MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jack_h | 2025-12-10 19:56:18+00:00
I also don’t think people should vote like that, the problem is there’s no way to enforce such a pattern[1]. Everyone benefits from voting as you describe, but that’s precisely where the prisoner’s dilemma comes into play. There’s also a size component to it. Small, tight knit communities tend to do well with voting, but as communities grow interactions become less personal, trust drops, and the incentive structure I described above becomes dominant. Voting essentially allows a community to establish its own Overton window distinct from what the official rules create, but that can be changed and constricted until a bubble is established[2]. I’ve seen it happen with countless communities across social media. Despite good intentions I think voting systems are a net negative to fostering good discussions and debate.

[1] Maybe AI meta-moderation?

[2] I don’t mean that this is happening intentionally by bad actors, merely that on average large groups produce outcomes that are dictated by incentives.
by RickJWagner | 2025-12-10 19:56:25+00:00
I disagree.

Even poor people carry phones that have the internet, news, weather, and a million useful apps. Food is available to everyone, nearly every church has a food pantry. Even cheap houses are climate controlled. Even the homeless have shelters in most places.

For garden variety household emergencies, GoFundMe is democratized charity. It seems it often comes to the rescue for people suffering terrible luck.

Healthcare is expensive, but ACA makes it more available than before. Even early retirees get it.

Cars are expensive, too, but the get great mileage, better performance, and last longer than what we used to have.

Having grown up in the 6s and 70s, I can say with confidence that even less fortunate people have better lives than almost everybody 50 years ago. ( At least as far as material things go. )

The people who are unhappy are often comparing themselves to other people as portrayed by media and social media. That’s a sure way to feel you aren’t doing very well.
by ncruces | 2025-12-10 19:56:51+00:00
They are more expensive. Because the lock-in isn't as tight.

I still like them because, ironically, for sporadic printing, they're more resilient than many ink cartridges.

So far, I haven't experienced any clogging (dried up ink in the print heads) or the printer resorting to ink consuming processes every time it's turned on after not having been used for a couple of weeks.

This is after some years of usage where I've refilled the tanks once.
by phkahler | 2025-12-10 19:56:52+00:00
>> GP's assertion of population collapse in five years is a bit extreme for me!

Check the population pyramid for the US. the baby boomers are moving into the top part (I call the grinder) where they will die out over the next 20 years. At the bottom, we have 20 years of slowly decreasing births, so the bottom AND top are shrinking. Combine that with current policies stopping immigration and I don't know how the US population can be doing anything but decreasing. College admissions people are talking about the cliff (an exaggeration for sure) in enrolment this year and for years to come. People are also getting married closer to 30, and having much less than 2 children per couple.
by amlib | 2025-12-10 19:57:04+00:00
> Tessellation (up to 2x) to reduce issues with large polygons

From the videos I've watched there is still insane amounts of affine transformation texture warping, is that because it's not enable or because 2x is not enough?

I guess they will need to also redo all level geometry to be more amenable to tesselation... I guess that's why many ps1 games had blocky looking levels.
by tastyface | 2025-12-10 19:57:15+00:00
It’s perfectly clear now that half the voters in the US are enthusiastic about fascism and white supremacy. Frankly, it makes me physically ill. Pockets of the country are great, but the nation as a whole is going to become another Russia in my lifetime and it breaks my heart. Why subject myself to this torture? The time to change our fate was 2016 and 2024 and we failed miserably.
by nu11ptr | 2025-12-10 19:57:18+00:00
A better route for something like Go IMO is to move to a compacting collector, this would allow them to move to a bump allocator like Java for super fast allocations and would make deallocation effectively "free" by only moving live objects. They may need to make it generational so they aren't constantly moving long lived objects, but that is a memory vs cpu trade off (could be one more GC flag?). If I recall, the previous objection was because of CGo, which would require pinning (since C wouldn't tolerate moved pointers), but every Go dev I know hates CGo and generally avoids it, plus I see they added "runtime.Pinner" in 1.21 which should solve that I suspect (albeit it would suddenly be required I expect for pointers retained in C). Is anyone aware of what other challenges there are moving to a compacting collector/bump allocator?
by techblueberry | 2025-12-10 19:57:25+00:00
I think I both high-level understand general sort of market economics and hate it in a lot of ways. And I don't know if this is obvious to everyone or people figure it out at different rates, but the rise of DEI like perfectly mapped the constraints in the labor market.

Basically if companies need labor, human rights, salaries, work culture all improve, if they don't. Well.

I'm not like fundamentally a socialist, and again, sort of the growth in the economy certainly led this, but it really felt like the post-war culture was very focused on what we could build together.
by bjoli | 2025-12-10 19:57:34+00:00
I just wrote (with some AI help) a recently fast rrb tree implementation for c# [0]. I am waiting for the phone calls, but so far I have gotten nothing in 24h. Maybe if I figure out how to use docfx...

[0]: https://github.com/bjoli/RrbList/tree/main/src/Collections
by ethin | 2025-12-10 19:58:03+00:00
It is part of the issue here. This specific post is about the HDMI forum having an insanely restrictive NDA, but the broader problem of SDOs charging obscene amounts of money for what amounts to trivially reproduceable digital documents (or taking other measures to do everything they can to seal the standards from the public unless your willing to pay the obscene fees or <insert other absurd measure here>) is relevant to this post, and this comment, since the HDMI forum is doing exactly this kind of gatekeeping; it only differs in form, but not function.
by lelanthran | 2025-12-10 19:58:12+00:00
> But then ask them whether people who bully minorities should be welcomed in polite society.

I don't understand this PoV; bullies aren't welcome anywhere! It's almost a tautology. What is the point of making a special exemption for bullies of minorities?

Your writing, OTOH, lumps people like me, who don't care to join this fight, in with actual bullies. We don't really care if bullies are bullies of minorities or bullies in general.

Your entire screed was not against bullies. It was specifically against bullies of minorities, which makes no rational sense.

> I'd be fascinated to hear what they (and you) answer to that question.

My experience is that the fraction of bullies against minorities is so small it's barely a rounding error.

I wanna know exactly what % of people are the bullies that your screed was aimed at. Most everyone is okay with women, minorities, gay and lesbian folk. Only about 50% of the population (including the LG and B in LGBT) is okay with the transgender movement.

So exactly how large is the % of population your screed was aimed at? The fractions of a percent that aren't welcome anyway?
by gabriel666smith | 2025-12-10 19:58:15+00:00
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a robot suit to ride around and fight things with."

I was visiting Jane Austen's House Museum last year and it always gives me pleasure to see how wildly popular her work remains. There always seem to be tourists there visiting from all over the world. That is really heartening.

She was very innovative. Maybe even underrated as a craftsperson at the sentence level. My favourite trick that I believe she invented is slipping from prose into a soft Iambic pentameter, essentially unnoticed. Lots of people have copied that from her.

And class-pressure narratives will never not be relevant to people's lives. She's a very very humane storyteller in that respect.

I am slightly biased - she's my great aunt (x 6). Used to find that embarrassing but now I feel quite proud.
by b00ty4breakfast | 2025-12-10 19:58:38+00:00
It's also a massive propaganda channel. We can argue about whether any one particular state is involved in that or not but gut reaction is that if this were the real concern, their solution would be to regulate and censor what is posted online rather than kicking them off the platform and thus detaching them from the teat of (alleged) indoctrination. (that push for censorship also exists).

Maybe Australia and the US are not involved in any social media propaganda campaigns but, at least in the case of the US, there is most certainly an abundance of precedence.

I don't know the sincere feelings of these types wrt the safety and well-being of children but I don't think the goal is "getting them back" wrt policy or whatever.
by 9rx | 2025-12-10 19:58:50+00:00
> should languages even aspire to more?

Some should, maybe. But Go said right from day one that it doesn't aspire to be anything more than a language that appears dynamically-typed with static-type performance for the creation of network servers. It has no reason to. It was very much built for a specific purpose.

It has found other uses, but that was a surprise to its creators.

> Go is getting squeezed

Is it? I don't really see anything new that is trying to fill the same void. There are older solutions that are still being used, but presumably more would use them if Go hadn't been invented. So it is Go doing the squeezing, so to speak.
by lisbbb | 2025-12-10 19:59:14+00:00
My son is 15. My talk to him went something like this: There's a lot of porn and nasty things that you can't unsee, so be careful what you look at. Also, those extortion gangs target teenage boys, so if some girl is suddenly hot for you online, come see me immediately so we can troll the ever loving fuck out of them. I think it went pretty well. We like doing things as a family, but more like the Addams family...
by zug_zug | 2025-12-10 19:59:22+00:00
So let me just understand your position here. Suppose the US declares war on Venezuela. Suppose a venezuelan living in America just looks up a bunch of US generals addresses online, and then sets all their houses on fire killing them in their sleep in their McMansions in suburbia.

Are you saying that's a valid military strike, and therefore can't possibly be terrorism? Suppose this person is so successful he kills 1,000 and generals and numerous quit their jobs and move in fear for their life, just to really clarify what you're arguing here.
by theluketaylor | 2025-12-10 19:59:51+00:00
Another option is just stick to a smaller circuit.

80% of 15A x 120V = 1.4 kW

80% of 20A x 240V = 3.8 kW

Just going from a standard 15A outlet to a 20A/240V nearly triples the amount of power, and many homes that would need a new panel for a 50A charger have room for one more 20A circuit. Cars typically spend 8-16 hrs per day stationary in their own driveway, so 3.8 kW translates into tons of range.

While 40A or 50A is nice to have, it's far from necessary.
by dingnuts | 2025-12-10 19:59:53+00:00
> Yes, I save an incredible amount of time. I suspect I’m likely 5-10x more productive

The METR paper demonstrated that you are not a reliable narrator for this. Have you participated in a study where this was measured, or are you just going off intuition? Because METR demonstrated beyond doubt that your intuition is a liar in this case.

If you're not taking measurements it is more likely that you are falling victim to a number of psychological effects (sunk cost, Gell-Manns, slot machine effect) than it is that your productivity has really improved.

Have you received a 5-10x pay increase? If your productivity is now 10x mine (I don't use these tools at work because they are a waste of time in my experience) then why aren't you compensated as such and if it's because of pointy haired bosses, you should be able to start a new company with your 10x productivity to shut him and me up.

Provide links to your evidence in the replies
by irrationalbrain | 2025-12-10 20:00:07+00:00
I used to believe this about myself as well, but later realized it was a rationalization. The reality is it's because leaving hacker news for extended periods (more than a minute or two) results in dopamine withdrawal. I feel a powerful urge to return to browsing links and my brain makes up a reason along the lines of "you're wasting time by staying on this site instead of going back to hacker news." It's a similar thing that drives me to "skip ahead to the good part" in youtube videos rather than watching the whole thing, evidenced by my doing it even on videos that are very short.
by mandevil | 2025-12-10 20:00:18+00:00
There are a lot of areas that could use more investment but aren't getting it. The way this works is complicated. The best explanation comes from really understanding Moore's Law. The main effect of the law was really about investment, about securing investment into semiconductor fabs rather than anywhere else.

See, every fab costs double what the previous generation did (current ones run roughly 20 gigadollars per factory). And you need to build a new fab every couple of years. But, if you can keep your order book full, you can make a profit on that fab- you can get good ROI on the investment and pay the money people back nicely. But you need to go to the markets to raise money for that next generation fab because it costs twice what your previous generation did and you didn't get that much free cash from your previous generation. And the money men wouldn't want to give it to you, of course. But thanks to Moore's Law you can pitch it as inevitable, if you don't borrow the money to build the new fab, then your competitors will. And so they would give you the money for the new fab because it says right on this paper that in another two years the transistors will double.

Right now, that "it's inevitable, our competitors will get there if we don't" argument works on VCs if you are pitching LLM's or LLM based things. And it doesn't work as well if you are pitching battery technology, fusion power, or other areas. And that's why the investments are going to AI.
by IAmBroom | 2025-12-10 20:00:20+00:00
I've been around cattle intermittently since I was a child, and 20 feet is too close if you don't have to be there and don't have a relationship with them.

A cow can absolutely kill you, and easily outrun you. Not likely, but can. Same as a hog, or for that matter a moving car. None of these are inherently friendly, as a group.
by cootsnuck | 2025-12-10 20:00:32+00:00
> My concern is that, even if the exercise is only an amusing curiosity, many people will take the results more seriously than they should, and be inspired to apply the same methods to products and initiatives that adversely affect people's lives in real ways.

That will most definitely happen. We already have known for awhile that algorithmic methods have been applied "to products and initiatives that adversely affect people's lives in real ways", for awhile: https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/roots-of-unity/revie...

I guess the question is if LLMs for some reason will reinvigorate public sentiment / pressure for governing bodies to sincerely take up the ongoing responsibility of trying to lessen the unique harms that can be amplified by reckless implementation of algorithms.
by zamadatix | 2025-12-10 20:01:18+00:00
> No idea how to check if this is actually deployed on qwen.com right now.

Assuming you mean qwen.ai, when you run a query it should take you to chat.qwen.ai with the list of models in the top left. None of the options appear to be the -Omni variant (at least when anonymously accessing it).
by bossyTeacher | 2025-12-10 20:01:44+00:00
If I tell people that I can write programming code at world-class level and in some of my reviews I make junior mistakes, I make out functions or dependencies that do not exist or I am unable to learn from my mistakes, I would be put on PIP immediately. And after a while, fired. This is the standard LLMs should be held up against when you use the word "world class".
by cxr | 2025-12-10 20:02:00+00:00
> This is pretty similar to the Sanitizer that I wanted to build into the browser: […] But that is NOT the Sanitizer we ended up with.¶ And the reason is essentially Mutated XSS (mXSS). To quickly recap, the idea behind mXSS is[…]

No, the reason is that the problem is underspecified and unsatisfiable.

The whole notion of HTML "sanitization" is the ultimate "just do what I mean". It's the customer who cannot articulate what they need. It's «Hey, how about if there were some sort of `import "nobugs"`?»

"HTML sanitization" is never going to be solved because it's not solvable.

There's no getting around knowing whether or any arbitrary string is legitimate markup from a trusted source or some untrusted input that needs to be treated like text. This is a hard requirement. (And if you already have this information, then the necessary tools have been available for years—decades, even: `innerHTML` and `textContent`—or if you don't like the latter, then it's trivial to write your own `escapeText` subroutine that's correct, well-formed, and sound.) No new DOMPurify alternative or native API baked into the browser is going to change this, ever.
by henryfjordan | 2025-12-10 20:02:06+00:00
Youtube really wants to send me down the alt-right pipeline. I watch a few WW2 history videos and suddenly I must identify with "Mr Mustache" as the kids say. TikTok wants to radicalize me the other way, and shows me every video of a cop abusing their power that they can find. It cuts both ways.

I think what's killing Dems is that they don't understand the medium. Mamdani did really well by making good social media posts. Him and Trump had a grand old time at the whitehouse because they have a competent grasp on social media in common. Newsom has been trolling lately and his approval ratings are only going up.

Dems being a million years old is killing the dems.
by sestep | 2025-12-10 20:02:13+00:00
I think actually Scala does exactly this style of inferring the container instance from its type: https://docs.scala-lang.org/scala3/book/ca-context-parameter...

But from what I understand (being a nonexpert on Scala), this scheme actually causes a lot of problems. I think I've even heard that it adds more undecidability to the type system? So I'm exploring ways of managing context that don't depend on inferring backward from the type.
by lisbbb | 2025-12-10 20:02:19+00:00
People in power just want total control of the narrative and they don't want you to find out the truth about anything. Look at Walz in MN--he's like the ultimate Jedi "nothing to see here" mind trick with his wholesome grandfatherly persona, which is furthest from the actual reality of who and what he is. They all just want to force you into their reality and they hate it when you don't go there.
by ComplexSystems | 2025-12-10 20:02:29+00:00
I am as tired of AI slop as everyone else but I think the backlash to this is way too exaggerated. Commercials are already "slop." There is no expectation of quality at all. The average Christmas commercial involves a bunch of elves singing "Taking Care of Business" while dancing in front of office supplies.

This commercial sucked because nobody wants to hear "it's the most terrible time of year." I don't really care if they used AI.
by thegrimmest | 2025-12-10 20:02:53+00:00
> They are closer to states than they are to algorithms

This seems like nonsense. All the tech industry does is convince people. It doesn't force anyone to do anything. States have a monopoly on violence. No one holds a gun to anyone's head forcing them to consume <insert content you disagree with>. In a country of equals, everyone's opinion, including <position you disagree with>, should hold equal sway, and be resolved via democratic due process.

Just because many people hold <position you disagree with> and vote for <politician you find repugnant> doesn't give you any sort of reasonable justification to limit the freedom of others to advocate (including on social media) for it.
by papichulo4 | 2025-12-10 20:03:26+00:00
Why does the motivation matter so much? It’s not a global ban, it’s not a permanent ban, nobody is going to jail. It’s like seeing if moving the smoking age to 18 will improve health outcomes.

It’s ruining their lives as far as we can tell, and at the end of the day it’s just one country testing it out. It’ll be stastically significant, culturally close enough of a sample set for us to learn from.

I’m curious to see what the 1-2-3 year effects are. We need to let some real life experimentation happen, somewhere, instead of accepting what every conglomerate wants.

I get that “it’s easy to say” for me as someone completely unaffected by this law.

The study that was posted last week regarding at school banning of phones was enlightening. It improved scores within two years after a bit of resistance. Boom!

I want them to have a chance at being healthy and well-educated; we can’t stop teens from smoking altogether but we can sure limit their access by default.
by awillowingmind | 2025-12-10 20:03:46+00:00
What you’re implicitly saying here is that we should wait until there is empirical evidence. That could take multiple decades, and even then will be tenuous at best because you’re dealing with a soft science. At that point the damage will have been done and much harder to address.

If you don’t think attention spans are on the downtrend & that social media has something to do with that, I don’t know what to tell you. I think it’s pretty clear.
by Elfener | 2025-12-10 20:03:56+00:00
> I wonder if allowing browsing without an account is compliant with the letter or the spirit of the law

Haven't read the law, but I don't think they considered this, since the most popular social media sites make it very hard or impossible to browse without an account. I guess with adult content bans they do consider this, since people don't tend to make an account there.

And a very similar fun fact: You can't browse facebook marketplace if you're logged into an under 18 account, but can without an account (at least here in Hungary).

Somehow, things are going to work better when you're not logged in...
by gloosx | 2025-12-10 20:04:00+00:00
"It's just kind of pointless, we're just going to create new ways to get on these platforms, so what's the point," said 14-year-old Claire Ni.

Claire Ni concluded it best. They are just going to find new ways. Imagine a kid stopping using something because of the law or government ban. Those lawmakers are just delusional if they think they can pass a law and the kids will stop using social media.