MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by thaumaturgy | 2025-12-13 20:56:23+00:00
Because, something that a lot of tech-obsessed Trek fans never seem to really come to terms with, is that Trek didn't fetishize technology.

In the Trek universe, LCARS wasn't getting continuous UI updates because they would have advanced, culturally, to a point where they recognized that continuous UI updates are frustrating for users. They would have invested the time and research effort required to better understand the right kind of interface for the given devices, and then... just built that. And, sure, it probably would get updates from time to time, but nothing like the way we do things now.

Because the way we do things now is immature. It's driven often by individual developers' needs to leave their fingerprints on something, to be able to say, "this project is now MY project", to be able to use it as a portfolio item that helps them get a bigger paycheck in the future.

Likewise, Geordi was regularly shown to be making constant improvements to the ship's systems. If I remember right, some of his designs were picked up by Starfleet and integrated into other ships. He took risks, too, like experimental propulsion upgrades. But, each time, it was an upgrade in service of better meeting some present or future mission objective. Geordi might have rewritten some software modules in whatever counted as a "language" in that universe at some point, but if he had done so, he would have done extensive testing and tried very hard to do it in a way that wouldn't've disrupted ship operations, and he would only do so if it gained some kind of improvement that directly impacted the success or safety of the whole ship.

Really cool technology is a key component of the Trek universe, but Trek isn't about technology. It's about people. Technology is just a thing that's in the background, and, sometimes, becomes a part of the story -- when it impacts some people in the story.
by RealityVoid | 2025-12-13 20:56:24+00:00
> I just disagree that multi-module consensus is a reliable form of EDAC.

I wonder why you disagree about this? The only reason I can thing of is: - same sw with same hw with same lifecycle would probably have the same issue. (vendor diversity would fix this) - The consensus building unit is still a possible single point of failure.

Any other reasons you might doubt it as a methodology? It seems to have worked pretty well for Airbus and the failure rate is pretty low, so... It obviously is functional.

Modern units I'm sure have ECC, AND redundace as well.
by exasperaited | 2025-12-13 20:56:58+00:00
If you have never played the backwards-lifetime game, you should.

Take your current age and work backwards that same number of days, months and years before your birth. Every year something else remarkable is added.

At my current backwards age, World War II is the best part of two decades away; the UK is still recovering from World War I. Rocket 88, the first rock and roll song, won't be written for nearly another three decades. Women still can't vote in the UK, the Wall Street Crash is several years away.

When my father (who knew one of the most important men in medical history in his younger days and who was working in medicine not long after the NHS was founded) died, his backwards age reached back before the germ theory of modern medicine.

Another interesting game is to use your "oocyte age" — about 32 weeks before your mother was born is roughly when the oocyte developed that led to your egg. In my case this too is before World War II started.
by tomrod | 2025-12-13 20:57:03+00:00
I make a ton of progress with ipython and vim/st3/other text editor with a vertical split. I sometimes screen the terminal in two if I want to run external elements.

We seem to keep iterating back to that modality, but honestly, it's just nice. VS Code starts there but then Java language servers and broken Python language servers and rust language servers and exploding npm dependencies and supply chain attacks just muck everything up.

Simple simple simple is so refreshing.
by miki123211 | 2025-12-13 20:57:08+00:00
> Hi, I’m the creator of Gleam!

What's the state of Gleam's JSON parsing / serialization capabilities right now?

I find it to be a lovely little language, but having to essentially write every type three times (once for the type definition, once for the serializer, once for the deserializer) isn't something I'm looking forward to.

A functional language that can run both on the backend (Beam) and frontend (JS) lets one do a lot of cool stuff, like optimistic updates, server reconciliation, easy rollback on failure etc, but that requires making actions (and likely also states) easily serializable and deserializable.
by enraged_camel | 2025-12-13 20:57:20+00:00
I've always respected your writing, but will have to disagree.

The first line of your 'about me' section says: "Always Systems Thinking". However, I don't believe you are thinking in terms of systems here. You are thinking in a single-loop fashion, by treating immigration as a one-way input (i.e. more workers -> fewer jobs for Americans) and as the gate for a massively multi-input system.

You said we should wait for full employment first. The issue with that logic is that full employment isn't a finish line you reach and then "unlock" other labor sources. Even a hot economy has frictional unemployment, skills mismatch, geographic mismatch, and people moving between jobs. Using full employment as a policy trigger sounds clean but doesn't map to how labor markets actually function. Empirically, the US is not a long way away from full employment: we're at 4.4% unemployment (or were, as of September 2025) and JOLTS showed 7.7 job openings in October. That's a cooled market, but not mass desperation across the board.

Jobs are not a fixed pie either. In a closed, fixed-input model (which is what underlies your thinking), adding foreign workers could mechanically reduce citizens' chances. But real economies are endogenous: Immigrants aren't just labor supply; they are also demand. They pay rent, they buy groceries, they need childcare, cars, you name it. That demand supports additional hiring. In addition, immigration can relieve bottleneck in sectors such as healthcare (which is suffering greatly at the moment, especially in rural areas), construction, logistics, agriculture, elder care, and so on. This is why high-quality syntheses generally find small aggregate impacts on native employment and wages, not the large scale negative effects the "hire Americans first" framing implies.

A major National Academies consensus report [1] concluded that the long-run impact of hiring immigrants on wages and employment of native-born workers overall is very small, if not non-existent. And any negative impacts are most likely from prior immigrants or native-born high school dropouts. The report found that immigration as a whole has a positive impact on long-run economic growth. Many meta-analyses [2][3] have found similar results.

The solution is not to restrict foreign workers, but to protect wages and working conditions by strictly enforcing labor standards and preventing exploitative hiring (across both the foreign and native labor forces), and to use targeted immigration that addresses genuine bottlenecks. Using a single unemployment threshold is not logical because labor markets are segmented and dynamic.

[1] https://www.nationalacademies.org/projects/DBASSE-CNSTAT-13-... [2] https://www.iza.org/publications/dp/2044/the-impact-of-immig... [3] https://www.cepii.fr/PDF_PUB/wp/2025/wp2025-07.pdf
by epistasis | 2025-12-13 20:57:20+00:00
If you believe China's internal pricing numbers, sure....

But their actual investments in billions of dollars and in GW show that nuclear is not competing with solar, and is sticking around for hedging bets. They the are deploying far far far more solar and storage than nuclear. And if those nuclear costs were accurate, then nuclear would be far preferable. $2/W is incredible, as in perhaps not credible, but it would also be far cheaper than solar.

And even if China figured out how to build that cheaply, it doesn't mean that highly developed countries will be able to replicate that. Nuclear requires a huge amount of high skill, specialized labor, and doing that cheaply is only possible at certain levels of economic development. As economies develop to ever higher productivity, the cost of labor goes up, and it's likely that nuclear only ever makes sense at a very narrow band of economic development.
by LexiMax | 2025-12-13 20:57:20+00:00
This is factually incorrect.

https://developer.nintendo.com/faq

Q: How much does it cost to develop on Nintendo platforms? A: Registering for the portal and downloading the tools is completely free. Also, if you plan to release a digital only title, you can use the IARC system to retrieve the age rating for no fee, which will allow you to publish in all the participating countries. All that is left is the cost of acquiring development hardware: you will find more information on this inside the portal.

Development hardware isn't cheap, but it's also not out-of-sight expensive either. There's a very good reason why you see so many indie games this past generation on Switch.
by IshKebab | 2025-12-13 20:57:25+00:00
Re argument formatting, I'd guess it's because it uses the Prettier algorithm which works like that.

However in my experience it's much better than the alternative - e.g. clang-format's default "binpack"ing of arguments (lay them out like prose). That just makes them hard to read and leads to horrible diffs and horrible merge conflicts.
by melvinroest | 2025-12-13 20:57:32+00:00
This is just my 2 cents.

This is why I programmed in Pharo (a Smalltalk descendant) professionally for a while to get that experience [1].

I feel like that using iPython is good enough of an experience to be honest. Could it be better? Sure.

But the fact that this is my iPython session:

ipython Python 3.12.9 | packaged by conda-forge | (main, Mar 4 2025, 22:44:42) [Clang 18.1.8 ] Type 'copyright', 'credits' or 'license' for more information IPython 8.32.0 -- An enhanced Interactive Python. Type '?' for help.

In [1]: def foo(): ...: return 'bar' ...:

In [2]: foo() Out[2]: 'bar'

In [3]: def foo(): ...: return 'baz' ...:

In [4]: foo() Out[4]: 'baz'

says a whole lot I think :)

The cool thing with Pharo and Lisp of course is the whole "treating code as data", where Lisp is arguably even more intense at it than Pharo - since the syntax is basically an abstract syntax tree. It really allows for automated reasoning (e.g. "give me all functions of xyz type with abc parameters, constrained to only pqr classes and only showcase the lines where they were being called, skip the definitions). So that's awesome. I haven't tested Python on this a whole lot yet and I don't know enough about Lisp to say anything useful about it, but with Pharo I vaguely remember doing some insane things since you can also access the AST and have reflection on that as well.

Pharo of course has the whole debugger inside a debugger inside a debugger experience. But that has had quite some limited use because a new process is spawned for that new debugger, so you won't have access to the exact same context that you need. I vaguely remember that some class based variables didn't have the state I needed when I went debugger inside a debugger mode. I think it was WADynamicVariable of the Seaside framework and it was because it was a singleton like thing (IIRC) and in order to have a certain behavior it could only do that by triggering exceptions (I really don't remember it well). The point is, it needed such obscure behavior to behave in the way it needed to that the debugger inside a debugger wasn't expected to copy that exception flow context, as it wasn't really intended to be used like that.

[1] I would've worked there for longer but the company got Americanized. Our company - that was profitable - got subsumed by a venture capitalist firm that had 2 companies like it that were unprofitable. We became a subsidiary/sub-company basically. Suddenly tech layoffs came, 2 rounds at least, because the company as a whole was unprofitable (as in: the other 2 subsidiaries were unprofitable and we had to pay the price). I'd have stayed there for much longer if that didn't happen. I will go on record and say that: it is my personal opinion that they destroyed a good company with good people. I won't name the company, but given that I'm posting under my real name, it's not too hard to figure out.
by wozzio | 2025-12-13 20:57:56+00:00
The curl | bash is just for convenience; the README explicitly advises to Download and inspect wozz.sh first if you aren't comfortable piping to shell.

As for the newness I just open-sourced this from my personal scripts collection this week, so yes, the Org and Account are new. It runs entirely locally using your active kubeconfig it doesn't collect credentials or send secrets anywhere. You can cat the script to verify that it's just a wrapper around kubectl top and kubectl get.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-12-13 20:58:15+00:00
> Are you saying “alas for citizens of the US who see things in competitive nationalist terms”?

He’s saying it as a realist.

China is building the equivalent to America’s sanctions power in their battery dominance. In an electrified economy, shutting off battery and rare earths access isn’t as acutely calamitous as an oil embargo, but it’s similarly shocking as sanctions and tariffs.
by chis | 2025-12-13 20:58:25+00:00
His idea seems to be to detect the approximate timing of a flip or roll with sensors and then strap in and wait for it to happen. I have some serious concerns though lol. I mean if the ball rolled off a cliff on the iceberg and fell into the water I’m pretty sure it would be like trying to survive a crash at terminal velocity, and I doubt the racing chair would handle it.
by pitched | 2025-12-13 20:58:27+00:00
Physical fatigue is lack of ATP and happens through the day as oxidation builds up. Cognitive fatigue is a build-up of used neurotransmitters that also build up over the day. These two processes interact with each other though where neurotransmitter reuptake uses a lot of ATP. I see that connection between them as ego depletion. If true, the best solution to it is a nap because that will help clear the junk out.
by delaminator | 2025-12-13 20:59:14+00:00
I chat with Claude about viability, capability, existing solutions, alternative approaches, etc.

This helps me get an idea of what we’re doing. I get pushback and have to be clear and Opus is good at asking questions.

Then I get it to write a set of documents for Claude Code describing the vision, the solution, the technical choices, the testing plan, the validation approach, how to share with colleagues, future ideas and a table of contents.
by nofunsir | 2025-12-13 20:59:37+00:00
This should be illegal if auto-updates are enabled or eventual updates are forced. Not joking.

Nowhere else in society do we allow such self-serving laziness and unethical negligence (looking at you, purposely destroying backwards compatibility of APIs) at a professional level. Most other professions have steep legal consequences if they hide their actions or inactions.
by yoavsha1 | 2025-12-13 20:59:40+00:00
I strongly agree with this. At $WORK I usually work on projects comprising many small bits in various languages - some PowerShell here, some JS there, along with a "build process" that helps minify each and combine them into the final product. After switching from shell scripts to Just and having to deal with a ton of issues on the way (how does quoting work in each system? How does argument passing? Environment variables?) I simply wrote a simple script with Python, UV shebang and PEP723 dependencies. Typer takes care of the command line parsing, and each "build target" is a simple, composable, readable python function that takes arguments and can call other ones if it needs to. Can't be simpler than that and the LLMs love it too.
by voodooEntity | 2025-12-13 21:00:03+00:00
Thanks, you brought up good points.

While in my case i had a program in which i created an instance of such a secret , "used it" and than scrambled the variable it never left so it worked.

Tho i didn't think of (2) which is especially problematic.

Prolly still would scramble on places its viable to implement, trying to reduce the surface even if i cannot fully remove it.
by hxtk | 2025-12-13 21:00:05+00:00
The change log for developers/administrators/etc. comes from the Git history. We use conventional commits. Breaking changes in the semantic version of a subcomponent means, "If you're operating this service, you can't just bump the container version and keep your current config.

The change log for end users comes from the JIRA board for the release, looking at what tickets got closed that release cycle, and it usually requires some amount of human effort to rewrite.
by k310 | 2025-12-13 21:00:09+00:00
My clearest recollection (don't know the episode) is when he attends an event, probably in place of Alan Brady, that turns out to be a big fund-raiser. The Hostess addresses him as Mister Petrov. When asked for a donation, he is stupefied, and can only say "I have this blank check" ... no spoiler ...

The comedy show within a comedy show is a cool dramatic and operatic trick.

Magnificent delivery.
by haunter | 2025-12-13 21:00:33+00:00
Which makes me wonder: at the end of the day 1970 or 2025 doesn't matter, it's the same plain text editing no matter what. As if we are still in the silent film era of programming. Visual programming seems to be the "obvious" generation leap but we are still not there yet (something like the UE Blueprints) https://dev.epicgames.com/documentation/en-us/unreal-engine/...
by danenania | 2025-12-13 21:00:46+00:00
I know of many experienced and capable engineers working on complex stuff who are driving basically all their development through agents. This includes production level work. This is the norm now in the SV startup world at least.

You don't just YOLO it. You do extensive planning when features are complex, and you review output carefully.

The thing is, if the agent isn't getting it to the point where you feel like you might need to drop down and edit manually, agents are now good enough to do those same "manual edits" with nearly 100% reliability if you are specific enough about what you want to do. Instead of "build me x, y, z", you can tell it to rename variables, restructure functions, write specific tests, move files around, and so on.

So the question isn't so much whether to use an agent or edit code manually—it's what level of detail you work at with the agent. There are still times where it's easier to do things manually, but you never really need to.
by throwyawayyyy | 2025-12-13 21:01:04+00:00
If I recall, in the novel Solaris, set largely on a spaceship orbiting a distant, sentient planet, one of the characters uses a slide rule.

Idea for a sci fi novel: total reliance on chatbots that predict what you want to hear based on the average of the internet ends the astonishing run of innovation we've had since the industrial revolution, and returns us to the situation humanity has been in for most of our history, in which technology develops slowly, if at all. What do things look like in a thousand years, when we're still relying on the current equivalent of slide rules and analog film?
by kachapopopow | 2025-12-13 21:01:25+00:00
well to be fair it's not always important to have the server at the geoip since a lot of the time you can measure the real latency of a user behind an ip address anyway.

the only important bit is that it is made clear whenever a given country falls under some category that allows things such as traffic analysis and cataloging.

it's actually often times preferrable to lie about the server location for lower latency access geo-blocked content, particulary when accessing US geo-restricted content in europe.

if you want true privacy you have to use special tools that not only obfuscate the true origin, but also bounce your traffic around (which most of these vpns provide as an option)
by dboon | 2025-12-13 21:01:56+00:00
AI programming, for me, is just a few simple rules:

1. True vibe coding (one-shot, non-trivial, push to master) does not work. Do not try it.

2. Break your task into verifiable chunks. Work with Claude to this end.

3. Put the entire plan into a Markdown file; it should be as concise as possible. You need a summary of the task; individual problems to solve; references to files and symbols in the source code; a work list, separated by verification points. Seriously, less is more.

4. Then, just loop: Start a new session. Ask it to implement the next phase. Read the code, ask for tweaks. Commit when you're happy.

Seriously, that's it. Anything more than that is roleplaying. Anything less is not engineering. Keep a list in the Markdown file of amendments; if it keeps messing the same thing up, add one line to the list.

To hammer home the most important pieces:

- Less is more. LLMs are at their best with a fresh context window. Keep one file. Something between 500 and 750 words (checking a recent one, I have 555 words / 4276 characters). If that's not sufficient, the task is too big.

- Verifiable chunks. It must be verifiable. There is no other way. It could be unit tests; print statements; a tmux session. But it must be verifiable.
by Beijinger | 2025-12-13 21:02:34+00:00
I am not sure that I really understand what they did. I am also missing some major VPNs in the list. I currently use AirVPN but this has something to do with my use case and pricing.

Why do you want to use a VPN?

- Privacy

- Anonymity (hint: don't!)

- unblock geolocation

- torrents

- GFC

The last point is the hardest.

https://expatcircle.com/cms/privacy/vpn-services/
by wozzio | 2025-12-13 21:02:50+00:00
you are technically right that requests are scheduling hints but in a cluster autoscaler world, requests=bill.

If I request 8GB for a pod that uses 1GB, the autoscaler spins up nodes to accommodate that 8GB reservation. That 7GB gap is capacity the company is paying for but cannot use for other workloads.

Valid point on Goodhart's Law, tho the goal shouldn't be fill the RAM, but rather lower the request to match the working set so we can bin-pack tighter.
by dllu | 2025-12-13 21:03:07+00:00
Not banned. In addition to the Chinese lidars I mentioned, the Valeo Scala on Audi cars is 905 nm, and then there are also Ouster (865 nm), Innoviz (905 nm), Livox (905 nm) etc. The large spinning lidar on top of the Waymo Jaguar I-Pace is also purportedly 905 nm, although in the past they also had a swivelling 1550 nm lidar in the dome of the Chrysler Pacifica cars (situated just underneath a smaller spinning 905 nm one).

The eye safety threshold for 850/905 nm is a lot lower than 1550 nm, so they output way less power, but the much better sensitivity of silicon sensors makes up for it partially. You can also squeeze out more range using clever signal processing and a large optical aperture (which allows you to output more light, but since the light is spread out across the aperture, the intensity doesn't exceed the threshold). Typically, the range of 850/905 nm lidars is less than that of 1550 nm lidars though.

On the bright side, due to lower power, there hasn't been any instances (to my knowledge) of 850 nm and 905 nm lidars damaging cameras, whereas at least two different 1550 nm lidars have been known to destroy cameras (Luminar and AEye).

On the Luminar lidar website [1] they proudly advertise "1,000,000x pulse energy of 905nm".

[1] https://www.luminartech.com/technology
by calmbonsai | 2025-12-13 21:03:22+00:00
For desktops, basically, yes. And that's OK.

Take any other praxis that's reached the 'appliance' stage that you use in your daily life from washing machines, ovens, coffee makers, cars, smartphones, flip-phones, televisions, toilets, vacuums, microwaves, refrigerators, ranges, etc.

It takes ~30 years to optimize the UX to make it "appliance-worthy" and then everything afterwards consists of edge-case features, personalization, or regulatory compliance.

Desktop Computers are no exception.