MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jack_tripper | 2025-12-15 18:22:38+00:00
>Who is the Chinese Intel?

Zhaoxin makes X86 and countless make ARM and RiscV chips. SMIC being a foundry.

> The Chinese Microsoft?

Baidu, Tencent, Alibaba, ByteDance.

>The Chinese Boeing?

Comac makes passenger and Chengdu fighter jets.

>The Chinese NVIDIA?

Huawei makes AI GPUs.

>People forget that the US is still the #2 manufacturer in the world

Considering the US never had its industry blown up in any war and could reap the benefits of 150+ years worth of stability, higher education, skilled immigration, compounding wealth, and taking over the vacuum and brains of Europe's post-war industrial powers, that's not really something THAT impressive.

>and that's (apparently) without halfway trying.

If it isn't halfway trying, why does it feel the need to sanction or ban chinese competitors?
by butvacuum | 2025-12-15 18:22:51+00:00
I do not grasp the spite put forth whenever a LLM is used for a non-critical point in an argument.

1) LLMs have the potential to, on the whole, raise the base "correctness" of people's opinions. (Ex: asking Gemini flash why seed oils are unhealthy begines with "that's a highly debated and complex topic." Which, is infinitely better than believing some short form shopping channel)

2) They offer a softer emotional impact when it's inevitably corrected, making for a less toxic environment, and increasing the odds a topic will be discussed and possibly an opinion corrected.

3) more often than not, I've found them to not only be correct- but they'll offer nuance in the answer. Ex: mitochondria aren't the same size across everything that has them.

We should be pointing out flawed usage, not a wholesale assault on all usage.
by jauntywundrkind | 2025-12-15 18:22:59+00:00
Anyone have some recommendations for a live distro that can run from ram?

It'd be nice to have a live image that I can put on a partition, that I can then delete the partition out from under while doing a bootstrap onto that same disk. Very useful on cloud instances that aren't great about letting you bring your own ISO.

I had some weird debian-live scripts thst tried doing a tmpfs & copying a btrfs snapshot onto it and launching that, but I never felt great about it, quite a hack.
by bloppe | 2025-12-15 18:23:05+00:00
Throwing out random numbers is not a convincing argument about how things would actually work in reality.

Consider the fact that median real income tends to move up [1]. This is the metric that matters. It's the 50th percentile person, so mega rich outliers are ignored. And it weighs incomes against the CPI, which incorporates the price of medicine, construction, education, as well as consumer electronics, food, and pretty much everything people spend money on in realistic proportions. That's objective evidence that people actually get richer, even though the price of labor does tend to go up across the board, relative to goods.

[1]: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/mepainusa672n
by mothballed | 2025-12-15 18:23:22+00:00
I've found the most freedom on the fringes of the earth. Rural South America and Kurdish Syria to name a couple.

Anywhere with any real government though, it's dead. My theory is the period of classical liberalism in the world was largely a result of the brief period where firearms were the main form of warfare, which represented a short period in history where violence was most decentralized and the government had the least leverage. Before that it was years to train archers or swordsman, after that fighter jets/ missiles / technology tilted back in power of government. In the golden era of the age of the firearm one person was basically one vote of violence (giving the populace the greater leverage); whereas before/after that time each vote was heavily weighted by a government actor.
by citizenpaul | 2025-12-15 18:23:29+00:00
> Chinese owner .... inside people's homes

They made the devices. I would say its fair to assume they already had access to the data if they needed it. Other than the fact they legally own it now I don't think this makes much difference from before.

Why are you concerned about china having access to this data anyway? I'm far more concerned about how much access the US gov has to this type of data. They can easily use it against someone in the country they control if they want.
by riversflow | 2025-12-15 18:23:45+00:00
My position is simple and has 2 parts:

To expect anyone to create meaningful regulation on every sector of the economy is absurd, our system is far too complex.

We need regulation if we want to live in a safe & healthy modern society.

Unless you just disagree with the second proposition, it seems your implication is that every congress person should be an expert on every sector of the economy and fiscal policy, and be able to craft meaningful laws, or at least have strong opinions about them. Otherwise, they would just be accepting laws written by other people, just like delegating to the regulator.

Corruption exists in every system. I grew up with clean air and water thanks to the current regulatory system, and have benefited from a safe work culture my whole life. Best I can tell the only guy who has really done anything to stop that is the current President, so kinda a crude characterization to say that they change with every admin.
by OutOfHere | 2025-12-15 18:23:45+00:00
It is highly inappropriate to accuse anyone with the claim that their writing is AI generated. This often is used as an excuse to unfairly discredit the content of the message. Whether the content is or isn't AI generated can't be determined with any confidence, and even if it is, it is improper to ignore the message. If you're going to criticize a message, do so on the basis of its actual content, not its alleged authorship.
by IgorPartola | 2025-12-15 18:23:50+00:00
I honestly am not sure why hardware startups do not adopt the open source model more frequently. At the very least they could do a software escrow where if they go belly up, the software becomes open source. The point is that it is a huge marketing point that they could use but do not. You are right that if let's say Samsung started selling completely autonomous kitchens then it is less likely that in two years they go belly up. But they also will want to cram it full of ads and spyware. Why can't a hardware startup position themselves against this and keep hammering their marketing with how they are open source and do not want and will not to show you ads or spy on you.

I think the point is that consumers never have a choice in these things so even if they cared, what would be the outcome? For phones, TVs, laptops, cars, if I do care about not just privacy but repairability, what options do I actually have? For phones there are various attempts at libre phones but they are all unusable in some way. Dumb TVs exist and so do open source media players, but something that lets me stream all my video subscription services + local media and does not have some phone home cloud thing built in just doesn't exist at all. Laptops are maybe as close as you can get with things like Framework, etc. and I think this is where I am surprised at the lack of serious marketing. Finally, cars are a complete mess. I have seen one or two open source ECUs but it is so far from plug and play it's not even on the horizon.

Basically, consumers don't care because they aren't choosing between a libre phone and Google Pixel. They are choosing between a Google Pixel and a buggy prototype or a dumb phone.
by OkayPhysicist | 2025-12-15 18:23:54+00:00
Unions are political entities, because their existence in their current form (i.e., not throwing dynamite at the cops, blowing up bridges, kneecapping scabs, or dragging the foreman out of his home in the middle of the night and killing him in the street) is a legal construct, that the bosses would love to eliminate.

If you're disjointed enough to belong to a union, benefit from a union, and yet hold political views that want to eliminate unions, then it really shouldn't come as some shock that your union is supporting politicians you don't.
by jwr | 2025-12-15 18:24:27+00:00
I used CL for many years before I switched to Clojure. And by "used" I mean really used it, not just for applications, but I also dove into CL implementations, for example I added return-from-frame (also known as debug-return) to CMUCL.

So, I kind of know what I'm talking about :-) And I don't miss anything from CL: I honestly can't find a single reason to switch back to CL.
by ufmace | 2025-12-15 18:24:30+00:00
This isn't about things that happened decades or centuries ago though. It's about how right now, today, the UK is arresting 12,000 people a year, 30 a day, for supposedly "offensive" posts on social media.

https://freespeechunion.org/police-make-30-arrests-a-day-for...
by skippyboxedhero | 2025-12-15 18:24:41+00:00
Lai admitted to explicitly doing this - https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/law-and-crime/article/32... - I believe he said he did this on multiple occasions. His arguments make no sense at all because, given his background, the only possible interpretation of that course of action would be to use sanctions to change the government.

Also, if Lai genuinely believed (as I think he must have done) that the US was going to help in any way then he was delusional. In almost every case, "freedom" fighters end up relying on the resources of hostile foreign governments to continue their activities. There is no way that the US was going to offer anything other than a publicity stunt.
by dylan604 | 2025-12-15 18:24:47+00:00
> I feel like there are significantly more interesting articles

if this is the article that introduces someone to the concept of certificate transparency, then there's nothing wrong with that. graciously, you followed through with links to what you consider more interesting. that is not something a lot of commenters do and just leave it as a snarky comment for someone being one of the lucky 10000 for the day.
by jeffbee | 2025-12-15 18:24:52+00:00
The Dalles data centers use a large fraction of the water supply of The Dalles because the data centers are extremely large and the town of The Dalles is of negligible size. It is also true that the paper mill of Valliant, Oklahoma uses 50 million gallons of water per day and that the town of Valliant, Oklahoma, population 819, uses less than 1% of that amount, so the paper mill can be said to be using > 99% of the local water supply but this is also a meaningless comparison.
by scottlamb | 2025-12-15 18:24:53+00:00
> Good schools have limited bandwidth or interest in remedial education/hand-holding and academics don't have a lot of interest in putting together materials that will be outdated next year.

I think they rarely escape doing this hand-holding unless they're actually willing to flunk out students en masse. Maybe MIT is; the University of Iowa certainly wasn't. So they end up just in a state of denial in which they say they're teaching all this great theoretical material but they're doing a half-assed job of teaching either body of knowledge.

I also don't think this knowledge gets outdated that quickly. I'd say if they'd put together a topic list like this for 2006, more than half the specific tools would still be useful, and the concepts from the rest would still transfer over pretty well to what people use today. For example, yeah, we didn't have VS Code and LSP back then, but IDEs didn't look that different. We didn't (quite) have tmux but used screen for the same purpose. etc. Some things are arguably new (devcontainers have evolved well beyond setting up a chroot jail, AI tools are new) but it's mostly additive. If you stay away from the most bleeding-edge stuff (I'm not sure the "AI for the shell (Warp, Zummoner)" is wise to spend much time on) you never have to throw much out.
by mattmaroon | 2025-12-15 18:24:54+00:00
No I was pointing out the absurdity of your comment. Cops are called to respond to violent crimes in America, Chinese people aren’t (presumably the response time would be far too long) so even if they were identical people, you’d expect a lot more police shootings than ones by Chinese citizens on the streets of America.

The Chinese government may not need its law enforcement officers to carry guns (that’s great but that ship sailed here centuries ago) but they do send vans to harvest the organs of dissidents. And Google “persecution of Uyghurs”.

They’re not a benign organization just because they shoot less, they just get shot at less.
by aleph_minus_one | 2025-12-15 18:25:30+00:00
> Or if you're regulated but have to be specifically exempted and allowed to work in a way that schools would never permit, then in that case you'd not be arguing in good faith that kids are able to learn to code and develop on a Chromebook since they can't.

No, I just wanted to show that your claim

> It's doubtful that your employer locks you out of literally everything that would allow you to develop software on-device. See my other comments in this thread.

simply does not hold in practice.

--

Addendum: Additionally, from my school experience, rather the attempts to circumvent "abitrary" restrictions on the computers which were set up by the school made you a good coder. :-)
by mrguyorama | 2025-12-15 18:25:37+00:00
So?

The entire Personal Computer revolution was built from reverse engineering the IBM PC, to start the clone market, which was legal in the US!

On the software side, both Apple and Microsoft were cribbing notes from all sorts of other places.

Remixing and iterating on mostly free ideas is literally how the US used to build things!

People get all huffy and puffy about how the US has stagnated and doesn't build anymore, and in the same breath get pissed that China doesn't kneel to our absurd IP laws!

The US COULD compete if we put building shit ahead of rewarding some shithead capitalist for someone else's work.
by benzible | 2025-12-15 18:25:39+00:00
I've read Manufacturing Consent more than once - it's one of my favorite books and Chomsky one of my favorite thinkers (really dismayed that he associated with Epstein but I digress). Anyway, you've got it backwards.

The propaganda model is explicitly not "capital determines what headlines are credible." Chomsky and Herman go out of their way to distinguish their structural critique from the crude conspiracy-theory version where owners call up editors and dictate coverage. That's the strawman critics use to dismiss them.

The five filters work through hiring practices, sourcing norms, resource allocation, advertising pressure, and ideological assumptions - not direct commands from capital. The bias is emergent and structural, not dictated. Chomsky makes this point repeatedly because he knows the "rich people control the news" framing is both wrong and easy to dismiss.

It's also not a general theory that institutional journalism can't accurately report facts. Chomsky cites mainstream sources constantly in his own work - he's not arguing the New York Times can't report that a building burned down.

Applying the propaganda model to whether People magazine can accurately report on a celebrity homicide is a stretch, to put it mildly. You've taken a sophisticated structural critique and flattened it into "all institutional journalism is fake, trust nothing."
by Tcepsa | 2025-12-15 18:26:48+00:00
So this is a post from/for a group of livecoding music jammers, but I think there's value in considering it in broader contexts. In particular, the parts about "let code die" and not being afraid to remove/rewrite large blocks of code really resonated with me because--regardless of the author's intent--they suggest to me a level of competency and familiarity with one's tools and languages that many people have not reached, and may not even realize is possible.

To me, some of the most impactful parts are the ones that talk about how sometimes someone will delete their code, and they'll just. Rewrite it! By hand! From scratch! Because they wanted it to be that way!! How different that seems than the more typical world of issue trackers and code reviews and having just enough time to figure out how to do something once before it's on to the next feature. How tightly we cling to working code, lest it be lost and we have to do it again! Whomst among us has the time?!

But what if we did have the time? What if instead of figuring something out once and then moving on to the next ticket, we erased it and started over? Like an improv sketch ("do it differently!") or learning to paint ("scrape your canvas clean and begin again!") exploring alternatives and reinforcing in our minds what works and what doesn't.

"Do it again" is much less scary, more invitation when you're on the hundred-and-second rewrite rather than the second. You know where the pitfalls are, you've internalized which shortcuts will work and which offer false hope. You can practically do it with your eyes closed, in a matter of minutes rather than days

That's when you can start to get really creative--because the risk of exploration and experimentation is practically zero: if you try something new and it doesn't work, it's trivial to throw it away and replace it with something that does.
by reify | 2025-12-15 18:26:52+00:00
Every time I see the word Claud I immediately think of an old song. Puffy Cloud by Ween 1990.

My earworm

lyrics

[Verse 1] Drift away on a puffy claud Go away on a puffy claud My brain is dead from too much pot 'Cause Gene/Dean and I smoke too much pot (of course) [Chorus 1] Claudy, Claudy, Claudy, Claud Claudy, Claud, Claudy, Claud Claudy, Claudy, Claudy, Claud Claudy, Claud, Claudy, Claud [Verse 2] Float away on a cotton ball We write songs about the clauds My brain is dead from too much pot 'Cause Gene/Dean and I smoke too much pot (oh)

ad nauseam ad nauseam
by Workaccount2 | 2025-12-15 18:27:27+00:00
We know why, we just don't like it.

A country with a business friendly, low regulatory environment, coupled with a high work ethic and poor work/life balance, if nothing else, is not going to be a country that falls behind.

Americans complain a lot, and the system isn't that comfortable or respectful, but they aren't facing existential economic irrelevance.
by just-the-wrk | 2025-12-15 18:27:30+00:00
A typed execution graph for Go. You write functions with typed inputs and outputs—Docket infers the dependency graph, runs independent steps in parallel, and caches what you tell it to. It integrates with River and a number of data stores.

I spent a year attempting to adopt Temporal at scale, and 6 months trying to wrangle some multistep data enrichment and ML pipelines. This is what I wish I'd had with what I learned

https://github.com/sugarsoup/docket
by IgorPartola | 2025-12-15 18:27:55+00:00
Why would the food prep robot be humanoid? There is no reason for that. And my point is that I wouldn't want it to be cloud-connected at all. No reason for that either. I don't need it to be intelligent. I need it to have recipe-following, and specific functions like measure(), chop(), dice(), grate(), mix(), etc.

For laundry, have you considered that not everything is a T-shirt? Suits, socks, onesies, pajamas, sweaters, halter tops, lingerie, long johns, bedding, etc. And drawers are only suitable storage for some types of clothes. Putting a suit into a drawer is for example a terrible idea.
by neko_ranger | 2025-12-15 18:28:01+00:00
"Gamification" is not necessarily bad, it's just how you do it. Even mathacademy.com has weekly leagues, and it does make it more motivating and social.

Put the learning stuff at the forefront, and the gamification stuff can be on the side for people who find that fun. The difference is something like mathacademy is trying to actually teach you math, duolingo is trying to hook you to look at ads.
by Dracophoenix | 2025-12-15 18:28:10+00:00
> When I was in my early 20s I used to think I was very clever for pointing out apparent hypocrisies. Now I realize how easily that devolves into “you are imperfect therefore you may never criticize anything”.

What's the solution? The alternative, where we can't criticize our governments on account of their hypocrisies and imperfections, robs citizens of their check against an institution with a monopoly on violence.

> Americans can never call out human rights abuses because of slavery. The British can never because of colonialism. Period. Forever.

There's certainly a difference between holding countries responsible for events that have long since ceased and holding a government responsible for double standards practiced presently. The UK lacks credibility on Hong Kong when its own citizens are being jailed on the basis of overbroad hate speech regulations and when its government agencies attempt to claim extraterritorial jurisdiction over the operation of foreign social media companies. Westminister can't be so empty-headed as to believe that its actions will go unnoticed by other governments.
by gaze | 2025-12-15 18:28:13+00:00
The power of quantum computing is constructing the solution to a problem out of an interference pattern. Classical probabilities don’t interfere, but quantum probabilities do. Loosely, quantum probabilities can be constructed to cancel, since their amplitudes can be negative.

Shor’s algorithm works on the quantum Fourier transform. The quantum Fourier transform works because you can pick a frequency out of a signal using a “test wave.” The test wave can select out the amplitude of interest because the information of the test wave constructively interferes, whereas every other frequency cancels. This is the interference effect that can only happen with complex/negative probability amplitudes.
by Timon3 | 2025-12-15 18:28:18+00:00
Maybe I'm misreading this article, but where does it actually say that anything UBI-related failed? The titular "failure" of the experiment is apparently:

> While the Ontario’s Basic Income experiment was hardly the only one of its kind, it was the largest government-run experiment. It was also one of the few to be originally designed as a randomised clinical trial. Using administrative records, interviews and measures collected directly from participants, the pilot evaluation team was mandated to consider changes in participants’ food security, stress and anxiety, mental health, health and healthcare usage, housing stability, education and training, as well as employment and labour market participation. The results of the experiment were to be made public in 2020.

> However, in July 2018, the incoming government announced the cancellation of the pilot programme, with final payments to be made in March 2019. The newly elected legislators said that the programme was “a disincentive to get people back on track” and that they had heard from ministry staff that it did not help people become “independent contributors to the economy”. The move was decried by others as premature. Programme recipients asked the court to overturn the cancellation but were unsuccessful.

So according to the article, a new government decided to stop the experiment not based on the collected data, but on their political position and vibes. Is there any further failure described in the article?
by caconym_ | 2025-12-15 18:28:34+00:00
> you shouldn't have given away your work for free.

Almost none of the original work I've ever posted online has been "given away for free", because it was protected by copyright law that AI companies are brazenly ignoring, except where they make huge deals with megacorporations (eg openai and disney) because they do in fact know what they're doing is not fair use. That's true whether or not I posted it in a context where I expected compensation.