MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by markdjacobsen | 2025-12-11 13:50:46+00:00
My own experience presiding over startup failure was excruciating. I had a serious personal breakdown that took a couple years to recover from. There was the burnout, but also a deep sense of guilt, weakness, and personal failure. Articles like this can inadvertently heap on guilt, insinuating that a founder "stopped trying" or "lost heart", as a if a better or stronger soul might have prevailed. But sometimes, closing the doors is the right thing to do.

For other failed founders out there... I found very few resources that could help me navigate the aftermath, so I wrote the book I wish I'd had. It's a passion project, so I give it away for free. It's titled "Eating Glass: The Inner Journey Through Failure and Renewal."

Amazon/Audible link: https://www.amazon.com/Eating-Glass-Journey-Through-Failure/...

Free copy: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/arauyfnkwwezbbk0cbvdp/eating-...
by _jzlw | 2025-12-11 13:51:06+00:00
If you're not willing to accept feedback, and just trying to advertise your paid product (which is all this looks like), then a Show HN is not appropriate. Flagged.

(Also, I think you're confused about your own product. Your users are not the survey-takers. But if it's not for them, then it's not for anyone, because anyone using this product will not reach those respondents, as you've just admitted. Hence my feedback, which you ignored.)
by hulitu | 2025-12-11 13:52:05+00:00
> But 'new' software might be more about completing users tasks for them, and these higher level tasks are the ones that are hard to define because there are so many permutations of what a user might want to do

20 years ago we called the functionality: "record macro". Very few programs implement a subset of it ( record, save, replay) - Hello Vector CANoe/Denoe, but not the whole ( loading, editing macros), again Hello Vector CANoe/Denoe.

Microsoft was very close to have a "Set as default" button in Settings dialogues in Office but, then, "they improved".
by chriswarbo | 2025-12-11 13:52:11+00:00
> Theoretically, could `set` be a subclass of `frozenset` (and `dict` of `frozendict`)?

At one extreme: sure, anything can be made a subclass of anything else, if we wanted to.

At the other extreme: no, since Liskov substitution is an impossibly-high bar to reach; especially in a language that's as dynamic/loose as Python. For example, consider an expression like '"pop" in dir(mySet)'
by jonathaneunice | 2025-12-11 13:52:53+00:00
Ordering, like stability in sorting, is an incredibly useful property. If it costs a little, then so be it.

This is optimizing for the common case, where memory is generally plentiful and dicts grow more than they shrink. Python has so many memory inefficiencies that occasional tombstones in the dict internal structure is unlikely to be a major effect. If you're really concerned, do `d = dict(d)` after aggressive deletion.
by rob74 | 2025-12-11 13:52:59+00:00
May I ask what your thoughts are on fonts that prioritise legibility over everything else, like Atkinson Hyperlegible? IMHO Calibri has a better balance between legibility and a consistent/polished look. The Munich transportation company MVG wanted to set an example here and adapted this font for their information screens at subway stations, on trains etc. There's one catch though: because Atkinson Hyperlegible tends to have wider glyphs than the previous (also sans serif, of course) font they used, they had to reduce the font size to fit the same amount of information on the screens, so the increased readability is partly counteracted by the decreased font size.
by dmm | 2025-12-11 13:53:01+00:00
It's possible to have both overpopulation(too large of a population for a given metric like water, energy, pollution, etc) and demographic collapse(too many old people, not enough young workers). It's not intuitive but they are separate phenomenon.

The reaction to overpopulation concerns probably discouraged people from having kids but it's unlikely to be the main cause.
by gregw2 | 2025-12-11 13:53:19+00:00
It's not Enron.

It's Sun Microsystems in 1999.

The growth is a one time surge due to AI hype, like Y2K fears which required double hardware purchases for pre-y2k testing and the internet boom. When Y2K passed, while the internet boom continued, all those test servers (and routers and other hardware) bought pre-y2k were freed up and reused, cutting growth #s and driving up P/E ratios for Sun instantly, and with Sun serving as a proxy for the internet boom, the boom was declared a bust in Q1 of 2000. Oh and low end x86+Linux competition didn't help.
by embedding-shape | 2025-12-11 13:53:24+00:00
NSO also claimed that their Pegasus software couldn't target US or Israeli phone numbers, but we now know that isn't true, so excuse me if it's hard to take their word for anything they say publicly. Not to mention that time they claimed they weren't involved in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, and then later we found Pegasus on the phones of his fiancée, wife, and other relatives.

Same goes for Meta, at one point it becomes blatantly obvious that you cannot trust any of their statements, because they turn out again and again to not be true.
by tdfirth | 2025-12-11 13:53:43+00:00
I don’t think this is confusing to the vast majority of people writing Go.

In my experience, the average programmer isn’t even aware of the stack vs heap distinction these days. If you learned to write code in something like Python then coming at Go from “above” this will just work the way you expect.

If you come at Go from “below” then yeah it’s a bit weird.
by ChrisMarshallNY | 2025-12-11 13:54:46+00:00
Maybe, but all businesses begin as "startups." I guess getting a lot of outside financing is a big deal. Most companies that I know, don't get investors, until they are a going concern. They usually have a bank loan, to start (which can be burdensome).

I used to work for a 100-year-old Japanese corporation. They absolutely refused to go into debt, or seek investors. It could be challenging, getting them to loosen their pursestrings.

But they survived depressions, recessions, and even being bombed in WWII. They had a massive implosion, a few years back, that would have killed most companies (it resulted in me being laid off), but it looks like they are getting their feet under them again.
by willwade | 2025-12-11 13:54:51+00:00
can i have this between my machine and git please.. Like its twice now I've commmited .env* and totally passed me by (usually because its to a private repo..) then later on we/someone clears down the files.. and forgets to rewrite git history before pushing live.. it should never have got there in the first place.. (I wish github did a scan before making a repo public..)
by teraflop | 2025-12-11 13:54:55+00:00
Nice article! One point of clarification:

> When the kernel starts it does not have all of the parts loaded that are needed to access the disks in the computer, so it needs a filesystem loaded into the memory called initramfs (Initial RAM filesystem).

The kernel might not have all the parts needed to mount the filesystem, especially on a modern Linux distro that supports a wide variety of hardware.

Initramfs exists so that parts of the boot logic can be handled in userspace. Part of this includes deciding which device drivers to load as kernel modules, using something like udev.

Another part is deciding which root filesystem to mount. The root FS might be on an LVM volume that needs to be configured with device-mapper, or unlocked with decrypt. Or it might be mounted over a network, which in turn requires IP configuration and authentication. You don't want the kernel to have those mechanisms hard-coded, so initramfs allows handling them in userspace.

But strictly speaking, you don't need any of that for a minimal system. You can boot without initramfs at all, as long as no special userspace setup is required. i.e., the root FS is a plain old disk partition specified on the kernel command line, and the correct drivers (e.g. for a SCSI/SATA hard drive) are already linked into the kernel.
by Propelloni | 2025-12-11 13:56:12+00:00
The German Democratic Republic had state-run universal daycare from ages 0 to 18 (Krippe, Garten, POS, FDJ). It was commonly seen as a bad thing by western societies, because it gave ample opportunity to indoctrinate.

PS: POS and FDJ are not really daycare but school and youth org, but they provided services exceeding what we connect with those ideas.
by tailsdog | 2025-12-11 13:56:20+00:00
I've had this happen to me, posted a factual restaurant review 12 months later threatened with defamation and it's auto removed by Google. It seems there are agencies that use legal framework to do bulk removal requests to Google for any low reviews no matter the content. The in-authentic Korean restaurant in Cologne went from a 1.9 to a 4.6. It's impossible to trust reviews in Germany due to these corrupt bully tactics.
by bjourne | 2025-12-11 13:56:46+00:00
Well, sucks to be you then, since many legal experts do see how this rule applies to this case: https://opiniojuris.org/2024/10/15/is-it-cake-on-boobytrappe... https://www.ejiltalk.org/were-the-israeli-pager-and-walkie-t... https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/09/exploding-pa...
by simianwords | 2025-12-11 13:56:52+00:00
It is zero sum unless you can prove that redistribution will increase productivity. If you can prove it then it is an obvious thing to do. It actually isn't that obvious otherwise we would see more productivity from western Europe.

>But that's irrelevant, because the reason some people are poor is not lack of resources in the whole economy. We have way more stuff than we need even if it was 0-sum

What do you think is the real problem then?
by FridayoLeary | 2025-12-11 13:57:07+00:00
>Why not have dedicated facilities that handle raising children professionally?

Because to even contemplate that means dismissing the entire notion of a parent child bond. Of course socialism, with it's inherent disdain of existing social structures have tried collective living, famously some kibbutzim in israel tried it, but most sensible people are horrified by such an idea.

I want to let it go but i can't. The suggestion that trained professionals would somehow do a better job of raising a child then parents would is terrible. It's one of the worst ideas i've ever seen here.
by omneity | 2025-12-11 13:57:09+00:00
You might actually get that desired behavior through reasoning, or if the model was reinforced for coding workflows involving COM, or at least enough stack diversity for the model to encounter the need to develop this capability.

In the case of LLMs with reasoning, they might pull this off because reasoning is in fact a search in the direction of extra considerations that improve its performance on the task. This is measured by the verifier during reasoning training, which the LLM learns to emulate during inference hence improved performance.

As for RL coding training, the difference can be slightly blurry since reasoning is also done with RL, but for coding models specifically they also discover additional considerations, or even recipes, through self play against a code execution environment. If that environment includes COM and the training data has COM-related tasks, then the process has a chance to discover the behavior you described and reinforce it during training increasing its likelihood during actual coding.

LLMs are not really just autocomplete engines. Perhaps the first few layers or for base models can be seen as such, but as you introduce instruct and reinforcement tuning LLMs build progressively higher levels of conceptual abstractions from words to sentences to tasks like CNNs learn basic geometric features then composing those into face parts and so on.
by brutus1213 | 2025-12-11 13:57:21+00:00
I fear SK is a harbinger of what's to come in other developed western countries. Companies seem to follow each other in getting more out of workers. When jobs and career become the most important thing (for survival, professional satisfaction or lifestyle), then family life suffers. Even with superb (albeit costly) child care that I avail, my wife has to throttle down her career to put taking care of the kids first, while I prioritize income generation. I have to put considerable thought into how I spend quality time with my kids (including taking a risk that a delayed email response will have professional costs for me). But I feel far more fortunate than my wife (who has to pay a heavy toll forgoing her professional aspirations). Society needs to evolve to do better to support working parents and caregivers.

I think small scale entrepreneurship might be a solution to the current corp craziness. Also, need to ensure lifestyle creep doesn't occur. Easier said then done.
by aurareturn | 2025-12-11 13:57:27+00:00
Maybe I don't know enough about human biology or sociology but it seems like at some point, the population will drop low enough that natural resources is high per person and people will start having many more kids again.

Am I crazy for thinking this?

Our generation might be the generation where resources can't sustain the population. Hence, people naturally have fewer kids. Zoom out to the macro level and it just seems like humanity is adjusting to the amount of available resources per capita.
by ToucanLoucan | 2025-12-11 13:57:46+00:00
No, my existence isn’t contingent on Meta existing. But when a platform with billions of users decides queer content is unwelcome, it erases us from one of the largest public squares in the world, at a time when public squares are at a premium. That’s not the same as "some random company doesn’t carry my stuff."

There's also a difference between not amplifying something and actively suppressing it. Neutral omission is one thing; deliberate censorship is another. When queer content is singled out for removal, it sends a message: you don’t belong here. That's erasure.

History shows us that erasure is rarely neutral. It's part of a continuum: silence leads to exclusion leads to violence. Pretending censorship is harmless ignores the fact that queer people have lived through this cycle many times before, and we're far from alone.
by DharmaPolice | 2025-12-11 13:58:00+00:00
I think the key thing (which we used to understand but seem to have forgotten) is that restrictions (including censorship) should be based on conduct, not opinion. Someone spamming commercial links, crap flooding, posting child pornography, even constant off-topic posting etc can justifiably be censored on a platform based on their conduct. But as soon as you advocate for censoring someone purely based on an opinion then you're making it dramatically easier for someone who shares your opinion to be censored later on. Although if we're being intellectually honest, even if there hadn't been any banning of wrongthink in the past, this kind of thing might still have happened anyway given the current administration and their allies. But it's definitely made it easier.

I remember when Alex Jones (or someone of that ilk) was being "de-platformed" by Google, Facebook, etc. Not only were people cheering for it, they were denying that being banned from YouTube (for example) was censorship since "there are other video hosting platforms" (yeah, there are but also not really) and "it's only censorship when it's the government who legally restrict you from speech".

(And Alex Jones is a detestable piece of shit just in case you think I'm a fan. But to paraphrase an old saying, freedom of expression is only a principle if it applies to people you utterly despise).
by exasperaited | 2025-12-11 13:58:41+00:00
> Fascism is one possible failure mode of capitalism. It is capitalism stripped of brakes, guardrails, and ethics.

This is not a useful definition of fascism, if that is what you mean. Fascism can exist entirely independently of capitalism, and has done.

Is it possible for fascism to thrive in a regulation-free capitalist world? Apparently yes. But they are not necessarily coupled.

It's a common misperception that fascism necessarily involves a merger of state and corporate power. Rather in a fascist regime, companies have no more choice in whether they further the state's aims and align with its goals than individual citizens have; they just have more devastating impacts.

As to whether Meta is aligning with the administration's goals, I don't know whether it is happening, consciously or unconsciously, in this case, but we know for certain there has been deliberate and conscious alignment elsewhere, because Zuckerberg made a big deal out of it.
by jackling | 2025-12-11 13:58:42+00:00
Cmon man, there are sources pasted all over this thread from my discussion with OP. I'm not going to post the same source that was already discussed with him, why would I waste my time to do so?

OP did split this chain, but a sibling comment has the sources you want.

EDIT: Getting downvoted because I didn't want to paste the same source N times. Nice.
by smartmic | 2025-12-11 13:58:51+00:00
Yes, that is also my feeling. But comparing an interpreted language with a compiled one is not really fair.

Here is my quick benchmark. I refrain from using Python for most scripting/prototyping task but really like Janet [0] - here is a comparison for printing the current time in Unix epoch:

$ hyperfine --shell=none --warmup 2 "python3 -c 'import time;print(time.time())'" "janet -e '(print (os/time))'" Benchmark 1: python3 -c 'import time;print(time.time())' Time (mean ± σ): 22.3 ms ± 0.9 ms [User: 12.1 ms, System: 4.2 ms] Range (min … max): 20.8 ms … 25.6 ms 126 runs Benchmark 2: janet -e '(print (os/time))' Time (mean ± σ): 3.9 ms ± 0.2 ms [User: 1.2 ms, System: 0.5 ms] Range (min … max): 3.6 ms … 5.1 ms 699 runs Summary 'janet -e '(print (os/time))'' ran 5.75 ± 0.39 times faster than 'python3 -c 'import time;print(time.time())''

[0]: https://janet-lang.org/
by LargoLasskhyfv | 2025-12-11 13:59:18+00:00
> I don't get the issue. Take too long? Not happen automatically?

Yes and Yes. Long before Arch I did LFS and Gentoo. And NetBSD like Gentoo.

I'm having had it! Gimme binaries in the flavors (Hello OpenBSD!) I want/like!1!! ;->
by order-matters | 2025-12-11 13:59:36+00:00
I would argue I am never required to accept someone elses version of ethics, but the laws do have to agree to some sort of consensus. Generally i think we do a pretty good job with allowing people to adhere to their personal ethics without breaking the law

Surprisingly enough, I dont think there is much in the accountability front that you can organize. It's like the final layer of accountability. You can only act in a way defendable by your genuine morals and the consequences are what they are. Maybe you can be somewhat negotiable and adjust and push your morals to their limit in order to limit the negative effects to yourself, but if its a true moral i think you shouldnt fully break it. I think that level of accountability with yourself is necessary to have peace of mind. Everything else is out of your control, including whos ethics the consequences are bound to.

If you were the same as you are now and you were placed into what you believe to be a genuinely evil society, and you have to severely go against your morals to fit in and avoid negative consequence, are you going to do that?
by hbn | 2025-12-11 13:59:54+00:00
Nintendo is pretty good for putting a solid 1.0 version of their games on the cartridges on release. But on the other hand, the Switch cartridges use NAND memory which means if you aren't popping them into a system to refresh the charge every once in a while, your physical cartridge might not last as long as they keep the servers online so you could download a digital purchase.

I've kinda given up on physical games at this point. I held on for a long time, but the experience is just so bad now. They use the cheapest, flimsiest, most fragile plastic in the cases. You don't get a nice instruction manual anymore. And honestly, keeping a micro SD card in your system that can hold a handful of games is more convenient than having to haul around a bunch of cartridges that can be lost.

I take solace in knowing that if I do still have a working Switch in 20 years and lose access to games I bought a long time ago, hopefully the hackers/pirates will have a method for me to play them again.
by alistairSH | 2025-12-11 14:00:28+00:00
Depends on the battery size (which depends on bike weight).

For a pedelec (actual e-bike meant to be pedaled), wall charging with a brick/wall-wart works fine. That's how they all work, at least any that I've seen. Some have removable batteries to make that easier, but the high-end models tend to have the battery wedged into the down tube and not removable (with complete disassembly of the bike).

For an e-scooter or light e-moto, wall charging should work fine, but it won't be fast. YOu're looking at 3+ hours to charge. Fine for most commuters and running errands, but not suitable for a delivery vehicle - they'd have to hot-swap batteries (or complete bikes).

Not sure about large electric motorcycles - there aren't that many out there right now. I'd guess similar to e-scooters, just with an even longer 10-80 or 0-100 charge period.
by aa_is_op | 2025-12-11 14:00:31+00:00
We have Trump blabbering about EU censorship, but here's the US oligarch's social network doing it at his orders.

The "bastion of free speech" is exporting its censorship to other countries... If I'm an EU lawmaker, I'd honestly use this to just ban Zuckerberg's entire social media sites and get it over with
by keymasta | 2025-12-11 14:00:37+00:00
Two broad categories, verse and prose.

Prose is mostly focused on describing meaning using any words that serve to do so.

Verse is more concerned with structural factors like rhythm, tonality, and structure within syllables, or within types of sound, or parts of speech. Other linguistic devices which look at details beyond the strict meaning of the words, like rhyme or many other factors (you could even use visual spacing for example) can be considered in verse.

Within verse there's the concept of iambs. I think of it as a tuple of two syllables which are said, weak-strong. Pentameter means ten syllables, and iambic means in groups of weak and strong. Most of Shakespeare is written like this. Also English naturally sounds iambic a lot of the time.

Iambic pentameter sounds like this:

I watched a bird attempt its beak upon The end of fake too-moist baguette in vain For it was sick of stale McDicks tossed on It endlessly maintained its rationed pain While others in its bobbing flock for scraps Of birds fought for the thrill squawked on and on Till cannibals among their kind rejoiced To find cousins in mayonnaise so long

Normally you'd also look at rhyme structure if writing a legit Shakespearean sonnet [2] but I fired this one out as in the style of fast food. So this is technically iambic pentameter but not technically a sonnet.

Or like a particular Shakespearean sonnet [0]. Or like any of them, [1]

[0] https://shakespeare.mit.edu/Poetry/sonnet.I.html

[1] https://shakespeare.mit.edu/Poetry/sonnets.html

[2] https://www.poetryfoundation.org/education/glossary/shakespe...