MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mrguyorama | 2025-12-16 22:13:26+00:00
If you vote republican, you do not "support medicare for all" no matter what you say to the poll.

Your vote has consequences, and republicans have been voting for people who objectively and loudly tell their voters that they have no intention of doing those things.

It's time for people who vote republican to own that they suck at picking who to vote for.

Tons of them also say they want recreational weed, but it's only republicans working to prevent that in most states, often literally ignoring citizen's initiatives and court cases to accomplish that.
by IlikeKitties | 2025-12-16 22:13:54+00:00
> If you are filming a public space with no expectation of privacy the government has no constitutional authority to restrict you if you are retaining the data private and never sharing it.

This a shitty argument from a time where mass surveillance wasn't possible. If you have "no expectation of privacy in public spaces" than Governments could force you to wear an ankle monitor and body camera at all times since you have "no expectation of privacy".
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-12-16 22:14:09+00:00
> OP is claiming the country should re-align its priorities to optimize this health-insured number, not claiming the gov does not already track this number

They absolutely claimed the latter.

But even to the first, they didn't make any policy claims! They said it "would clearly show how poorly the economy is actually functioning." That's not true! You can have a fabulous economy (with a well-performing "GDP or...stock market") with terrible healthcare KPIs, this is basically a petrostate.

Healthcare is measured. And it's discussed. One can debate how the total-insured figure should play into policy. That wasn't that comment.
by mattkrause | 2025-12-16 22:14:22+00:00
That depends immensely on the type of effect you're looking for.

Within-subject effects (this happens when one does A, but not when doing B) can be fine with small sample sizes, especially if you can repeat variations on A and B many times. This is pretty common in task-based fMRI. Indeed, I'm not sure why you need >2 participants expect to show that the principle is relatively generalizable.

Between-subject comparisons (type A people have this feature, type B people don't) are the problem because people differ in lots of ways and each contributes one measurement, so you have no real way to control for all that extra variation.
by AnonymousPlanet | 2025-12-16 22:14:28+00:00
> Now suppose construction is cheap and zoning doesn't prohibit this. For 10% of the cost of the land, we could build a condo tower on that same piece of land. Ten stories, 100 housing units. The cost of a unit just went by down by a factor of ~100. The price of the land doubling is dwarfed by the increase in the number of permissible units per plot of land.

That's a brilliant plan! Let me buy the piece of land where that high rise stands with money you can't afford. Oh, you mean you have split ownership between all the owners of the units so you now can afford it? I'll buy half of the units then and rent them out. And when things are not looking good for people, I buy some more when they can't afford their loans anymore. Can't let those units depreciate, can we? My friends are in on the party and together we're keeping the demand up. And those prices go up and up. Oh, the cost of each unit has now doubled and tripled while your wages haven't? Too bad for you. I can still afford them and now you have been out competed by me.

It's the same game just with a lower starting point.

Maybe this former financial trader can explain it better https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTlUyS-T-_4&t=520s
by dragonwriter | 2025-12-16 22:14:29+00:00
If you make running your own runners as expensive as running on Github's runners on top of the cost of actually hosting the runners, then if you are currently on Github and not able to migrate off immediately, the price conscious decision is to migrate runners into Github. But then, its even harder if you ever decide to migrate your whole operation out.

Now, if you are already looking at migrating, its also potentially a kick in the butt to do it now. But if you aren’t, the path of least resistance—or at least, the path of least present recurring cost—is a path to a greater degree of lock-in.
by ManuelKiessling | 2025-12-16 22:14:54+00:00
Isn‘t it funny how that’s exactly the kind of stuff that helps a human developer be successful and productive, too?

Or, to put it the other way round, what kind of tech leads would we be if we told our junior engineers „Well, here’s the codebase, that’s all I‘ll give you. No debuggers, linters, or test runners for you. Using a browser on your frontend implementation? Nice try buddy! Now good luck getting those requirements implemented!“
by opello | 2025-12-16 22:15:05+00:00
My ready example of a GitLab pain point is parallel matrix job names include the matrix variables and quite easily, in complex configurations, exceed the static 255 character limit of job names, preventing job creation/execution.

There's been years of discussion about ways to fix it with nothing moving forward.

https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/263401

And the most recent tracking issue:

https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/285853
by stonemetal12 | 2025-12-16 22:15:10+00:00
> Even "hacker", which started out meaning only breaking into computer systems

No. The Etymology of Hacker in the technical scene started at MIT's Tech Model Railroad Club in the late 1950s/early 1960s, "hack" described clever, intricate solutions, pranks, or experiments with technology.

A hacker is one who made those clever solutions, pranks, and technology experiments. "Hacker News" is trying to take it back from criminal activity.
by D-Machine | 2025-12-16 22:15:12+00:00
While I agree I wouldn't expect too much stability in developing brains, unfortunately there are pretty serious stability issues even in non-developing adult brains (quote below from the paper, for anyone who doesn't want to click through).

I agree it makes a lot of sense though the sensory experiments are more consistent, somatosensory and sensorimotor localization results generally seem to the be most consistent fMRI findings. I am not sure registration or motion correction is really going to help much here, I suspect the reality is just that the BOLD response is a lot less longitudinally stable than we thought (brain is changing more often and more quickly than we expected).

Or if we do get better at this, it will be more sophisticated "correction" methods (e.g. deep-learners that can predict typical longitudinal BOLD changes, and those better allow such changes to be "subtracted out", or something like that). But I am skeptical about progress here given the amount of data needed to develop any kind of corrective improvements in cases where there are such low longitudinal reliabilities.

===

> Using ICCs [intraclass correlation coefficients], recent efforts have examined test-retest reliability of task-based fMRI BOLD signal in adults. Bennett and Miller performed a meta-analysis of 13 fMRI studies between 2001 and 2009 that reported ICCs. ICC values ranged from 0.16 to 0.88, with the average reliability being 0.50 across all studies. Others have also suggested a minimal acceptable threshold of task-based fMRI ICC values of 0.4–0.5 to be considered reliable [...] Moreover, Bennett and Miller, as well as a more recent review, highlight that reliability can change on a study-by-study basis depending on several methodical considerations.
by Retric | 2025-12-16 22:15:30+00:00
> to supplement what the household could not grow

Many women did this as their full time job. Spinsters became a viable option for women without a family or land to be self sufficient. Most women used to multi task a drop spindle as they went about their day. A spinning wheel was a massive improvement per hour but the lack of portability made it an independent job. As specialists could now make way more thread which enabled the transport of large quantities of relatively high value goods to one location for economies of scale. Which could then benefit from a positive feedback loop.

> manufacturing reduced the time spent making clothing

Anyway, my point was factories came late in the process. Automation of thread making occurred at several stages before there was enough supply excess supply for any kind of scale. Without that factories could only really automate less than 5% of the total labor for making clothing.

So sure, eventually automation came for those home spinners, but that happened after the natural benefits from economies of scale alongside huge shifts in the land devoted to cotton etc. This ties into all kinds of economic activity, southern plantations depended on a relative increase in the value and demand of cotton far above its historic level etc.
by pacjam | 2025-12-16 22:15:32+00:00
Thanks for sharing!! (Charles here from Letta) The original MemGPT (the starting point for Letta) was actually an agent CLI as well, so it's fun to see everything come full circle.

If you're a Claude Code user (I assume much of HN is) some context on Letta Code: it's a fully open source coding harness (#1 model-agnostic OSS on Terminal-Bench, #4 overall).

It's specifically designed to be "memory-first" - the idea is that you use the same coding agents perpetually, and have them build learned context (memory) about you / your codebase / your org over time. There are some built-in memory tools like `/init` and `/remember` to help guide this along (if your agent does something stupid, you can 'whack it' with /remember). There's also a `/clear` command, which resets the message buffer, but keeps the learned context / memory inside the context window.

We built this for ourselves - Letta Code co-authors the majority of PRs on the letta-code GitHub repo. I personally have been the same agent for ~2+ weeks (since the latest stable build) and it's fun to see its memory become more and more valuable over time.

LMK if you have any q's! The entire thing is OSS and designed to be super hackable, and can run completely locally when combined with the Letta docker image.
by godelski | 2025-12-16 22:15:36+00:00
Same. It looks like the author is playing with poetry to me. They're clearly playing with the stanza with the similar lines and the contrasting lines. Yeah, it's amateur, but who cares? It tracks with the message.

If anything I think the GP's comment is an example of a thin desire. Being nitpicky/petty to justify internalizing and actually reading the post. There's no lines to read between here, it's plain as day. We are addicted to dismissing things because it's gratifying and easy. It's trivial to find errors or complaints about anything, but it's difficult to actually critique. I'd argue in our thin desires we've conflated the two. It's cargo cult intellectualism. Complaints look similar to critiques in form but they lack the substance, the depth.
by Bender | 2025-12-16 22:16:11+00:00
I am having fun playing with the slow syn flood of spoofed packets someone is sending. I appreciate them sending it. I like the variability in the TCP MSS, TTL, Window sizes they are sending.

Thus far I am letting some leak through it would seem.

100 SYN received in 15.03 seconds 100 SYN-ACK returned in 3 minutes and 22.03 seconds.

Thus far 2388 requests to this confused-bots file have been let through and 3226 have been assumed to be bots.
by rayiner | 2025-12-16 22:16:34+00:00
A thesis doesn't have to be published in some academic paper. It's just a basic set of ideas or assumptions underlying a worldview. Trump has a very distinctive set of beliefs underlying his policies, and he talks about them at length if you listen to his speeches, his interviews, etc. Just because he expresses them at a 6th grade level doesn't mean that there aren't ideas.

> Those were concrete policies from Project 2025, which Trump directly said was not related to his campaign or administration.

This is such a weird angle. Democrats focused on Project 2025 because of the abortion stuff. Trump stated that Project 2025 wasn't related to his campaign because it wasn't. Heritage doesn't speak for Trump--especially about abortion. That is not inconsistent with the fact that Trump and Heritage agree on 80% of everything else.
by gregsadetsky | 2025-12-16 22:16:43+00:00
I realized that the old QuickTime movie wouldn't load for most (it does load natively on iPhones!). If you follow the following link, you should be able to watch the movie with VLC and/or convert it with ffmpeg:

https://www.apple.com/media/us/mac/ilife/iweb/2009/tutorials...
by humanfromearth9 | 2025-12-16 22:17:12+00:00
- Working on my two papers about a new unifying theory of software architecture based on the "Independent Variation Principle" (IVP) (one paper for IEEE ICSA 2026 conf, Research track - I hope it will be accepted, and a long-form paper already on Zenodo: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17677316). - Today I have started vibe-coding a frontend framework called wickeTS based on Apache Wicket's concepts, but for TypeScript. According to an analysis I made of various frontend frameworks (Java, JavaScript, dotnet, php...) using the IVP, Apache Wicket is the one that presents the highest compliance level with the IVP (the best decoupling of constructs that have different change driver assignments). I'll use it for my website (a knowledge base) about the IVP, and if it works, also for other things. I'd say that for SSR, I'm at least halfway there after half a day. For CSR, I haven't tested yet. I also plan to support Static Site Generation. And I plan to support accessibility standards. - Organizing the creation of my company to start working as a freelance software consultant (mostly for archi & dev).
Who has enjoyed using PR code reviewers? What worked and what didn’t?
by yashwantphogat | 2025-12-16 22:18:15+00:00
I’m curious about people’s experiences with pull request code reviewers, both human and automated.

For those who have used PR review tools or bots:

What did you actually find helpful?

What ended up being annoying or counterproductive?

At what point did you stop paying attention to the feedback?

I’m particularly interested in how people balance signal vs noise in reviews, and whether summaries, inline comments, or opt-in depth work better in practice.

Asking to understand real usage patterns and pain points, not to promote anything. Happy to just listen.
by xavierxwang | 2025-12-16 22:18:50+00:00
After a quick glance, it seems that you don’t maintain the reading/writing status in the shared memory. That means you have to make a syacall in every read/write call. You could look into the kaze-core for an alternative implementation, which doesn’t require any syscall if possible.

Btw, kaze-core uses a `used` atomic variable, to avoid reading both readPos/writePos in routine - they are not atomic at all.
by intelec1 | 2025-12-16 22:18:57+00:00
Recent signals seem to indicate a major correction in how markets are pricing regulatory-driven technologies versus legacy systems:

Ford's $19.5B Pivot: Ford is taking a massive write-down on EVs and shifting back to hybrids. It looks like the unit economics just aren't there yet without subsidies, and Toyota's cautious hybrid strategy is being vindicated.

China's Structural Slowdown: It’s looking less like a cycle and more like a demographic/structural ceiling. If the "factory of the world" is entering deflation, what does that do to global supply chain resilience?

JPMorgan on Ethereum: JPM is launching a tokenized fund. It seems the "fight" phase is over and the "assimilate" phase has begun. Is this the end of DeFi as an alternative system, or just the inevitable institutional capture?

It feels like we are exiting an era of cheap capital and ideological investing (ESG) and returning to strict unit economics. Thoughts?
by 101008 | 2025-12-16 22:18:58+00:00
> however im not sure if these are true uv maps that is accurate as i dont have the 3d models itself

also in the tweet

> GPT Image 1.5 is **ing crazy

and

> holy shit lol

what's impressive if you don't know if it's right or not (as the other comment pointed out, it is not right)
by almosthere | 2025-12-16 22:19:39+00:00
I do think dipping your toes into the future is worth it. If it turns out the LLM is trying to kill us by cancelling our meetings and emailing people that we're crazy that would suck. But I don't think this is any more dangerous than giving people a browser in the first place. They have already done enough to shoot themselves in the foot enough.
by TheMirskyLimit | 2025-12-16 22:19:52+00:00
Hi HN, I’m an independent researcher (former systems thinking background). I wrote a Python script to test a hypothesis: that financial models often undervalue thermodynamic efficiency (Creation/Negentropy vs Bureaucratic Drag). I tested a simple metric: R&D / SG&A on the S&P 100. I expected noise, but found a statistically significant positive correlation (0.376, p=0.0168). It seems to act as a filter for identifying high-volatility 'growth' engines versus stagnating incumbents.

Code (Python/yfinance/scipy) is open source: https://github.com/gmirsky2/mirsky-ratio-analysis Full methodology paper is on Zenodo: https://zenodo.org/records/17956159

Curious if anyone in quant finance has seen a similar pure-ratio metric used before.
by waveywaves | 2025-12-16 22:19:54+00:00
I had created this chrome plugin for myself because I didn't want to pay anyone else for a similar plugin to improve my French reading. The aim of this project is to create a open source platform which can be used to learn a language through reading initially and track progress on the app platform. I would like to share it here and understand what things would be good to keep in mind when making an app like this. I plan on making the platform free as well for as long as I can trying to keep the costs to an extreme minimum by making an extremely optimized service. I know that right now there's nothing substantial in the repository apart from a working MVP which you can start using locally, but would love to hear your comments on what you think.
by jfengel | 2025-12-16 22:20:12+00:00
It's referring to a successful political overthrow.

The quote really needs the first two lines:

Now is the winter of our discontent made glorious summer by the sun of York.

The verb in the sentence is "is made", not just "is". "Now" it is summer, not winter. They were discontent in the past. Now they are happy.

York (Richard's brother, Edward, now King Edward IV) has overthrown King Henry VI. There's also an important pun: "York" also refers to their father, also named Richard, who was the Duke of York until his death at the hands of Henry's faction. So Edward is also the "son of York".

That said, Richard is being sarcastic. He's plotting the next political overthrow, which will also be successful. And who will in turn be overthrown again. That, at least, will put an end to it, if for no other reason than that literally everybody else is dead.
by calfuris | 2025-12-16 22:20:37+00:00
It's not actually optimal. Each check should account for all previous feedback, but it may be optimal to make a known-incorrect guess and trade the chance of winning with that guess for additional information.

For example, if your first guess on wordle is BOUND and you learn that the word is _OUND, you know the answer is one of FOUND, HOUND, MOUND, POUND, ROUND, SOUND, WOUND. Satisfying all previous feedback leaves you checking those one at a time and losing with probability 2/7. Or you could give up the 1-in-7 chance of winning in 2 and trade it for certainly winning in either 3 or 4: HARMS checks four of those options, and WHOOP identifies the remaining three.
by Sevii | 2025-12-16 22:20:59+00:00
Can you setup automated integration/end-to-end tests and find a way to feed that back into your AI agents before a human looks at it? Either via an MCP server or just a comment on the pull request if the AI has access to PR comments. Not only is your lack of an integration testing pipeline slowing you down, it's also slowing your AI agents down.

"AFAICT, there’s no service that lets me"... Just make that service!
by _heimdall | 2025-12-16 22:21:35+00:00
Modeling will never be sophisticated enough to model the entire system.

The question here isn't about determinism, the question is whether the universe could ever be modelled completely enough to understand and predict what may or may not be predetermined.

Short of that level of modelling and understanding, determinism is based on belief or faith just like any other religion. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, but you must recognized it is only belief that can make one view any unproven understanding of the universe to be the true explanation for it.
by rayiner | 2025-12-16 22:21:44+00:00
Of course some immigrants are more American than other immigrants! You can tell who those are by whose ancient legal documents are incorporated into the U.S. constitution and laws and whose aren't.

If you think those principles have worked pretty well, then the question is how to maintain the culture that produced this successful society. This is something Silicon Valley folks should easily understand! You guys screen people endlessly for "fit." Would you want a large number of folks who grew up in IBM's corporate culture to come work at your startup?
by Analemma_ | 2025-12-16 22:21:49+00:00
I'm speaking here as an end user of gcc, who might want e.g. to make a nice code formatting plugin which has to parse the AST to work properly. For a long time, Stallman's demand was that gcc's codebase be as difficult, impenetrable, and non-modular as possible, to prevent companies from bolting a closed-source frontend to the backend, and he specifically opposed exporting the AST, which makes a whole bunch of useful programming tools difficult or impossible.

Whatever his motivations were, I don't see a practical difference between "making the code deliberately bad to prevent a user from modifying it" and something like Tivoization enforced by code signing. Either way, I as a gcc user can't modify the code if I find it unfit for purpose.
by arjie | 2025-12-16 22:22:06+00:00
Interesting prediction. It sort of makes sense. I have noticed that LLMs are very good at solving problems whose solutions are easy to check[0]. It ends up being quite an advantage to be able to work on such problems because rarely does an LLM truly one-shot a solution through token generation. Usually the multi-shot is 'hidden' in the reasoning tokens, or for my use-cases it's usually solved via the verification machine.

A formally verified system is easier for the model to check and consequently easier for it to program to. I suppose the question is whether or not formal methods are sufficiently tractable that they actually do help the LLM be able to finish the job before it runs out of its context.

Regardless, I often use coding assistants in that manner:

1. First, I use the assistant to come up with the success condition program

2. Then I use the assistant to solve the original problem by asking it to check with the success condition program

3. Then I check the solution myself

It's not rocket science, and is just the same approach we've always taken to problem-solving, but it is nice that modern tools can also work in this way. With this, I can usually use Opus or GPT-5.2 in unattended mode.

0: https://wiki.roshangeorge.dev/w/Blog/2025-12-11/LLMs_Excel_A...
by bcrosby95 | 2025-12-16 22:22:16+00:00
If you're hanging your features off a well trodden framework or engine this seems fine.

If frameworks don't make sense for what you're doing though and you're now relying on your LLM to write the core design of your codebase... it will fall apart long before you reach "its basically working".

The more nuanced interactions in your code the worse it'll do.