MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by XorNot | 2025-12-22 21:34:24+00:00
Nix and specifically nixpkgs is IMO very bad at this. It's not a distro: it's a collection of random links that in many cases now only exists in cache.nixos.org. The tarball server frequently doesn't have content, can't represent some content at all (recursive hash types), links have rotted away completely (broadcom driver zips referencing a domain which is now advertising online gambling).

Nix isn't functional: it's a functional core that moved every bit of the imperative part to an even less parseable stage, labelled it "evaluation" and then ignored any sense of hygiene about it.

No: your dependency tree for packaging should absolutely not include an opaque binary from a cache server, or a link to a years old patch posted on someone else's bugzilla instance (frequently link rotted as well).

Nothing has made me appreciate the decisions of mainstream distributions more then dealing with an alternative like this.
by JackSlateur | 2025-12-22 21:34:26+00:00
Because logging to a remote server is not "executing code in that remote server" .. ?

Same as any other remote protocol ? Yes. But we are not talking about that, we are talking about active directory, whose main purpose is to authenticate and authorize stuff. Yes, you can configure everything. But just like a wall is better than a door with a lock .. see what I'm saying ? In the AD world, allowing remote code execution is not a bug, it's a feature. Call it a vulnerability if you want;

A direct competitor of AD is oauth, which does not allow people to execute code on the issuer

Number of cryptolock due to oauth: none (that I know of); As if theory and practice sometimes meet ..

I understand that you like AD, and that's fine. The original post was about security and I stand by my point: thinking that we are perfect, that others are doing mistakes but "not us" is not good for security. Neither is playing with fire, as per the vast quantity of burnt people
by jjtheblunt | 2025-12-22 21:34:27+00:00
the article talks about this, the (too vaguely explained) tldr is that pulverization allows neoantigens to be exposed to the immune system rather than hidden within a tumor. i saw elsewhere (weeks ago) an article that this worked excellently, but this article seems to not reference it.

this is one such article:

https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2025/11/tricking-tumors-i...
by fjfaase | 2025-12-22 21:34:27+00:00
I fear that some women who once slept in my bed, will be rather sad now. On April 15, 1984, Chris Rea gave a concert at the University of Twente. Some people in my dorm were involved with the organization of concerts. After the concert a girl turned up at our dorm who was looking for a place to sleep. I ended up offering her my bed while I slept on a sofa in my room. The bed and the sofa were separated by a back half of a piano. I remember that the next morning, she left to the next city where Chris Rea would perform next.
by stuffn | 2025-12-22 21:34:53+00:00
Regulation, I’d argue, is a far more efficient route to monopoly than “unchecked capitalism”. If you have enough money you can gain regulatory capture.

If you pay close attention the majority of “evil capitalists” the far left bitches and whines about so much are masters at this. Last mile service, car manufactures, medicine, law, construction, power, water, technology, banking, housing, etc. Most of the world’s billionaires got their money through fucking over the average person with regulatory capture. This must present the leftist with a conundrum they simple ignore because it doesn’t fit their paradigm. More government leads to more control of wealth by fewer people.

This isn’t to say all regulation is bad. However, the line between over-regulating and under-regulating is so thin it’s often better to err on the looser side. Otherwise, in many places, small business is immediately crushed and “late stage capitalism” is the result.
by bitexploder | 2025-12-22 21:35:08+00:00
Hmm, I sort of learned ad-hoc. Joe Celko's books were good back in the day. I never read something a lot later that was an "aha" for me. I think I was a little resistant to "NoSQL" databases for a while but eventually they made sense to me. I can't think of a single resource or turning point. There are probably some very good books out there now. The key thing is not /everything/ has to be SQL. And SQL databases like Postgres and SQLite can be used for a lot more than SQL now. Also, don’t be afraid to just throw protos/JSON/whatever into a database with no or mininal schema to get going. But manage data design debt ruthlessly, it can haunt you.

My biggest learnings:

Don't prematurely normalize data, but if it is obvious it can always stay normalized, normalize it. Read the normal forms. Learn about indexing and how data is actually being stored on disk. Just knowing about indexes is a huge advantage even today. Understand and know when to use different styles of data storage: row oriented, column oriented, key value, bigtable style (2d key value), document (rare). Pick good systems. Spend more time than you think you should designing your data. The system is often easy if the data is right. Learn ACID and CAP theorem. Learn when and where you can trade on fundamental database principles in your data model for performance or ease of development. Honestly, a lot of this stuff senior engineers at big tech are just expected to know these days, but it still isn't really obvious and not everyone has big tech problems. Still if you know how to solve the problems at scale and you can get out of your own way it is much easier to write smaller systems (most problems people have).

So in terms of resources, go learn about each of those concepts. Read papers. Ask an LLM about them. Play with databases and storage systems. Maybe try to write your own simple database. Go read about how people design massively scaled distributed systems and what systems they use to manage data. Just like with programming languages, be flexible and open minded. Read about how distributed systems work (CAP theorem). Almost all data systems make tradeoffs in that realm to meet cost/performance/implementation goals.
by jameslk | 2025-12-22 21:35:14+00:00
That graph is not inflation-adjusted and basically says to avoid using it like this in the description:

> Average prices are best used to measure the price level in a particular month, not to measure price change over time. It is more appropriate to use CPI index values for the particular item categories to measure price change.

I’m not doubting that (inflation-adjusted) energy prices have gone up but this graph is misleading to represent it

FRED actually has a blog post about how you would go about calculating an inflation-adjusted priced graph here: https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2022/11/fred-gets-real-unles...
by Ajedi32 | 2025-12-22 21:35:29+00:00
I don't think it's wishful thinking. Flock advertises how many actual, real-world cases their cameras have contributed to solving, and even just reading news reports on murder trials you'll often see comments like "suspect's car was caught on camera traveling such and such direction" in the timeline of events.

The question isn't whether these cameras help law enforcement. Of course they do. The question is whether that's sufficient justification for continuous government surveillance of the public movements of millions of law abiding citizens.
by jjwiseman | 2025-12-22 21:36:10+00:00
If they were doing that, that would be a criminal conspiracy, not terrorism. Authoritarians often like to call ordinary criminals, political opponents, and dissenters terrorists to delegitimize them and justify harsher behavior against them. I assume that's what Garrett Langley was trying to do when he called them a "terroristic organization".

Luckily for DeFlock they're not doing anything "terroristic" or even criminal.
by throw310822 | 2025-12-22 21:36:13+00:00
Sorry, but if you don't trust your coworker to review and shape the AI's output, why would you trust them with actually writing the whole document?

And if you think that at this point you could have done it yourself, then why don't you? The only important thing is that the document is fine, if it takes you too much to verify it then you need to trust your colleague, that was their job.
by bell-cot | 2025-12-22 21:36:28+00:00
Don't expect any sort of mass disobedience here. Doing anything in offshore wind requires a large, highly-skilled organization and lot of time. One firm "ahem!" from the Coast Guard, Navy, or Treasury, and that kinda org will back down.

If things fall apart so badly that the CG, USN, and Treasury don't matter - then who's paying the bills for any offshore construction, and who's protecting anything that is built from looting or seizure?
by Retric | 2025-12-22 21:36:47+00:00
Nuclear is inherently expensive even with zero regulations you have the full costs of a coal power plant + more expensive lifetime costs for fuel + extra costs associated with nuclear such as more and more highly educated workers.

Meanwhile coal is dead because it’s already more expensive than the market is willing to accept.

The only hope for nuclear is massive subsidies, deregulation on its own isn’t going to work.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-12-22 21:38:24+00:00
> So clearly this is politically motivated, and they're using what seems to be a real but solveable concern as a scapegoat.

I approve of this, because they were going to come up with an excuse one way or another, but "it's classified" has been a BS excuse that has received far too much deference to cover for all kinds of nonsense going back many decades, and being sufficiently flagrant about it is exactly what it takes to create enough of a backlash to finally do something about it.
by toomuchtodo | 2025-12-22 21:38:31+00:00
This administration won't last long enough to see any of these nuclear ambitions to any sort of success (its takes at least a decade to build nuclear generators in the developed world). Words are cheap, and regime change is coming. Solar and battery storage is already the cheapest form of generation in most of the world, and will only continue to decline in price, while the US will continue to face system and labor challenges precluding the large scale construction of commercial nuclear. The US currently doesn't have enough labor to build residential construction and naval vessels, so it will be interesting to see where they attempt to source this labor from (assuming the usual labor pipeline challenges where it takes up to half a decade to turn a human into a skilled tradesperson from an apprentice or other form of beginner).

Citations:

https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/solar-electricity-e...

https://ember-energy.org/latest-updates/batteries-now-cheap-...

https://www.agc.org/news/2025/08/28/construction-workforce-s...

https://www.nahb.org/blog/2025/10/hbi-labor-market-report

https://www.slashgear.com/2034405/us-navy-warship-building-w...
by etothepii | 2025-12-22 21:38:38+00:00
I'm amazed by how few people appreciate the quote attributed to Abraham Lincoln, "If I had more time I'd write a shorter letter."

Why aren't people using LLM to shorten rather than lengthen their plans? You know what you meant so can validate whether the shorter version still hits the points you care about. Whereas if I use an
LLM to shorten your email there is always a risk I've now missed your main point.

Cleaning up grammar, punctuation spelling etc is a good thing worth doing but adding padding is exclusively irritating.
by 0_gravitas | 2025-12-22 21:38:59+00:00
Disclaimer: I used the /royal/ LISP--as in the 'lisp family'- my introduction, and language of choice, has been Clojure (who's qualification as a Lisp is technically contended by certain fundamentalists), but it is still quite paren-based either-way.

And I do, I bounced off it the first time long ago, and really took to it the second go around, its been my daily driver at home and work for some years now- it brings me great joy.
by jleyank | 2025-12-22 21:40:09+00:00
Uni life was quite good. Lots of people nearby with similar interests, fair bit of free time, lots of diversions (concerts, radio, computers, ...) and not a significant drag on my time. There has not been a time since then with less responsibility with all those advantages.

But then, I did all this in advance of social networking which gave me 10-20 extra hours a week to do stuff. The computers were there, you merely had to go to where they sat.
by robin_reala | 2025-12-22 21:40:17+00:00
Leaving accessibility out of an UI library tutorial is like leaving security out of an API tutorial. It’s perfectly possible to build something that’s probably not a problem if you’re building a toy application, but if you haven’t done it right from the start it will absolutely bite you hard, and it’ll broadly be quicker to start over from scratch than try to fix the mess.
by ed_blackburn | 2025-12-22 21:40:18+00:00
I literally said this three days ago: https://hachyderm.io/@ed_blackburn/115747527216812176

But in all seriousness, LLMs have their strengths but we’re all wasting tokens and burning the planet unnecessarily getting LLMs to work so inefficiently. Use the best tool for the job; make the tools easier to use by LLMs. This mantra is applicable generally. Not just for coding.
by PessimalDecimal | 2025-12-22 21:40:42+00:00
China's middle class is already larger than the entire US population, and growing fast. It won't be rich in the sense that say Switzerland or Norway are rich. But it seems safe to say they won't be barely scraping by.

IMO, India likely won't make this transition. It's population is still growing but it's birth rate is sinking fast (like most everywhere else).
by eieio | 2025-12-22 21:40:44+00:00
I found this article while debugging some networking delays for a game that I'm working on.

It turns out that in my case it wasn't TCP_NODELAY - my backend is written in go, and go sets TCP_NODELAY by default!

But I still found the article - and in particular Nagle's acknowledgement of the issues! - to be interesting.

There's a discussion from two years ago here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40310896 - but I figured it'd been long enough that others might be interested in giving this a read too.
by kazinator | 2025-12-22 21:40:55+00:00
I've played with operator precedence parsing earlier this year to produce an infix implementation for TXR Lisp.

Documentation entry point: https://www.nongnu.org/txr/txr-manpage.html#N-BEB6083E

I may have invented something new, which I called "Precedence Demotion". I did some research regarding prior art for this exact thing but didn't find it.

https://www.nongnu.org/txr/txr-manpage.html#N-89023B87

LOL, I see I have a bug in the quadratic-roots example (not related to the above). The example has correct results for the given inputs because a is 1.

It's ironic: you add infix to Lisp and, wham, you make a bugeroo because of infix that would never happen in prefix, right in the documentation. Like a poetic justice punishment.
by mopsi | 2025-12-22 21:41:33+00:00
> I'd argue that communism is the only system of government that guarantees property for all. That's somewhat a core tenant that every member in a communist society collectively owns everything.

This year, I knit a scarf for a friend as a Christmas gift. He already owns several scarves, unlike some other people who own none, but might need one more than he does. How is that collective ownership supposed to work here? Are you going to take that scarf away from me and "assign" it to someone you deem more deserving? I'll resist and you'll have to take it from me by force. And if you do, I'll stop knitting altogether, because why bother if I never get the chance to gift it to my friend. What are you going to do when you need the next scarf, force me to work?

If the answer is "yes", you've just reinvented a communist dictatorship. If it's a "no", then such society will run out of food and goods, and something better will rise to replace it.
by Imustaskforhelp | 2025-12-22 21:41:45+00:00
Same, although gemini 3 flash already gives a run for the cheaper aspect but a part of me really wants to get open source too because that way if I really want to some day, I can have privacy or get my own hardware to run it

I genuinely hope that gemini 3 flash gets open sourced but I feel like that can actually crash the AI bubble if something like this happens because I genuinely feel like although there are still some issues of vibing with the overall model itself, I find it very competent overall and fast and I genuinely feel like at this point, there might be some placebo effects too but in reality, the model feels really solid.

Like all of western countries (mostly) wouldn't really have a point to compete or incentives if someone open sources the model because then the competition would rather be on providers/ their speeds (like how groq,cerebras have an insane speed)

I had heard that google would allow institutions like universities to self host gemini models or similar so there are chances as to what if the AI bubble actually pops up if gemini models or top tier models accidentally get leaked or similar but I genuinely doubt of it as happening and there are many other ways that the AI bubble will pop.
by SOLAR_FIELDS | 2025-12-22 21:42:08+00:00
Are you saying that because you fundamentally just don’t believe the db is a good place for auth, or because these low-code frameworks tend to roll it in and as such you see a lot of low quality implementations of auth from these systems simply because using them is within reach of someone who has no idea what they are doing?

To me it’s important to make this disambiguation. One take says that auth in db itself is a problem. The other take says “auth in db is a symptom of low code garbage”
by geerlingguy | 2025-12-22 21:42:43+00:00
The CSACs that I have in a couple devices are 'atomic', and use Rubidium, but they're a bit lower accuracy than Cesium clocks [1] or Hydrogen Masers [2].

There are a few folks on the time-nuts mailing list who own such exotic pieces of hardware, but those are pretty far out of reach for most!

[1] https://www.microchip.com/en-us/products/clock-and-timing/co...

[2] https://www.microchip.com/en-us/products/clock-and-timing/co...
by tjr | 2025-12-22 21:42:48+00:00
Well, in recent years, I would mainly work in a DAW system like Logic or Pro Tools, recording each track of music by playing the instrument -- be it a real instrument, or a virtual instrument played off a MIDI controller, or sometimes working with another performer doing a track -- so it was all about recording music in real time.

Whereas this system appears to emphasize a programmatic description of the music.

Of course, with MIDI, there's that underlying programmatic description, and you could use various means to work with MIDI in a more programming-style if you wanted, but I for one have mostly generated music either through playing an instrument, or sometimes through exporting music notation files (Sibelius, Dorico, etc.) to MIDI files.

To me, the idea of programming the timing and duration and intensity and so forth of a note from scratch seems like it would be harder and less enjoyable to do than to just play the note on a keyboard -- even if I turned around and applied some MIDI transforms to clean it up. But for someone who doesn't play music much, and is good with programming, this coding approach might prove easier.
by cafard | 2025-12-22 21:43:17+00:00
Donald Knuth wrote of Robert Floyd that

(Bob used to say that he was planning to get a PhD by the “green stamp method,” namely by saving envelopes addressed to him as “Dr. Floyd.” After collecting 500 such letters, he mused, a university somewhere in Arizona would probably grant him a degree.)

See https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=1299661

I suppose that Stallman must have received enough letters.
by jleyank | 2025-12-22 21:43:35+00:00
It's all well and good saying that migrants and other lower-income workers have to go somewhere else, but who will take their place doing that lower-income often distasteful work? Somebody has to work in the fields, clean commodes, dismember meat, ... and it's been a (very?) long time since Maddie and Connor wanted those jobs if they ever did.
by esalman | 2025-12-22 21:43:40+00:00
It is not a bipartisan winning issue.

Wife worked in a construction firm in South Texas. Firm owners were a half-hispanic family. It was a decent sized firm, millions of dollars turnover and recipients of millions more in PPP loans, special state contracts, and tax breaks due to being half Hispanic and "woman-owned". They also firmly supported T and believed in qanon stuff. They believed something to the effect of, scientists have sold their souls to Satan in exchange for technological progress.

It was not really shocking. What was shocking is that how similar vibes prevail within silicon valley, as it became clear days after him winning the election.
by iamsomewalrus | 2025-12-22 21:43:41+00:00
genuinely curious, can you steel man stored procedures? views make intuitive sense to me, but stored procedures, much like meta-programming, needs to be sparingly used IMO.

At my new company, the use of stored procedures unchecked has really hurt part of the companies ability to build new features so I'm surprised to see what seems like sound advice, "don't use stored procedures", called out as a cargo cult.
by dijit | 2025-12-22 21:44:34+00:00
I appreciate the thoughtful response and the commitment to facts. Racism has no place in these discussions. Let’s examine the points with nuance, drawing from the cited report and context.
On the Home Office Report’s Statistics
The 2020 paper states that group-based child sexual exploitation (CSE) offenders are “most commonly White”.[0]

However, it highlights major data limitations. Ethnicity was often unrecorded or incomplete. Police forces supplied partial details only. The report notes that “the academic literature highlights significant limitations to what can be said about links between ethnicity and this form of offending”.

It also cautions against conclusions due to “data quality problems, the way the samples were selected in studies, and the potential for bias”. A 2025 audit by Baroness Casey confirmed this. Ethnicity went unrecorded for two-thirds of suspects. Better data collection is now mandatory.

While the report leans towards White predominance overall, it acknowledges high-profile cases “have mainly involved men of Pakistani ethnicity”.(also in[0]) It does not rule out over-representation in specific subtypes. This invites careful interpretation rather than dismissal.

On Cherry-Picking Anecdotes and Corrections: Selective stories can mislead. Yet DHH often cites aggregated data from European reports, such as Denmark’s figures on higher crime rates among certain immigrant groups. He praises selective immigration from compatible cultures and commends Denmark’s integration policies. This points to policy focus, not inherent bias.

If presented with the report’s full nuances and unmoved, that warrants critique. Given its caveats and recent calls for improved data, the debate remains open.

On Non-White Native Brits and Racism; Implying Britishness ties to skin tone is wrong. DHH’s remark about “Brits being a minority in their own capital” refers to the “White British” census category, at 37% in London per the 2021 census. This tracks ethnic shifts officially.

Non-White British citizens, many native-born and fully integrated, are undeniably British. If his phrasing suggests otherwise, it needs clarification. His posts emphasise rapid changes from mass immigration, not rejection of integrated individuals. Many non-White Brits voice similar concerns on resources and cohesion, without racism.
Criticising policies can be valid if evidence-based and non-dehumanising. Targeting one group without balance risks bias. DHH’s stance seems data-driven on integration, but scrutiny is fair.

Thanks for the source though.

[0]: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...