The problem is that Lua is effectively an embedded language for C.

If Lua never interacted with C, 1-based indexing would merely be a weird quirk. Because you are constantly shifting across the C/Lua barrier, 1-based indices becomes a disaster.
by dc_giant | 2025-12-24 07:09:46+00:00
Safety, performance, avoiding python dependency hell.

I tried Toad and to me it feels ridiculously slow and laggy. Switching between input and output (ALT+up/down) for example just lags, I can notice the transition. The whole UI lags. It's no wonder, it's python. Simply the wrong language for this, sorry.
by dc_giant | 2025-12-24 07:10:44+00:00
Didn’t know that. Good reason then of course. But I do notice these sort of differences. Codex feels way better than Claude code to me for example.

I tried Toad and to me it feels ridiculously slow and laggy. Switching between input and output (ALT+up/down) for example just lags, I can notice the transition. The whole UI lags. It's no wonder, it's python. Simply the wrong language for this, sorry.
by kerkeslager | 2025-12-24 07:10:46+00:00
EDIT 3: Looking at Lua's overall implementation, it seems to be focused on being fast and lightweight.

I don't know why Lua implemented TCO, but if I had to guess, it's not because it enables you to replace loops with recursion, it's because it... optimizes tail calls. It causes tail calls to use less memory, and this is particularly effective in Lua's implementation because it reuses the stack memory that was just used by the parent call, meaning it uses memory which is already in the processor's cache.

The thing is, a loop is still going to be slightly faster than TCOed recursion, because you don't need to move the arguments to the tail call function into the previous stack frame. In a loop your counters and whatnot are just always using the same memory location, no copying needed.

Where TCO really shines is in all the tail calls that aren't replacements for loops: an optimized tail call is faster than a non-optimized tail call. And in real world applications, a lot of your calls are tail calls!

I don't necessarily love the feature, for the reasons that I detailed in the previous post. But it's not a terrible problem, and I think it at makes sense as an optimization within the context of Lua's design goals of being lightweight and fast.
by avaer | 2025-12-24 07:11:25+00:00
Around 2019 it became clear to me how much I was underestimating how quickly AI would "take over" and "take credit" for the parts of my identity I wanted to keep (engineering, design taste, invention for example).

But it also made me realize that because I was always at the tip of my chosen curve of tech adoption, I was also the first to be feeling the existential dread that would soon permeate the lives of everyone living a life even tangentially touched by tech.

(I think the author is ahead of the curve too).

But I feel this post identifies the problem and then compounds it with this line:

> This messaging works. Look at me. I feel the need to write a post about it. But it is completely wrong.

I would counter that (intentional) "ignorance is bliss". If you want to play the VC grind hustle game, do it, but be intentional about checking in and checking out, and don't let it into your identity. And don't write posts like this.

It might "feel" dishonest to operate like this, but the alternative is doom, because you are fighting against demons that don't actually exist. I think more and more people will realize this over the coming years -- we are only now starting to react to the personal problems caused by immersion in social media.

This also reminds me of a good piece by PG: https://paulgraham.com/identity.html
by larusso | 2025-12-24 07:11:26+00:00
I spend well over a month now on the topic to implement the different half cooked APIs into our apps. The chance that this gets overturned or blocked was high but we had to race anyways.
I’m curious what this means for similar legislations in others states line Utah and Louisiana that where planned to get into effect later this year.

I very much saw the irony that Texas of all regions tried to restrict the Wild West that is the digital App Store landscape.
I think something needs to be done but the implementation proposed is not just problematic but also downright technically impossible.
Our first implementation simply failed open for all kinds of errors. Reading the AppStore Age Verification APIs (except Apple) they tried to make this an app problem ala: Playstore is not up to date. Show a message to the user yadayadayada…
There so many reasons why this call can go wrong. And the apps won’t start blocking all users just because this call failed. Not to speak about the issue that just for Texas we had to implement said call globally. Because the law states that a an account created after 1.1.26 of a Texas “resident” needs these additional checks.
Well let’s see what happens next.
by pprotas | 2025-12-24 07:12:04+00:00
> Balatro was one of the biggest games of last year, and I'm sure the tinkerability was a big catalyst to that

Not sure I agree on that point. Balatro is a great game and the mainstream success is warranted, but my gut tells me that the technical implementation was not the catalyst for that. Sure, Lua’s portability could have led to the cross-platform popularity, but a mainstream gamer does not tinker with and mod Balatro at all.
by whytevuhuni | 2025-12-24 07:13:02+00:00
Are you sure you mean concurrency safety, and not thread safety?

I think Rust's concurrency safety (e.g. async on a single thread) is mostly granted by the Pin trait [1], and the async code-gen making sure lifetimes make sense over .await points (which requires things to be either pinned across those points, or to not care about their location in memory potentially moving).

Thread safety is instead given by a couple of auto-derived marker traits, called Send and Sync [2], that denote which kinds of data can be sent or shared between threads safely.

This is coupled with types like Arc, Mutex, etc that can wrap data that isn't safe to share, so that the wrapped data as a whole is safe to share. It is also coupled with functions (like std::thread::spawn [3] and MPSC's send()) that have a requirement for the data to either be Sync/Send, or to take full ownership of it (which ensures there are no other active references to it).

[1] https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/pin/struct.Pin.html

[2] https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/marker/trait.Sync.html

[3] https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/thread/fn.spawn.html
by agentifysh | 2025-12-24 07:13:18+00:00
that "Not MCP" is so refreshing it makes me laugh out loud

it's literally waht i've been saying all along when I came across mcp "why can't i just give agent a prompt and it will run the rest api calls for me"

there's still some MCPs which makes sense but we have it for literally everything when just a prompt will do the job!

now on the topic of html2png i do wonder is this like the self-hostable version on github https://github.com/maranemil/HTML2Png where they use canvas? or is this something else ?
by rao-v | 2025-12-24 07:13:31+00:00
I’d love to pay my ISP to rotate my ipv6 subnet every week. It’s not an option. My comcast IP changes every so often and that’s of some value.

It’s very unclear to me why people should be able to deterministic reach out to a specific device on my network. It has no value to me unless I run a service.
Show HN: PoliteHub – an Slack alternative with workspace-based pricing
by alexpham14 | 2025-12-24 07:13:45+00:00
Hi HN,

We’re building PoliteHub (https://politehub.com), an AI-first team messaging tool for small and growing teams.

Like many teams here, we used Slack daily. Over time, two things became increasingly painful for us:

1. Pricing: Per-seat pricing punishes growing teams.
2. AI tools are fragmented — chat in Slack, thinking in ChatGPT, docs elsewhere

PoliteHub is our attempt to fix this by making AI a "member" of the channel that understands the full workspace context, rather than just a sidebar chatbot.

What we’re experimenting with:

- Slack-like channels and messaging
- Shared AI that understands workspace context
– Workspace-based pricing instead of per-user
– Built mainly for SMBs and early-stage teams

The product is still early (beta), and we know replacing existing habits is hard. We’d really appreciate any feedback from the HN community, especially from teams that have tried integrating AI into daily collaboration.

What we’re most curious about:

- Does workspace-based pricing make sense?
- Should AI be shared across a team, or remain personal?
- What would make you seriously consider switching from Slack?

Thanks for taking a look, and I'm happy to answer questions.
by wraptile | 2025-12-24 07:14:21+00:00
> but not language extermination

as Lithuania - this is absolutely not true. Even before Soviet union the Russian empire was exterminating language to the point where there's an entire Lithuanian history chapter on Lithuanian book smugglers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithuanian_book_smugglers

Soviet empire wasn't better either. My great grandmother who was a Lithuanian language teacher was sent to Siberian gulags _for_ teaching Lithuanian. Luckily she survived and lived to a 100 just to prove these disgusting people wrong.
by reify | 2025-12-24 07:15:03+00:00
Another smuck that has fallen for the hype.

Though to be honest. Im thinking of installing a truthsayer on my old Samsung S4.

A bit stumped by the "they understand what you say". Sounds a tad immature and extremely bullshitty to me.

I dont understand the generalisation, who are "they"?

does it mean I can install loads of SLM's on my old phone and listen to them having a conversation.
by TheDong | 2025-12-24 07:16:14+00:00
No one has presented a remotely correct fix anywhere on that issue, or elsewhere to my knowledge.

You're welcome to write an actually correct patch for android if you want, one that isn't just commenting out code and probably breaking some spec-compliant bluetooth devices.

Make sure to test your patch against all the bluetooth devices in existence to make sure it doesn't regress.

Do that, make a PR, wait the average third-party-android-PR review time (approximately 5 years), and then if your PR isn't accepted at that point we can maybe say Google is intentionally ignoring this issue.
by culi | 2025-12-24 07:16:19+00:00
This was my initial reaction to this news. I mean think about it

The Trump team knows that nobody is gonna buy whatever they put out as being the full story. Isn't this just the perfect way to make people feel like they got something they weren't supposed to see? They can increase trust in the output without having to increase trust in the source of it

And as far as I've heard there hasn't been anything "unredacted" that's been of any consequence. It all just feels a little too perfect.
by lelanthran | 2025-12-24 07:17:29+00:00
> I believe that is in fact the exact return type of malloc.

> You have to do extra work to type it.

Nope. Casting the return from `malloc` is a code-smell in C. You have to do extra work if you use `malloc` in C++.

> Hopefully that helps you in your battle.

Not sure what you mean by this - weren't you the one who dragged C into a conversation about Python?
by ksec | 2025-12-24 07:17:41+00:00
> I think the distinctive choices are a boon. You are never confused about what language you are writing because Lua code is so obviously Lua. There is value in this.

This. And not just Lua , but having different kind of syntax for scripting languages or very high level languages signal it is something entirely different, and not C as in system programming language.

The syntax is also easier for people who dont intend to make programming as their profession, but simply want something done. It used to be the case in the old days people would design simple PL for new beginners, ActionScript / Flash era and even Hypercard before that. Unfortunately the industry is no longer interested in it, and if anything intend to make every as complicated as possible.
by nobody9999 | 2025-12-24 07:17:50+00:00
>Sure you can. Search and somehow mark the text (underline or similar) to make keywords hard to miss. Then proceed with the manual print, expunge, scan process.

I suppose a global search/replace to mark text for redaction as an initial step might not be a bad idea, but if one needs to make sure it's correct, that's not enough.

Don't bother with soft copy at all. Print a copy and have multiple individuals manually make redactions to the same copy with different color inks.

Once that initial phase is complete, partner up persons who didn't do the initial redactions review the paper text with the extant redactions and go through the documents together (each with their own copy of the same redactions), verbally and in ink noting redactions as well as text that should be redacted but isn't.

That process could then be repeated with different people to ensure nothing was missed.

We used to call this "proofreading" in the context of reports and other documents provided as work product to clients. It looks really bad when the product for which you're charging five to six figures isn't correct.

The use case was different, but the efficacy of such a process is perfect for something like redactions as well.

And yes, we had word processing and layout software which included search and replace. But if correctness is required, that's not good enough -- a word could be misspelled and missed by the search/replace, and/or a half dozen other ways an automated process could go wrong and either miss a redaction or redact something that shouldn't be.

As for the time and attention required, I suppose that depends upon how important it is to get right.

Is such a process necessary for all documents? No.

That said, if correctness is a priority, four (or more) text processing engines (human brains, in this case) with a set of engines working in tandem and other sets of engines working serially and independently to verify/correct any errors or omissions is an excellent process for ensuring the correctness of text.

I'd point out that the above process is one that's proven reliable over decades, even centuries -- and doesn't require exact strings or regular expressions.

Edit: Fixed prose ("other documents be provided" --> "other documents provided").
by hanamizuki | 2025-12-24 07:18:02+00:00
I built a GLP-1 tracker app for iOS/Android called mojo.

mojo connects your health data (apple health/health connect) and get real-time AI feedback when new data is logged. It proactively detects your changes and provide insights on achievements and suggestions.

So far it's around $1150 revenue per month with 200 paying users and 4000 downloads.

https://mojoapp.ai/
by supermatt | 2025-12-24 07:18:37+00:00
That depends on the interpretation of a market, which is why laws like the DMA establish a market based on its size. In the iOS market, apple have a monopoly.

EDIT: Downvotes for what? That’s literally what the DMA is for. If you don’t like it, take it up with your representatives - it’s nothing to do with me.
by jmyeet | 2025-12-24 07:19:28+00:00
There's no putting this genie back in the bottle.

MAGA is a cult and every cult has a mission. MAGA's mission is to uncover the elite pedophile ring. A cult can only be sustained so long as the mission is incomplete. Epstein is core foundational mythology. It's going to be really difficult if not impossible to redirect this.

You'll notice that Mike Johnson once again has put Congress in recess to avoid it taking action, this time a day before the 30 day deadline. The last time was for 7 weeks to try and get Republicans to remove their names from the discharge petition to avoid all this. Republicans know what a core problem this is.

So it's politically damaging with his base for Trump to pardon attorneys involved in obstructing this. But even if he weathers that, it doesn't solve his problem.

For one, any attorneys despite any pardon are subject to disciplinary proceedings (including disbarment) as well as possible state charges.

For another, this stuff is simply going to get out. Where previously a DoJ attorney would be committing career suicide if they got caught leaking things like grand jury testimony and confidential non-prosecution agreements, now they're obligated to. So they're not leakers anymore, they're whistleblowers who are following the law.

Congress will eventually have to come back into session and Pam Bondi may actually face a real risk of impeachment. If that happens, who is going to want this job when the key requirement is being such a loyalist that you have to break the law?

Congress will also seek compliaance from DoJ and hold investigations as well as drip feed their own documents from,say, the House Oversight Committee.

And in the wings we still have Ghislaine Maxwell who is clearly operating under an implicit understanding that she will get a pardon or, more likely, a commutation. Her move to a lower security prison that isn't eligible for her type of offenses was (IMHO) clearly a move to buy her continued silence until it became politically possible to free her. I don't think that's ever going to be possible other than maybe a lame duck pardon when leaving office.

This story is only getting bigger.
by throwaway17_17 | 2025-12-24 07:19:48+00:00
Curious as to why you chose Pony as the language to use for your none used language. Any specific reason or was it just the first one that you thought of that fit the sentence?

I’m not sure if Pony is still being used, but the language was making some headway, at least on the PLT side of things. I know the inclusion of some of their reference capabilities work (and practical implementation of prior research in the area) would be a benefit to greenfield programming language design. I think they missed going the process calculus route, instead choosing actors, but overall I liked the direction.