MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by throwaway894345 | 2025-12-20 05:11:05+00:00
> We can see we're going to have to move away from MinIO in the foreseeable future.

My favorite thing about all of this is that I had just invested a ton of time in understanding MinIO and its Kubernetes operator and got everything into a state that I felt good about. I was nearly ready to deploy it to production when the announcement was released that they would not be supporting it.

I’m somewhat surprised that no one is forking it (or I haven’t heard about any organizations of consequence stepping up anyway) instead of all of these projects to rebuild it from scratch.
by godelski | 2025-12-20 05:13:19+00:00
> see Bill Gate's famous quote about hiring lazy people

I think this is part of why all this is so contentious. There's been a huge culture shift over the last decade and AI is really just a catalyst to it. We went from managers needing to stop engineers from using too much abstraction and optimizing what doesn't need to be optimized to the engineers themselves attacking abstraction. Just look how people turn Knuth's "premature optimization is the root of evil" went from "get a profiler before you optimize" to "optimization? Are you crazy?"

Fewer and fewer people I know are actually passionate about programming and it's not uncommon to see people be burned out and just want to do their 9-5. And I see a strong correlation with these people embracing AI. It makes sense if you don't care and are just trying to get the job done. I don't think it's surprising things are getting buggier and innovation slowed. We killed the passion and tried to turn it into a mechanical endeavor. It's a negative feedback loop
by markhahn | 2025-12-20 05:14:32+00:00
by not conflating "internet" with "social network / doomscrolling".

no, seriously, that's the main thing. nothing about "internet" says you have to let ad-motivated recommendation engines fill your gullet.

let's call it "mindful internet": you deliberately choose what to read, even if that means, gasp, seeking out a few quality sources, checking in with a few worthwhile people. "influencers" are so ick precisely because they are an gross side-effect of doomscrolling.
by rmason | 2025-12-20 05:14:52+00:00
Been following this guy for a pretty long time on his bootstrapping journey in Detroit. Never met him but we have a few mutual friends. He is going to sell an EV Japanese style Kei truck that he will ship to you as a kit.

What I think that he should tell are more of the stories where he failed. He mentions how he originally had the wrong business model for the bus company. He also tried briefly rehabbing cheap apartment buildings. I think people fail in business and then they're done. The successful ones simply pivot, sometimes multiple times until they find something that works.
by AndrewKemendo | 2025-12-20 05:15:44+00:00
Everything but the collective will is there for an open and decentralized internet to thrive as envisioned

what you describe emerged from open protocols and standards being intermediated by middlemen because “regular” people don’t want to learn how to run their own fiber.

All the “regular people” took over what was basically a communications experiment by scientists because attention and as a result commerce moved to that experimental space.

I lived through that as a early net user in 1992 and watched any possibility of the dream get eaten.

The crowding out of the “original intent” is an artifact of transactionalism being the driving factor behind the majority of human action.

Anything that would replace it would eventually succumb to the same fate because the constituent parts are still the same: humans who desire abstracted transactional convenience over coherence and sustainability.
by xxr | 2025-12-20 05:16:37+00:00
“Initially, Ravel was to create a variation on the music of Isaac Albéniz, but copyright laws prevented him from doing so.” [your article]

“[Koji Kondo] had planned to use Maurice Ravel's Boléro as the title theme as it perfectly matched its speed, seeing as under Japanese copyright law, music is released into the public domain 50 years after the composer's death. However, Kondo was forced to change it in November 1985, late in the game's development, after learning that it had only been 47 years and 11 months after Ravel's death.”[1]

Funny how things rhyme.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Legend_of_Zelda_(video_gam...
by ahartmetz | 2025-12-20 05:16:43+00:00
It sounds like you're fighting the language - Rust is sort of FP-light and you're encouraged to return a null/error value from the intermediate calculation instead of doing an early return from the outer scope. It's a nice and easy to follow way to structure the code IME. Yes, it's more verbose when an early return would have been just right - so be it.
by __turbobrew__ | 2025-12-20 05:17:37+00:00
I have unfortunately got a ceph cluster in a bad enough state that I just had to delete the pools and start from scratch. It was due to improper sequencing when removing OSDs, but that is kindof the point is you have to know what you are doing to know how to do things safely. For the most part I have so far learned by blundering things and learning hard lessons. Ceph clusters when mistreated can get into death spirals that only an experienced practitioner can advert through very carefully modifying cluster state through things like upmaps. You also need to make sure you understand your failure domains and how to spread mons and osds across the domains to properly handle failure. Lots of people don’t think about this and then one day a rack goes poof and you didn’t replicate your data across racks and you have data loss. Same thing with mons, you should be deploying mons across at least 3 failure domains (ideally 3 different datacenters) to maintain quorum during an outage.
by MrVandemar | 2025-12-20 05:18:30+00:00
How to fix "the internet" is a largely insurmountable problem. It is a particular specimen of "The Tragedy of the Commons" in many ways.

One approach is to simply disappear into a parallel universe designed to somewhat resemble the old internet, but also guard against what it turned into.

The Gemini Protocol was a remarkable attempt at this, and while it isn't (and will probably never be) mainstream, it seems to me to be a little pocket of sanity (although its jettisoning of semantic HTML-like structures pains me greatly).

To forestall any unnecessary commentary on the design and choice of the GemText markup language: Markdown is difficult to parse and not standardised, and a subset of HTML is also not trivial to parse, and still potentially leads to the same problems as exists today with HTML. GemText was well-designed for its goals.
by tjpnz | 2025-12-20 05:18:31+00:00
>Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

U.S. Code § 1519 - Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigation
by Morromist | 2025-12-20 05:18:43+00:00
I agree its bad and it should be fixed but...

I think AI is going to greatly decrease the quality of the internet in the coming years. What we have now, as bad as it is, will be remembered as being very good in 2035. AI will clog this place up.

Eventually there will be a serious attempt to make an internet where each user is a verified human person, to sieve out the AI slop, but I don't think that will succeed and anonymity is part of what makes the internet good.

One solution for some - but not all - of the problems we have is to go back to small communities, where each user knows one another, talking in their own servers, like BBSes often used to be. Discord leads the way here.
by Night_Thastus | 2025-12-20 05:18:46+00:00
You can't fix it, because it's a problem of incentives.

* Businesses want to maximize shareholder value

* Those running websites want to do as much SEO-slop as possible to appear first

* Content creators need to maximize views, which means rage-bait, clickbait, etc.

* Addictive content = more time spent, more ads seen

You can't 'fix' the internet. The internet, like many things, is a tool. Shareholders and individual actors are only interested in maximizing their own gains - and so use this tool to that purpose - regardless of any negative effects on the whole. That's how humans operate in general (with rare exceptions).

You may as well say "Human selfishness and greed sucks, how do we get rid of it?". You can't.
by zdragnar | 2025-12-20 05:19:26+00:00
It's a fundamentally flawed analogy. Leo's apprentices learned and improved. They studied under a master and faced serious repercussions if they bullshitted about their ability or what they had accompolished.

LLM capabilities are tied to their model, and won't improve on their own. You learn the quirks of prompting them, but they have fixed levels of skill. They don't lie, because they don't understand concepts such as truth or deception, but that means they'll spout bullshit and it's up to you to review everything with a skeptical eye.

In this analogy, you aren't the master, you're one part client demanding work, one part the janitor cleaning up after their mistakes.
by somenameforme | 2025-12-20 05:20:36+00:00
No, his arguments were materially different in this case. Most of his arguments came from first principles and worked outwards from some baseline; in particular - what is virtue and how virtue, itself, leads to satisfaction in life, and onward to how this can apply to systems and politics in general. But slavery he treated in an entirely different, practically ad hoc, fashion starting from slavery and then trying to shoe-horn in a justification along the lines of what you alluded to already with e.g. natural order and it being an inescapable inevitability.

It was a complete, and poor, rationalization. He even added, almost as a disclaimer, that there was not a complete overlap between 'natural' slaves and legal slaves, giving himself a plausible out to explain the endless examples of the repulsiveness of the institution by applying a no true scotmans fallacy, 'Ahh yes, I would agree with you there. But that is because that is not a natural slave, but merely a legal one.' And this is not my opinion alone. It has long been considered notably weak, especially from an otherwise brilliant man.

And I think that leads into your next issue. I don't think higher intelligence makes it easier to treat morality as a fiction, but rather even average intelligence, without discipline and virtue, makes it very easy to engage in self delusion and cognitive dissonance. Even those conditions are hardly a guarantee - Aristotle certainly had and strived for both discipline and virtue, yet the desire to rationalize what we want to be true, even if we know it is not, is a never-ending struggle that's easy to fail.
by kennyadam | 2025-12-20 05:23:03+00:00
I don’t think it can be fixed. When the internet was used only by people who were geeky enough to find chatting on IRC exciting and set up websites and blogs simply for the fun of it, there was a thrill in doing all this stuff for the first time and you had to organise IRL meet-ups just to find like-minded people. Once everything became about clicks and ad impressions and content was created to make money, not just because you wanted to share something you thought was cool.

Obviously, this is still possible and many people do maintain blogs and websites for the love of it, the overwhelming amount of internet users are happy using a handful of giant social networks.

Heck, internet dating used to be looked down on as something so pathetic only complete losers did it. The world and the internet has evolved and as much as I miss the wild west days where it felt like anything was possible, the giant corps have taken over and people are too scared to say the word suicide on YouTube lest they be demonetised, so everyone trembles and mutters unalived and everything gets a little bit worse.

I’m rambling, sorry,
by amatecha | 2025-12-20 05:23:04+00:00
Probably stop using platforms/sites that exist to make money off you. I know it sounds ridiculous, but... the vast majority of the crappiness on the web is due to greed for money. If platforms didn't care about making money through ad revenue they woudln't be manipulative attention-harvesting outrage-bait.

You can actually engage in the trash platforms by using unofficial methods - I browse "youtube" by searching on Invidious and then either viewing on there, or when it doesn't work, download with yt-dlp. Or if someone links an "x" post I view it with xcancel (if at all). I don't care how inconvenient it is. For social media, fediverse (mastodon). Every other platform is for-profit and it shows in its respective design. I contact friends and family through texts and email. I've gone so far that I literally block all Meta-owned domains on my Pi-hole. I'm hoping to upgrade that to blocking Google domains but I'm not there yet.

I generally try to opt out of the psychologically-manipulative world that hyper-capitalistic greed tries so hard to force on me. It's kind of impossible to do completely, and social connectivity is made a LOT more frictional/tedious, but.. I try to "walk the walk".

Oh yeah, I still use IRC and XMPP. Hotline and KDX occasionally too.
by al_borland | 2025-12-20 05:23:36+00:00
Stop trying to make massive platforms with the goal of having millions or billions of users.

Once sites get too large and the mainstream enters, they seem to go downhill quickly. I think the old internet seemed better, because this didn’t really happen. There were pockets of like-minded people, not general platforms trying to be everything to everyone.

In addition to this, get the stuff off the phone. Having these things in your pocket and available all the time doesn’t seem to be good for people. Make the sites painful to use on mobile, to select for users who are willing to engage only with a proper keyboard and mouse, which will drastically reduce low-effort posters, trolls, and excessive engagement.

Of course these things are counter to everyone’s dream of getting rich on the internet. We have to choose. Do we want a healthy, collaborative, and functional internet… or do we want to make a lot of money. It doesn’t seem we can have both.
by ordu | 2025-12-20 05:23:36+00:00
> what if I want to load the config from somewhere else?

There are DRY and WET principles. We can argue which one of them is better, but to move something used exactly once to a method just due to an anxiety you can need it again seems to me a little bit too much. I move things into functions that are called once, but iff it makes my code clearer. It can happen when code is already complicated and long.

The block allows you to localize the code, and refactoring it into a separate function will be trivial. You need not to check if all the variables are temporary, you just see the block, copy/paste it, add a function header, and then add function call at the place where the block was before. No thinking and no research is needed. Veni, vidi, vici.

> The fact that you need to explain what’s happening with comments is a smell.

It is an example for the article taken out of a context. You'd better comment it for the sake of your readers.

> I think blocks are useful when you are referencing a lot of local variables and also have fairly localized meaning within the method.

I do it each time I need a temporary variable. I hate variables that exist but are not used, they make it harder to read the code, you need to track temporaries through all the code to confirm that they are temporaries. So even if I have just two local variables (not "a lot of") and one of them is temporary, I'd probably localize the temporary one even further into its own block. What really matters is a code readability: if the function has just three lines, it doesn't matter, but it becomes really ugly if a lifetime of a variable overshoots its usefulness for 20 lines of a dense code.

The other thing is mutability/immutability: you can drop mutability when returning a value from a block. Mutability makes reasoning harder, so dropping it when you don't need it anymore is a noble deed. It can and will reduce the complexity of reading the code. You'll thank yourself many times later, when faced with necessity to reread your own code.

There is a code and there is the process of devising the code. You cannot understand the former without reverse engineering the latter. So, when you write code, the more of your intentions are encoded somehow in your code, the easier it will be to read your code. If you create temporary variables just to parse config with the final goal to get the parsed config in a variable, then you'd better encode it. You can add comments, like "we need to parse config and for that we need three temporary variables", or you can localize those three temporary variables in a block.
by moontide2 | 2025-12-20 05:23:46+00:00
sometimes I think about starting a social media platform that is better than the current stuff, but countries keep adding more and more regulations and liabilities, so I guess it isn't for those who don't wish to brave breaking the law.

The old internet feels like it is increasingly illegal to run. I mean, youtube circa 2013 basically is. You wouldn't get away with just letting people upload disney movies there anymore, or just letting anyone join the adsense program.

The whole pervasive censorship problem on youtube is downstream of various scandals where a big newspaper wrote a hit piece blaming youtube for letting the wrong people say the wrong things or letting the wrong people see them.

So in this cultural and legal climate, I going to try to avoid any business where people talk to each other, since I don't want to get in trouble if I didn't do censorship hard enough, or didn't know every regulation globally.

if you choose to, good luck. I am just frustrated that people observe that social media is bad, and thus pass laws that raise the regulatory burden and thus stamp out competition.
by johncolanduoni | 2025-12-20 05:23:57+00:00
No non-embedded libc will actually return NULL. Very, very little practical C code actually relies only on specified behavior of the spec and will work with literally any compliant C compiler on any architecture, so I don’t find this particularly concerning.

Usefully handling allocation errors is very hard to do well, since it infects literally every error handling path in your codebase. Any error handling that calls a function that might return an indirect allocation error needs to not allocate itself. Even if you have a codepath that speculatively allocates and can fallback, the process is likely so close to ruin that some other function that allocates will fail soon.

It’s almost universally more effective (not to mention easier) to keep track of your large/variable allocations proactively, and then maintain a buffer for little “normal” allocations that should have an approximate constant bound.
by SoftTalker | 2025-12-20 05:24:02+00:00
Maybe. The average homicide clearance rate in the US is only around 60%. But that includes a lot of killings where nobody really cares about anyone involved. This was a much higher profile crime so it would get a lot more attention. But there are high profile cases that get a lot of (at least local) attention that don't ever get solved either.
by District5524 | 2025-12-20 05:24:21+00:00
Zucman taxes rich individuals (100m€+), not Mistral. AI Act rules are not that difficult to comply with by GPAI model providers as long as the model doesn't become systemic risk... They have to spend a lot more time on PR and handshaking with French politicians than on AI compliance. They probably don't even have a single FTE for that... So that's just prejudice I believe.
by rcoder | 2025-12-20 05:24:59+00:00
You’re totally right; I got myself spun around thinking AES instead of of ChaCha because the product I work on (ZeroTier) started with the initially and moved to AES later. I honestly just plain forgot that WireGuard hadn’t followed the same path.

An embarrassing slip, TBH. I’m gonna blame pre-holiday brain fog.
by Morromist | 2025-12-20 05:26:06+00:00
I suppose people could try to make a non-monitizable internet.

Everything would have to be self-hosted. No ads would be allowed anywhere. No business would be allowed to build anything, just users. Some kind of super-admin would have to have to power to perma-ban any website or user that breaks the rules.

But you'd still have the problem of people who aren't directly monitizing things, like influencers. You'd have bots. You'd have subtle ads that don't quite appear to be ads, or users writing fake testimonials.

Still, despite its obvious flaws, it would be cool to see someone try to build such a non-commerical internet someday. I wish them luck.
by mothballed | 2025-12-20 05:26:52+00:00
Why would the minority prefer to live under a 'democracy' when the majority have decided they would kill them because they don't acknowledge their 'legitimacy'? That's when they need to avoid monopolistic democracy the most! You present the strongest case for my argument!

Under the split model they at least have a chance; the minority can bind together, form alliances, and frustrate the 'majorities' force. This is what we see on the world stage -- minority populations like USA or India form alliances and somehow survive without a world government to force the will of a vote of the majority of the world. The USA population is a minority and most are extremely happy it's not a world democracy which is what the logical conclusion of your argument leads to, based on your implied threat that minority USA would experience.

Under your proposal, they all simply are voted into being democracy's 'lackey' assuming the majority don't simply vote them dead.

Not to mention you're contradicting yourself in your statement -- a dictatorship is a minority rule yet you imply they can't exist because the majority would destroy the minority in power.

In reality even in the incredibly unlikely case minorities can't form alliances strong enough it's not worth the risk to try to crush them -- even then in the real world it's often better off for both sides to engage in trade and coexistence rather than to simply kill each other. Of course, even in democracies, war exists, and they would under all other forms of governance.
by gvkhna | 2025-12-20 05:27:00+00:00
In this case with the, I believe it’s called quantum tunneling by mullvad, it’s actually a good thing. Because the encapsulation protocol is just UDP/IP, a well established existing protocol that can masquerade as any kind of internet traffic easily.

Makes it difficult to block by censors. Great video I saw here: https://youtu.be/pZiG8r-diTM?si=wy35elqMt1T6euq0

This also means wg is just doing one thing instead of a dozen it doesn’t “need” to.
by mlmartin | 2025-12-20 05:28:57+00:00
The thing is - the 'old' internet is still there. IRC is there, despite slack and discord making closed privately hosted versions. NTTP newsgroups are still there, despite reddit and stackoverflow etc. All that infrastructure still there that doesn't algorithmically keep you in a perma-outraged state for engagement. If I have some sort of spiritual or scientific awakening that I just have to share with the world - The web still lets you self host. I can hide that behind onion routers if I need to.

Not to say that the modern alternatives don't fix a lot of problems, particularly with accessibility to end users, but whats to stop us from going back and creating a new branch from that base that tries to solve the problems without the toxicity? And more importantly, engaging only with that network? (the sad probable answer: Because we're collectively lazy).