MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ssl-3 | 2025-12-16 06:19:47+00:00
I drive a Honda van, usually with the seats out/folded down.

It's really big back there. It holds an enormous volume of stuff.

4x8 sheets of plywood fit inside with the doors closed, and so do 10-foot lengths of pipe.

It's easy to access stuff at the front or the back. It's all contained under a roof in a locking, conditioned space (3 zones of HVAC) and is easy to get to from either sliding door or the back tailgate.

Works great for hauling stuff like sports equipment, outdoors gear, or photography equipment. Mine is full of tools, ladders, and boxes of wire right now, but it's been awesome for taking a mountain of camping gear and a PA system across the country. (Or, you know: Groceries. It does groceries very well indeed.)

(It's not so great at hauling stuff like bulk stone or mulch, but that stuff is usually pretty cheap to get delivered.)
by oooyay | 2025-12-16 06:20:16+00:00
> The ethical side is up to you, but in a strictly technical sense I don't think there's much that Google could do to intrude on your users privacy as a result of them issuing your SSL certificate, even if they wanted to.

I'm not sure that's technically true. As a CA they definitely have the power to facilitate a MitM attack. They can also issue fraudulent certificates.

> AIUI the ACME protocol never lets the CA see the private key, only the public key, which is public by definition anyway.

That has more to do with HTTPS end to end encryption, not the protocol of issuance.
by a6kme | 2025-12-16 06:21:23+00:00
Hello. Thank you for trying out Dograh and being our 100th Github Star.:)

1. Having different voice personas selector like Vapi is in our pipeline. 2. The lag can be either because of system resource constraints, or due to LLM Inference Lags from the LLM inference providers. We are constantly trying to squeeze out every milisecond to combat the latency issues.

Thank you again for your kind words.
by Nevermark | 2025-12-16 06:21:52+00:00
So just 13.3 million sq. meters of solar panels, and 6.67 million sq. meters of cooling panels for 1 GW.

Or a 3.651 km squared and 2.581 km squared butterfly sattelite.

I don't think your cooling area measures account for the complications introduced by scale.

Heat dissipation isn't going to efficiently work its way across surfaces at that scale passively. Dissipation will scale very sub-linearly, so we need much more area, and there will need to be active fluid exchangers operating at speed spanning kilometers of real estate, to get dissipation/area anywhere back near linear/area again.

Liquid cooling and pumps, unlike solar, are meaningfully talked about in terms of volume. The cascade of volume, mass, complexity and increased power up-scaling flows back to infernal launch volume logistics. Many more ships and launches.

Cooling is going to be orders of magnitude more trouble than power.

How are these ideas getting any respect?

I could see this at lunar poles. Solar panels in permanent sunlight, with compute in direct surface contact or cover, in permanent deep cold shadow. Cooling becomes an afterthought. Passive liquid filled cooling mats, with surface magnifying fins, embedded in icy regolith, angled for passive heat-gradient fluid cycling. Or drill two adjacent holes, for a simple deep cooling loop. Very little support structure. No orbital mechanics or right-of-way maneuvers to negotiate. Scales up with local proximity. A single expansion/upgrade/repair trip can service an entire growing operation at one time, in a comfortable stable g-field.
by yjftsjthsd-h | 2025-12-16 06:22:03+00:00
As a single anecdote, I will say that when I personally migrated from Windows to Linux, it was a lot easier because I was already using mostly FOSS applications. It turns out, if you use Windows to run Firefox and Libreoffice and whatever, there's a lot less friction to using Linux to run Firefox and Libreoffice and whatever:)
by notepad0x90 | 2025-12-16 06:23:36+00:00
I always comment when people say how TV shows make hacking look so easy, that I think they're not too far off when the "hackers" are state-sponsored. Part of the benefit of compartmentalizing things like tool/exploit-dev from ops is you get good tooling that you just point and shoot and it mostly works.

With enterprise/corporate red-teaming you have to work for it a lot, update your tooling, attacks, etc... do a lot of recon. But even then, even in companies that take security seriously and pay for it too, experienced pros spend a few days and get domain-admin (or equivalent) half the time. And I'm talking about in 2025 with everyone and their mom running EDR that have only gotten better over time (in my opinion).

The CIA's tools probably don't have flashy graphics, but even the ones that were leaked a while ago give a good insight into things.

https://github.com/secoba/CIA-Hacking-Tools

I can imagine an experienced operator automating things quite a bit, and when you give them a target, they'll just run a few commands, wait a some time and get a shell with lots of powerful capabilities.

Matter of fact, I think they don't show enough "easy hacking" in the movies, where you take over hospitals, government agents, courts ,etc.. in a matter of minutes and start snooping around, or just wipe them out. That would feel unbelievable to movie/tv audiences so they lave it out.
by BrenBarn | 2025-12-16 06:24:12+00:00
I'm actually receptive to this argument, but there are two problems. One is that we have no mechanism for implementing international policy of this sort even in theory (i.e., there is no jurisdiction with authority over both those to be taken from and those to be given to). The other is that, absent such a mechanism, most attempts to implement such transfers will likely increase inequality, because, for instance, the elites of whatever country we want to benefit will simply appropriate all the intended transfers. In other words there is no even remotely reliable way to convert, en masse, cars in my country to bicycles in a poor country somewhere else.

This makes it unwise to attempt to do such transfers on a large scale. That said, I would support something like a tax whose revenues are specifically directed towards improving the lives of much-worse-off people elsewhere in the world in ways that are carefully chosen so as to be less vulnerable to graft. (These would likely be in-kind benefits like latrine construction, etc., rather than monetary grants.)
by kragen | 2025-12-16 06:24:28+00:00
Did they actually deploy GNOSIS at Tymshare? I hadn't heard that. I thought that the reason they spun out Key Logic was that Norm hadn't convinced Tymshare management to deploy GNOSIS.

For example, in https://conservancy.umn.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/a39e5... p. 37, he says:

> That was their [Derwent's] idea. I thought it was very clever and we realized that we couldn’t do it with our current software but that software like that could be written. And KeyKOS was the outcome of that. Tymshare and another company, Key Logic, did not succeed in making that commercial. It would’ve been a high security system with novel features.

Later in the interview, he says Tymshare timesharing on the 370 (the IBM machine) started out on VM/CMS.

If you have conflicting information, I'd love to see it!
by a6kme | 2025-12-16 06:24:56+00:00
There is always a tradeoff between latency and reasoning. The bigger the model, the more stuff we can get it to do by better instruction following, but it comes at a cost of increased latency. OpenSource colocated smaller models do much better in terms of latency, but the instruction following is not that great, and we might have to tune the prompts much more than tuning for bigger models.
by xarope | 2025-12-16 06:25:32+00:00
“If you want to build a ship, don’t drum up the men to gather wood, divide the work, and give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast and endless sea.” ― Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

I do a lot of stuff that people think is "hard work", but as they say, physical pain is fleeting, and I typically have a half-dozen or more small and large goals that I am working towards, that requires such "hard work". So, perhaps I yearn for the vast and endless.... something?
by notepad0x90 | 2025-12-16 06:26:06+00:00
Windows is the fastest from my testing, even then there is about a minute or so immediately after restoration where i get TLS errors on some sites.

Honestly, I just wish that browsers used NTP directly and used that instead of the system time. If the CA/B wants to go this direction, maybe this will be a good enhancement to make it more tenable?
by cryptonector | 2025-12-16 06:26:11+00:00
Earlier you wrote:

> Puzzle no more, the answers are obvious!

and now you write:

> Unfortunately, educating yourself on this topic is not easy and involves differential equations.

Which is it? Obvious but... only if you're "educated"?

> The economic models that fail to predict our current situation are simplifications.

Are there economic models that are not simplifications?

If being simplifications makes the models trivial to dismiss, but also all models are simplifications, then how do you successfully "predict our current situation"? I guess not with models. Just from first principles or something, but like, which? And then you need to provide the full chain of reasoning, and don't let that become a model. Or maybe it's simulations, but those are also invariably simplifications.

It's hard to take this seriously. Some links would be appreciated.

> And if you think I’m a leftist, you would also be wrong!

I didn't refer to specific politics, just your politics whatever they happen to be. Now you tell me I'm an ignoramus while you're educated and that's why this stuff is obvious to you but not to me -- and also not to [some? many? most??] economists. Plus:

> I’d link you, but I don’t think I’ll be getting a very receptive audience!

Certainly no link -> non-receptive audience. Links might or might not improve the situation, but we can't tell till you furnish some.
by bruce511 | 2025-12-16 06:26:20+00:00
This is a popular refrain from folks hosting read-only sites.

The problem is not "your part", it's the "between you and the client" part.

It becomes trivial to inject extra content, malicious JavaScript, adverts etc into the flow. And this isn't "targetted" at your site, its simply applied to all insecure sites.

TLS is not about restricting your ability to broadcast information. It's about preserving your ability to guarentee that your reader reads what you wrote.

TLS is free and easy to implement. The only reason not to do it is laziness. You may see TLS as a violation of your principles- but I see it as an attitude of "I don't care about my readers safety - let someone inject malicious JavaScript (or worse) on my page, their security is not my problem".

(If the govt want to censor you they can do that via dns).
by PeterHolzwarth | 2025-12-16 06:26:28+00:00
"space is cold"

I've always enjoyed thinking about this. Temperature is a characteristic of matter. There is vanishingly little matter in space. Due to that, one could perhaps say that space, in a way of looking at it, has no temperature. This helps give some insight into what you mention of the difficulties in dealing with heat in space - radiative cooling is all you get.

I once read that, while the image we have in our mind of being ejected out of an airlock from a space station in orbit around Earth results in instant ice-cube, the reality is that, due to our distance from the sun, that situation - ignoring the lack of oxygen etc that would kill you - is such that we would in fact die from heat exhaustion: our bodies would be unable to radiate enough heat vs what we would receive from the sun.

In contrast, were one to experience the same unceremonious orbital defenestration around Mars, the distance from the sun is sufficient that we would die from hypothermia (ceteris paribus, of course).
by emsign | 2025-12-16 06:26:43+00:00
This isn't that unusual at all. Many pop stars make a lot of money with private concerts for very rich individuals or companies. Even actors like Leonardo DiCaprio get paid to vacate on the super yachts of rich people from gulf states who then show off the celeb and get attention for themselves.

My personal hypothesis for why pop music seems so odd, BORING and promoting luxury life instead of dealing with people's every day problems and heart aches. The Spotify users don't pay their bills, it's the high profile fans among the billionaires who do. Also their parties are fancier I guess.
by phasmantistes | 2025-12-16 06:26:57+00:00
It's a good question! I know that our first root (ISRG Root X1) used that naming scheme simply because it was cross-signed by IdenTrust's root (DST Root CA X3) which used that same scheme. But where they got the scheme from, I don't know.

Using Y to denote the "next generation" of roots is a scheme I came up with in the past year while planning our YE/YR ceremony, so it's certainly not something that people were thinking about when they named the first roots.
by ssl-3 | 2025-12-16 06:27:29+00:00
It's not the width that's a problem, but the height.

Here's a brochure for the first-year F-150 (1984): https://xr793.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/1984-Ford-F-Ser...

Have a look at some of the pictures that have people standing next to the truck.

They'd be giants if they were able to have that kind of posture next to a modern F150.
by tadfisher | 2025-12-16 06:28:50+00:00
The right is that of copyright, one that is granted by the public to incentivize the creative arts. Disney and other rights holders need to hold up their end of the bargain, so it's reasonable for the public to require wider dissemination of their works.

Disney still gets paid if their works are shown on Netflix; they choose exclusivity to build a moat around their streaming service, regardless of the quality of the service, which is a form of consumer abuse (albeit a mild one in the big picture).

Disney still requires you to disclose your age and gender to use the service, last I checked. This is concerning, and would be punished by a competitive streaming market were it not for exclusivity.
by kentm | 2025-12-16 06:29:24+00:00
> You can argue that, but then what is its purpose?

The purpose is to reduce randomness while still preserving probability of uniqueness. UUIDv4 come with performance issues when used to bucket data for updates, such as when there used as primary keys in a database.

A database like MySQL or PostgreSQL has sequential ids and you’d use those instead, but if you’re writing something like iceberg tables using Trino/Spark/etc then being able to generate unique ids (without using a data store) that tend to be clustered together is useful.
by adgjlsfhk1 | 2025-12-16 06:29:28+00:00
One of the really nice things Julia does is make broadcasting explicit. The way you would write this in Julia is

Z = [1,2,3] W = Z .+ Z' # note the . before the + that makes this a broadcasted

This has 2 big advantages. Firstly, it means that users get errors when the shapes of things aren't what they expected. A DimmensionMismatch error is a lot easier to debug than a silently wrong result. Secondly, it means that julia can use `exp(M)` etc to be a matrix exponential, while the element-wise exponential is `exp.(M)`. This allows a lot of code to naturally work generically over both arrays and scalars (e.g. exp of a complex number will work correctly if written as a 2x2 matrix)
by AndrewDavis | 2025-12-16 06:29:42+00:00
> I think this is incorrect. Specifically the Windows ARM support. Official hardware support page indicates that the Windows version requires x64. I unfortunately don’t have the hardware to confirm for myself. But Blizzard is the kind of company that would have made a blog post about that.

It has been around for a while, circa 2021. They made a forum post when they released it.

For reasons unknown the link no longer works but here it is on the wayback machine. https://web.archive.org/web/20210512205620/https://us.forums...
by DoctorOetker | 2025-12-16 06:29:54+00:00
I am not asking you for a random citation of the article, but one that demonstrates the article discusses a puzzle concerning a recent trend, as opposed to a longtime ongoing one.

Your citation of the article:

> This is a puzzle! Why would the market fail to reward innovative firms, or, conversely, why does it continue rewarding less innovative firms? Unfortunately, here we don’t have clear answers.

does not refer to any recent change, indeed, it uses the word "continue" invalidating your claim that the puzzle is about some recent change.
by D-Machine | 2025-12-16 06:32:07+00:00
"I have direct experience of universities doing horrifyingly wasteful computations" is not the ringing endorsement for Matlab you might think it to be...

Granted, I've seen Python horrors on university HPC clusters too, but at least there are libraries and clear documentation (e.g. Lightning, Ray, etc) for how to properly manage these things. Good luck finding that with Matlab.
by rswail | 2025-12-16 06:32:12+00:00
Aside from the economics, the question is why do it in orbit vs on land (or sea)?

What are the regulatory/legal gains? Lack of jurisdiction means open slather?

What are the national security gains? Redundancy and resiliency by each satellite being a "micro-compute" connected by high speed laser links? So more resilient to attack?

Why do it at all?
Ask HN: How do you know what you're working on is worth working on?
by ideavo | 2025-12-16 06:33:06+00:00
How do you know that the idea you want to work on or are working on is worth the time, energy and money? Not talking about side projects that you whipped up over the weekend, but medium term projects that you want to monetise, or even want to market to a medium to large audience (upwards of 100 daily/weekly users)

I see so many posts on reddit, people asking for validation. So I made a community-driven platform for it, I am attaching that link only: https://ideavo.tripivo.co.in

But my question remains, if you don't get any validation, why to take that risk of doing it?
by Terr_ | 2025-12-16 06:33:17+00:00
> I stick to extensions that Mozilla has manually vetted as part of the Firefox recommended extensions program.

If you're feeling extra-paranoid, the XPI file can be unpacked (ZIP) and to check over the code for anything suspicious or unreasonably-complex, particularly if the browser-extension is supposed to be something simple like "move the up/down vote arrows further apart on HN". :P

While that doesn't solve the overall ecosystem issue, every little bit helps. You'll know it's time to run away if extensions become closed-source blobs.
by bruce511 | 2025-12-16 06:34:57+00:00
I'll upvote you for at least asking the question. But you get downvoted because your premise is wrong.

There are lots of organizations that support the ACME protocol. LE is the most well known, but there are others, and more on the way.

Existing CAs don't necessarily vanish with this change. They are free to implement ACME (or some proprietary protocol) and they are completely free to keep charging for certificates if they like.

The real result of this change is that processes will change (where they haven't already) improving both customer experience and security.

But to be clear there's no "one organization" in the loop here. You can rest easy on that front.
by derleyici | 2025-12-16 06:35:17+00:00
It turns a single photo into a rough 3D scene so you can slightly move the camera and see new, realistic views. "Photorealistic" means it preserves real textures and lighting instead of a flat depth effect. Similar behavior can be seen with Apple's Spatial Scene feature in the Photos app: https://files.catbox.moe/93w7rw.mov
by 0xCE0 | 2025-12-16 06:36:01+00:00
I don't like at all. My experience for iPhones is iPhone 6+ (which was amazing), then I've been at Android world (Sxx series), and now I have iPhone 17 Pro Max, and truly wonder what is the value proposition here. Feels really buggy, UI tries to be Jolla-like gesture-based, but fails to do that, default style reminds that it is made by/for a kindergardener. And there is no "home" button anymore, that resets my virtual position to something safe/familiar, now I'm trying to swipe up/down/left/right, and there is always some new screen layout.

On the macOS side, it gets more locked and buggy and inconsistent with every release.

This is just a general comment for Apple OSs today, not specifically version 26.2.
by adgjlsfhk1 | 2025-12-16 06:36:18+00:00
The main thing is just that Julia has a standard library that works with you rather than working against you. The built in sort will use radix sort where appropriate and a highly optimized quicksort otherwise. You get built in matrices and higher dimensional arrays with optimized BLAS/LaPack configured for you (and CSC+structured sparse matrices). You get complex and rational numbers, and a calling convention (pass by sharing) which is the fast one by default 90% of the time instead of being slow (copying) 90% of the time. You have a built in package manager that doesn't require special configuration, that also lets you install GPU libraries that make it trivial to run generic code on all sorts of accelerators.

Everything you can do in Julia you can do in C++, but lots of projects that would take a week in C++ can be done in an hour in Julia.
by tzury | 2025-12-16 06:36:28+00:00
This case study reveals the future of AI-assisted[1] work, far beyond mathematics.

It relies on a combination of Humans, LLMs ('General Tools'), Domain-Specific Tools, and Deep Research.

It is apparent that the static data encoded within an LLM is not enough; one must re-fetch sources and digest them fresh for the context of the conversation.

In this workflow, AlphaEvolve, Aristotle, and LEAN are the 'PhDs' on the team, while the LLM is the Full Stack Developer that glues them all together.

[1] If one likes pompous terms, this is what 'AGI' will actually look like.
by moggers123 | 2025-12-16 06:37:33+00:00
>Back when I was writing xdg-desktop-portal-hyprland

Bahaha. I could have guessed. My only interaction with D-Bus as a layman is xdg-desktop-protocol. Is there just something about that particular use case that makes it so... Obnoxious? I presume all kinds of applications on my computer are right now busily d-bussing away without my notice, but getting xdg-desktop-protocol working with wlroots involved pentagrams and tomes bound in human skin.
by XorNot | 2025-12-16 06:37:36+00:00
Not really? In 1984 you were made an active participant of the oppression. The thought police and 5 minutes hate all required your active, enthusiastic participation.

Brave New World was apathy: the system was comfortable, Soma was freely available and there was a whole system to give disruptive elements comfortable but non disruptive engagement.

The protagonist in Brave New World spends a lot of time resenting the system but really he just resents his deformity, wanted what it denied him in society, and had no real higher criticisms of it beyond what he felt he couldn't have.
by pitched | 2025-12-16 06:40:40+00:00
I think they have slightly different meanings where “use” is more direct like a tool and “utilize” is more indirect like a system but that could be more about context than meaning. The words “usage” and “utilization” show this more where I would expect “usage” to be binary or integer and “utilization” to be fractional or percentage. That context and expectation is important for clear writing.
by phasmantistes | 2025-12-16 06:40:51+00:00
FWIW, we're acutely aware of the operational risks of super short lifetimes and frequent renewals. That's why our `shortlived` profile is clearly documented as only being appropriate for orgs that have high operational maturity and an oncall rotation. We carry pagers too, and if LE goes down for 48 hours, we'll be desperately trying not to take out a huge chunk of the Internet.