MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by deanforan | 2025-12-19 18:54:27+00:00
Hi HN,

I’ve spent the last while building a saga orchestration engine for the TypeScript and Node ecosystem, because I kept running into the same gap. Queues like BullMQ are great for one-off jobs, but they don’t help much once you need durable, multi-step workflows that react to multiple events over time. On the other end, Temporal is powerful, but often feels heavy if all you want is message-driven orchestration using your existing infrastructure and databases.

In the .NET world, MassTransit’s saga pattern solves this nicely. I couldn’t find a clean equivalent in TypeScript, so I built one.

Saga Bus is a TypeScript-first, MassTransit-style saga engine for Node and Bun. It provides durable saga state stored in Postgres or Prisma with pluggable stores, message-driven orchestration over RabbitMQ with an in-memory transport for tests, explicit retries, backoff and dead-letter queues, fully type-safe saga definitions using a small DSL, and framework-agnostic usage across plain Node workers, Next.js producers, and NestJS applications. A saga ends up looking like a proper state machine rather than ad-hoc queue handlers, and it scales horizontally across workers using optimistic concurrency.

GitHub: https://github.com/d-e-a-n-f/saga-bus Docs: https://d-e-a-n-f.github.io/saga-bus

This is early but functional, and I’m mainly looking for feedback from people running distributed workflows in Node.

Does this solve a real problem for you? Where does it fall down compared to what you’re using today? What transports or stores would you expect first?

Happy to answer questions or explain design decisions.
by ericmcer | 2025-12-19 18:54:32+00:00
I am not excited about any of it, but like... Corporations in America can still refuse/fight government requests for data, they can disclose how many requests they get for the year, and there is judicial oversight on the requests.

In China if the government makes a request for data the courts are not involved, the company has no ability to push back and they cannot disclose any info about government requests.
by hearsathought | 2025-12-19 18:55:03+00:00
You "misuse" it by using it to get at truth and more importantly historical contradictions and inconsistencies. It's the same reason catholic church kept the bible from the masses by keeping it in latin. The same reason printing press was controlled. Many of the historical "truths" we are told are nonsense at best or twisted to fit an agenda at worst.

What do these people fear the most? That the "truth" they been pushing is a lie.
by roamerz | 2025-12-19 18:55:15+00:00
>>good idea

Or maybe just the less of 2 evils. An intelligent asshat or non asshat that was an imbecile. It was time for a change.

There are so many things I don’t like about him but some of his policies such as immigration / border enforcement, natural resource utilization, federal workforce reduction, regulatory reduction and tariffs are absolutely legit imho and will take time to have an affect.
by johnnyanmac | 2025-12-19 18:55:36+00:00
Yes, this was a good 30 years in the making, so anyone still in a career will feel it. Even some younger boomers would feel the after effects of tbis, especially those who didn't get to own a house.

Gen Z is simply unique as the "full immersion" generation. It's uniquely hard to ignore the youth unemployment for kids who are spending more than ever to be educated, or being hard locked out of minimum wage jobs our parents would scare us with because they lack a bachelor's degree.
by vintagedave | 2025-12-19 18:56:14+00:00
This sounds like domestication!

> By hanging out with the orcas, dolphins likely gain protection from other orca pods that pass through the area and hunt dolphins. ... Cooperation between different species is relatively common in nature, but rarer among mammals and typically doesn’t involve predators

This sounds (to me) very much like the story of how wolves became dogs: predators (us) and predators (them), mutual benefit, some degree of protection.
by alecco | 2025-12-19 18:56:39+00:00
The article mentions AM4 boards and many of those are PCIe 3.0.

https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/ilz8v6/which_am4_...

Chipset PCIe Version Supported X570 PCIe 4.0 (both GPU/NVMe) B550 PCIe 4.0 (GPU/NVMe; other lanes are PCIe 3.0) A520 PCIe 3.0 X470 PCIe 3.0 B450 PCIe 3.0 X370 PCIe 3.0 B350 PCIe 3.0 A320 PCIe 3.0
by breve | 2025-12-19 18:57:12+00:00
Here it is: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/2025-N...

Discussion:

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/breaking-down-trumps-2025...

https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/12/trumps-new-national-sec...

The points on Europe are:

> Our broad policy for Europe should prioritize:

> • Reestablishing conditions of stability within Europe and strategic stability with Russia;

> • Enabling Europe to stand on its own feet and operate as a group of aligned sovereign nations, including by taking primary responsibility for its own defense, without being dominated by any adversarial power;

> • Cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations;

> • Opening European markets to U.S. goods and services and ensuring fair treatment of U.S. workers and businesses;

> • Building up the healthy nations of Central, Eastern, and Southern Europe through commercial ties, weapons sales, political collaboration, and cultural and educational exchanges;

> • Ending the perception, and preventing the reality, of NATO as a perpetually expanding alliance; and

> • Encouraging Europe to take action to combat mercantilist overcapacity, technological theft, cyber espionage, and other hostile economic practices

This is aligned with what Russia wants. Russia has cultivated Trump as an ally and it appears to be working.

The US is explicit in its intention to meddle with and undermine Europe by "cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations" and celebrates "the growing influence of patriotic European parties" (i.e. authoritarian, right-wing parties like AfD).

The US is explicitly attempting to annex European territory. Trump says the US will take Greenland "one way or the other". The US has been caught running an influence campaign in Greenland trying to promote its secession from Denmark: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0j9l08902eo

Given American's new direction, de-Americanising your infrastructure and supply chains makes sense. It's sensible risk reduction.
by jchw | 2025-12-19 18:57:25+00:00
Note that I am not defending the merits of Google's lawsuit, but they did describe in this very post what they believe distinguishes their scraping versus SerpApi.

> Stealthy scrapers like SerpApi override those directives and give sites no choice at all. SerpApi uses shady back doors — like cloaking themselves, bombarding websites with massive networks of bots and giving their crawlers fake and constantly changing names — circumventing our security measures to take websites’ content wholesale. [...] SerpApi deceptively takes content that Google licenses from others (like images that appear in Knowledge Panels, real-time data in Search features and much more), and then resells it for a fee. In doing so, it willfully disregards the rights and directives of websites and providers whose content appears in Search.

To me this seems... interesting, for sure. I think that Google already set a bad precedent by pulling content from the web directly into its results, and an even worse one by paying websites with user-generated content for said content (while those sites didn't pay the users that actually made the user-generated content, as an additional bitchslap.)

But it seems like at the very least Google is suggesting that SerpApi is effectively trying to "steal" the work Google did, rather than do the same work themselves. Though I wonder if this is really Google pulling up the ladder behind them a bit, given how privileged of a position they are in with regards to web scraping.

It's a tough case. I think that something does need to ultimately be done about "malicious" web scraping that ignores robots.txt, but traditionally that sort of thing did not violate any laws, and I feel somewhat skeptical that it will be found to violate the law today. I mean, didn't LinkedIn try this same thing?
by Aurornis | 2025-12-19 18:57:53+00:00
Reading the fine print, the benchmark is not just the Leibniz formula like it says in the chart title. It also includes file I/O, startup time, and console printing:

> Why do you also count reading a file and printing the output?

> Because I think this is a more realistic scenario to compare speeds.

Which is fine, but should be noted more prominently. The startup time and console printing obviously aren't relevant for something like the Python run, but at the top of the chart where runs are a fraction of a second it probably accounts for a lot of the differences.

Running the inner loop 100 times over would have made the other effects negligible. As written, trying to measure millisecond differences between entire programs isn't really useful unless someone has a highly specific use case where they're re-running a program for fractions of a second instead of using a long-running process.
by SilverElfin | 2025-12-19 18:57:57+00:00
Google scrapes so what even is this? Beyond that I think it is unreasonable and monopolistic that Google can use all this data (like YouTube) to bolster their AI products but no one else can. It just means the megacorp will keep being megacorp and smaller players are doomed to have to work much harder and get very lucky. It’s not fair competition. So I view scraping Google as necessary for our society.
by reactordev | 2025-12-19 18:58:12+00:00
That would be a better approach. Let the sites that require it, negotiate with the browser to get it. Oh wait, isn’t that what we are asking them to do and they won’t? They’d rather shut off access entirely.

No the best approach is having parental controls on device and require whitelisting and established accounts that the parents setup. Anything else is making the web a more restrictive place for all.
by codazoda | 2025-12-19 18:58:25+00:00
Technically, yes, but Amazon customers probably wouldn't benefit from that. I don't currently distribute or sell books directly because that creates a tax burden. So it's probably best to let the various stores handle it. I still want to sell books but I don't want my readers to be restricted by DRM for a book they paid for. The honor system is fine for me.

Edit: I now realize you might mean in the Amazon KDP UI. I don't see a way to upload your own.
by jollyllama | 2025-12-19 18:58:31+00:00
Great article. Key quote:

> What this video is really doing is normalising the fact that "even if it is completely stupid, AI will be everywhere, get used to it!"

Techies are finally starting to recognize how framing something as "it's inevitable, get used to it" is a rhetorical device used in mass communications to manufacture consent.

See:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44567857 'LLM Inevitabalism' 5 months ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46288371 'This is not the future' 3 days ago
by vintagedave | 2025-12-19 18:58:42+00:00
> This isn't the first time I've accidentally done two overlapping 'git pull' operations on the same repository. I think it's the first time I hit this error...

If these are two separate clones / checkouts, how can running `git pull` on both conflict?

I keep multiple copies of some repos, but I can't recall ever pulling both at once. I would expect it to work: separate folders, indexes, and git processes.
by zamadatix | 2025-12-19 18:59:12+00:00
The "insane" RAM bandwidth makes sense with Apple M chips and Strix Halo because it's actually "crap" VRAM bandwidth for the GPU. What makes those nice is the quantity of memory the GPU has (even though its slow), not that the CPU has tons of RAM bandwidth.

When you go to the desktop it becomes harder to justify including beefed up memory controllers just for the CPU vs putting that towards beefing some other part of the CPU up that has more of an impact in cost or performance.
by unyttigfjelltol | 2025-12-19 18:59:28+00:00
Actually, that’s the high-value model. Imagine you have a bunch of LLMs tuned to different sensibilities that match great jurists, Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., Learned Hand, maybe Aristotle to mix things up, maybe a real jurist. And your attorney tunes their arguments to be persuasive to whatever model they believe is dominant.

It’s a short leap to comparing model scores to determine a quick and dirty settlement “winner” which really isn’t that far from manual processes.

Lawyering will look different, but there definitely will be lawyers. Judging on the other hand…. Judging is the one I wonder about.
by dwohnitmok | 2025-12-19 18:59:36+00:00
No you can also model things that are client-only or server-only using such non-deterministic events.

For example you could have the following client-only properties where you can treat "connection established" as an entirely non-deterministic event that randomly just pops in and happens to the client.

1. Every edit that is stored on the client is preserved in the client's undo/redo log (e.g. a remote edit after a connection established can't clobber any client's local edits that are already preserved in history)

2. Document invariants always hold no matter what connection established/remote edits come in (e.g. even if the document shrinks as a result of remote deletions, the cursor is always in a valid location)

3. Causal consistency and order preservation can be rescoped to also be client-only properties

4. Undoing and redoing with no other local edits always returns back to the original state (e.g. making sure that remote edits coming in don't violate user's expectations about how to get back to a known state) for some definition of "original state" (this depends a lot on how you want to handle merging of remote edits)

5. Remote edits are always applied after a multi-component edit not in the middle (e.g. we never apply a remote edit in the middle of a grapheme cluster such as an emoji or when we're in the middle of writing one).

6. We handle connection affinity properly (e.g. we might have multiple servers for redundancy that can all be connected to, but over the course of a session we cache data for a single endpoint to improve performance that will need to be recalculated if we connect to a new endpoint), so checking that the initial connection to a new endpoint from the client always has the data that the new endpoint needs and we're able to re-establish the connection that doesn't corrupt our client's local data etc.

Etc.
by mlsu | 2025-12-19 18:59:48+00:00
This piece is pretty ineffective. Not that I like the world of "AI", I probably share the author's opinion that its just another evolution in the bullshittification of the human experience.

But, the point of the article is not that you would implement an agent based vending machine business. Humans restock the machine because its a red-team exercise. As a red-team exercise it looks very effective.

> Why do you ever want to add a chatbot to a snack vending machine? The video states it clearly: the vending machine must be stocked by humans. Customers must order and take their snack by themselves. The AI has no value at all.

Like this is like watching the simpsons and being like "why are the people in the simpsons yellow? people in real life aren't yellow!!"

The point isn't to run a profitable vending machine, or even validate that an AI business agent could become profitable. The point is to conduct an experiment and gather useful information about how people can pwn LLMs.

At some level the red team guy at Anthropic understands that it is impossible by definition for models to be secure, so long as they accept inputs from the real world. Putting instructions into an LLM to tell it what to do is the equivalent of exposing an `eval()` to a web form: even if you have heuristics to check for bad input, you will eventually be pwned. I think this is actually totally intractable without putting constraints on the model from outside. You'll always need a human in the loop to pull the plug on the vending machine when it starts ordering playstations. The question is how do you improve that capability, and that is the anthropic red-team guy's job.
by FloorEgg | 2025-12-19 18:59:50+00:00
Ah yes there is a distinction for students or someone learning principles.

If the goal is learning programming then some of that should be done with LLMs and some without. I think we are still figuring out how to use LLMs to optimize rate of learning, but my guess is the way they should be used is very different than how an expert should use them to be productive.

Again it comes back to the want though (learning vs doing vs getting done), so I think my main point stands.
by chocochunks | 2025-12-19 19:00:28+00:00
It's not super easy to refund digital goods in general with few exceptions like Steam. I have done it with Kobo but IIRC you have to chat with a CS rep or least you did when I did it.

No where legit is DRM free for eBooks from the big publishers. You don't even have to use the Kobo app since they let you download the ACSM file and use it Adobe Digital Editions which could be used on a computer or ADE supported eReader like Pocketbook (or Kobo!). This has been the case since before they were even called Kobo! And if the publisher offers the book DRM free they just give you a DRM-free ePub instead of the ACSM file.

These days, with the Calibre DeACSM and DeDRM plug-ins you don't even need ADE. It's also trivially easy to remove the DRM from the Kobo desktop app or their readers. It's way easier than Amazon and a way better experience with multiple routes to a DRM free file.
by observationist | 2025-12-19 19:00:30+00:00
This is why I stopped using google wherever possible - they pushed the frontier of useful fair use and copyright precedents and established that things on the public internet displayed to the public without a login mechanism are fair game for scraping. The US supreme court ruled that you have to incorporate authentication and not simply serve your content to the public internet if you want to restrict usage.

Then they bend over backwards and do the "but not like that!" crap with their legal team and swing their wealth and influence around to screw over other companies and people, and a vast majority of it just vanishes, gets memory holed, with NDAs and out of court settlements, so you never get to see the full scope of harm they inflict unless you're watching like a hawk and catch the headlines before they get disappeared.

Google needs to be broken up and we need to legislate the dismantling of the current adtech regime, with a privacy and sovereignty respecting digital bill of rights that puts the interests of individual citizens above that of giant corporate blobs and the mass surveillance data industry.
by dwaltrip | 2025-12-19 19:00:42+00:00
Any new useful tool must be managed in a way so that one isn’t overly dependent on it.

- google maps

- power tools

- complex js frameworks

- ORMs

- the electrical grid (outages are a thing)

- and so on…

This isn’t a new problem unique to LLMs.

Practice using the tool intelligently and responsibly, and also work to maintain your ability to function without when needed.
by beering | 2025-12-19 19:01:01+00:00
That may be true, but you can’t compare average GenAI with the best humans because there are many reasons the human output is low quality: budget, timelines, oversights, not having the best artists, etc. Very few games use the best human artists for everything.

Same with programming. The best humans write better code than Codex, but the awful government portals and enterprise apps you’re using today were also written by humans.
by ekropotin | 2025-12-19 19:03:05+00:00
I personally use CLI coding agents as well, but many people do prefer tight IDE integration.

I’ve tried every popular agent IDE, but none of them beat Cursor’s UX. Their team thought through many tiny UX details, making the whole experience smooth like a butter. I think it’s a huge market differentiator.

Also their own composer model is not bad at all.
by Aurornis | 2025-12-19 19:03:30+00:00
> Note in particular the huge delta between rust 1.92 and nightly. I'm gonna guess that's down to the autovectorizer having a hole that the implementation slipped through, and they fixed it.

The benchmark also includes startup time, file I/O, and console printing. There could have been a one-time startup cost somewhere that got removed.

The benchmark is not really testing the Leibniz loop performance for the very fast languages, it's testing startup, I/O, console printing, etc.
by PeterStuer | 2025-12-19 19:03:31+00:00
The article claims "Second-hand prices for the 5800X3D average around $500-$600 on eBay. Some of the highest-selling units sold at nearly $800, showing how desperate some buyers are to buy AMD's best gaming chip that still uses DDR4 memory"

This is absurd. "Average quoted" on ebay does not mean anything, neither dors their claim of "highest selling" which is "highest listed". Nobody is buying at these prices.

People buy the lowest priced (incl. Shipping) with modifiers for professional>private, seller review rating, location and picture/description quality.
by mothballed | 2025-12-19 19:03:52+00:00
Harris only got 48.34%, so less popular vote than Trump. I was one of the 1.85% that voted for 'others', but still would have ranked Trump over Harris (this isn't so much a praise of Trump, just found him and Harris a couple of the absolute worst options), so it very well may be greater than 50% if you narrow those voters just to Trump and Harris, and absolutely over 50% if you discard their votes.

It's contested and speculative, but a reasonable projection of Trump V Harris gives >50% to Trump in a finall runoff for majority.
by mrguyorama | 2025-12-19 19:04:00+00:00
>Russia has air superiority in terms of jets over Ukraine

No, no they do not. Russia has more fighter jets than Ukraine yes but that's not what "Air superiority" is, let alone "Air supremacy" which is what the USA designs for.

If you cannot suppress air defense networks, you do not have anything close to air superiority. If you cannot fly missions in an airspace, you do not have superiority.

>What matters is drones and missiles etc and how fast you can churn them out. Who would win that?

Drones and missiles still don't replace airframes. Do not mistake "Is new and the battlefield is still teasing things out" with "Is dominant forever". China definitely doesn't seem to think they are replacing airframes, and in fact is doubling down on making platforms that are aligned with US doctrine, like modern stealth fighters, carriers, and networked battlespace management.

Torpedo boats did not kill Battleships. Battleships were only replaced when their job could be done from longer range by an Aircraft carrier.

>To anybody with significant missile/drone tech they are just massive, slow, sitting ducks.

Only China with their legit Hypersonic weapons has a strong case for nullifying the carriers. US doctrine has included "Defend from 200 incoming weapons targeting the carrier" since the 60s when the Navy first built an entirely automated and networked fleet system to ensure that those incoming get tasked appropriately, and anti-missile defense is never a guarantee, but it works well enough that the sinking of the Moskva was utterly shocking to those familiar with it, and implies terrible things about Russian naval readiness.

The previous threat model of these carriers was supersonic bombers launching high speed cruise missiles 200 at a time from 100 miles out. Shaheds are not a threat. That's why the Navy started running primary 5inch gun practice against them. They are the same threat model as a helicopter because they are slow.

>The current US policy of trying to dismant all the organisations that were set up post world war II

Agree

>in order to keep the peace is madness.

What? That's uh, not what they are doing. See Venezuela.