MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by goku12 | 2025-12-15 15:51:16+00:00
How considerate of them!

That aside, comparisons with 'even' Iran or Israel is not very meaningful for US these days. Granted, both committed some very serious atrocities. But I don't remember Israel just arbitrarily blowing up every flotilla headed for Palestine. Meanwhile, the US administration treats small boats off the Venezuelan coast like targets of a duck hunt or something. The way they joke about it on TV is sickening, to say the least.

Even if you take civilian aviation activities, the US standards are a rather low bar these days. For example, when you launch a space vehicle, you usually notify via NOTAM, the entire region where it might fall in case of a failure or destruct. But how many times has Starship fallen outside the notified area? We even have videos of flaming streaming wreckage, taken from commercial airliners. That's absolutely insane, if you ask me! Have you seen how ridiculously tiny the notified area was? That too for a vehicle that had never worked properly before that. It's a display of pure hubris and lack of concern.

And then you have the jaw dropping revelation that there was nearly one near-collision between a military aircraft and a commercial civilian airliner over the Potomac near DCA every month for 13 years, till a pair finally collided killing 67 innocent people. I mean, who is taking all these unbelievable decisions? I thought each near-miss is supposed to be treated as seriously as a full crash. Do you need 2 such incidents, much less ~150 before your alarm bells go off? And when it inevitably fails, you see the culprits running for a scapegoat, like what Boeing tried to do with the pilots of the crashed 737 Max-8 aircrafts.

Clearly, somebody is not getting the message here. All concerns about human lives have gone out the window. How many more?
by basilikum | 2025-12-15 15:51:26+00:00
They definitely do. Before this comment CT logs – aside from DNS queries – were the only way to know about https://onion.basilikum.monster and you have to send the hostname in the SNI, otherwise you get another certificate back.

Of course I get some bot traffic including the OpenAI bot – although I just trust the user agent there, I have not confirmed that the origin IP address of the requests actually belongs to OpenAI.

That's just the internet. I like the bots, especially the wp-admin or .env ones. It's fun watching them doing their thing like little ants.
by iamnothere | 2025-12-15 15:51:38+00:00
In the worst case you have some people who only want to transmit their own negative emotions to you. The don’t want to solve the problem (but will get angry if you don’t attempt it), they won’t accept empathy (or will use it as bait for subtle personal attacks), and they divert any and all conversations back to their own personal issues. The listener is not at fault in this situation!
by jajuuka | 2025-12-15 15:51:52+00:00
Yeah I think a lot of privacy advocates like to pretend they are some high value target. A nation you don't live in, that has no use for information about you is collecting information on you. What is the problem that wasn't there before? I can at least understand a principled stand of not wanting cloud connected cameras or microphones, but the China hawking is just ludacris.
by rapind | 2025-12-15 15:51:55+00:00
As a solo grumpy senior, I've been pumping out features over the past 6 months and am now expanding into new markets.

I've also eliminated some third party SaaS integrations by creating slimmer and better integrated services directly into my platform. Which is an example of using AI to bring some features in-house, not primarily to save money (generally not worth the effort if that's the goal), but because it's simply better integrated and less frustrating than dealing with crappy third-party APIs.
by ohmyai | 2025-12-15 15:52:02+00:00
https://meetlace.ai - LACE, a self-organising research companion for long-horizon inquiry.

With LLMs, generating ideas and snippets is cheap; what’s hard is keeping track of fragments with their “why I cared” context over months. Most tools (Notion/Obsidian/etc.) assume you will do the work (folder/tag/linking) structure will maintain it forever. I don’t.

In LACE we: – capture fragments from the web via a browser extension – auto-cluster them into evolving “threads” / projects with summaries & reading lists – maintain a graph of connections across threads (“topology of attention”) – let you turn a cluster of fragments into an essay draft when you’re ready to share.

Stack is a fairly standard web app + LLM pipeline. Used neo4j's llm-graph-builder as a starting point.

The interesting bit is self-organising graph. treating fragments/questions/lines of inquiry as first-class objects and letting the system reorganise around them over time instead of fixed folders.

It’s in a small test phase right now. If you’re a researcher/writer/engineer/founder who constantly loses good ideas in your notes and want to try something opinionated in this space, I’d love feedback.

background write-up: https://open.substack.com/pub/ozthinks/p/from-fragments-to-i...
by pavlov | 2025-12-15 15:52:08+00:00
I had the same experience at age 13.

I'd read the American classics like Asimov and Clarke, but Varley's short stories were the first time I encountered science fiction where society is genuinely something completely different than just post-WWII America projected into space.

John Varley and Stanislaw Lem changed my worldview completely as a teenager. In my mind they are the two greats of science fiction. I'm also grateful somebody translated and published their books in my small European language.
by catapart | 2025-12-15 15:52:29+00:00
Could also be anti-immigration sentiment, because I'm from the US, but I traveled to Germany a few years before the pandemic and while there was only ever one German person whom ever gave me crap about English, there was indeed one and it was a very inconvenient person to take such a harsh stance on. It was in a little airport (which, if it matters, was very close to france) that we were taking to leave Germany and head down toward Italy. The person looking over the bins for carryons was herding people through and she pointed at me and said something I didn't understand in German. So I guessed and pointed at a thing or two, and when she kept saying "no", I finally gave the ol' "es tut mir leid, mein Deutsch ist schlecht. Sprechen sie englisch?", to which she replied slowly and aggressively: "noooo. sprichst du deutsch?"

Which... is certainly understandable! I'm sure she sees a lot of tourism and tourists. But for a neurotic person, being singled out as someone holding up the line by someone who is ostensibly there to help things move faster, because I didn't know a language that I expressly said I didn't know and apologized for, was quite jarring. Up until that point, every single person I met with talked to me like I had a second head that they were generally aware of but didn't care about while they tried to be as polite as possible about not bringing it up. It was a kind of clipped politeness that I have been told is just "german". Nobody cares to be friendly, everyone just wants to exchange only the information needed and, while they do so, they would be as happy and pleasant as a person could be. But as soon as the information had been exchanged, they were right back to bewildered disinterest ("why are you still talking to me? we've finished.", while smiling and nodding).

Anyway, whatever it was that she was trying to tell me, the message never got through. When I answered "no" to her question, she just moved me on through. So maybe she was trying to be polite and I showed my ass or something. Or maybe she was just trying to make a joke and then moved past it when there was no way to make me get it. Whatever the case, I left with the distinct feeling that the author described about that French street. "some people here, sometimes, are going to be very uncharitable about your lack of cultural integration. beware of that." Which, on the one hand is pretty obvious; people are just people all over. But on the other hand, it's probably something most cultures would aspire to minimize.
by smallmancontrov | 2025-12-15 15:52:37+00:00
The common theme behind the avoidance mechanisms is "keeping the gain unrealized." Going after preferential treatment of unrealized gains categorically attacks every single one of these tricks. It nukes the hydra rather than trying to chop off heads one at a time.

I am of course deeply sympathetic to the "founder scenario," but I'd rather address it specifically than hobble tax collection generally. This could be done by a "payment in-kind" mechanism. If we wanted to steer it towards startups I'm sure the valuation rules could be set to do so, but I'd personally like to aim higher and go for progressive taxation on the basis of market cap to encourage company splitting and competition. Industries with the most dramatic returns-to-scale (semiconductors) could be exempted.

That said, the (in)ability for new founders to self-fund is deeply tied to the same gini coefficient story as the rest of the economy, so policy that addresses the gini story should help bootstrappers as well.
by james_marks | 2025-12-15 15:52:38+00:00
I've always assumed we'll end up re-processing landfills when it hits an economic tipping point: better tech emerges, raw sources are exhausted, etc.

There's a story in Junkyard Planet of this exact thing making someone wealthy when a product that was treated as waste became valuable to the steel industry, and they knew where to find it in the dump.
by zxh | 2025-12-15 15:52:39+00:00
I’m building an online memorial product in China, currently used via a WeChat mini-app and web pages by local governments and cemeteries for digital remembrance.

I’m now exploring a global version (web + app) for families worldwide — especially those separated by distance.

The current product is in Chinese, but the idea is universal. I’d love feedback, and I’m open to marketing or distribution collaborations.

Product (Chinese): https://www.yunmu13.cn/products/
by spwa4 | 2025-12-15 15:53:31+00:00
But isn't that in the past?

Look at stocks: everything is synchronizing, for years now. Either something like 85% of stocks all go up, with a predictable difference between them (meaning, e.g. META moves about double GOOG does, whichever way it goes, up or down), or 85% of stocks all go down. SPY, VOO. And in fact the only ones that make a move to speak of are the MAG7. It isn't just that they're the fastest to rise, they're the only ones that beat the market.

Zoom out and you'll see that in recent years you can include even non-stock-market assets in this argument. Housing ... same (of course there I understand), Gold, surprisingly, same.

And that's ignoring the warnings European authorities are issuing these days. It's pretty public information at this point that European authorities expect open ("kinetic" if you will) hostilities between Germany, France and Russia to open somewhere between March 2026 and Jan 2027. That will crash the stock market. That will crash the housing market. That will probably even crash the gold market, AI or no AI. Imho, that will crash the value of fucking Trump tower. The places these warnings are coming from are very serious and not known for joking on these matters (like the German chancillary, which if anything is far too conservative, or the French department of health, which has literally never issued a warning like this)
by andsoitis | 2025-12-15 15:53:35+00:00
> The fact that capital owners successfully avoid contributing to the financing of our states and social systems is

Are you sure capital owners do not contribute to our states and financial systems?

For instance, Jeff Bezos is worth $238 billion even though Amazon has a $2.6 trillion market cap. That's $2.4 trillion of value created for other shareholders plus trillions more for employees, customers, suppliers, governments, and other stakeholders.

Jensen Huang is worth $164 billion while NVIDIA’s market cap is $5 trillion. That’s $4.8 trillion of value for other people (ignoring value created for non-equity stakeholders).

etc.

I'm not saying that there should not ALSO be other ways to force contribution (e.g. via taxes), but to say they do not contribute at all is false.
by JeanMarcS | 2025-12-15 15:54:01+00:00
IMHO you can and should.

AI is a great assistant. Letting go the more experienced dev is a bad move.

We work in a field where you should understand what it is you're doing.

We had a wave of "dev" who where told that assembling libraries and API as Lego is the way. It's only a sub part.

Now with the AI fuzz, people think it's kind of magic and do everything by its own. It's not.

You can gain a lot of time with AI if you know how to prompt and are capable to understand what it spits out.

But beting the future of your business on less experimented junior for saving a couple thousand dollars is not a clever move.

(Again, my opinion)
by christophilus | 2025-12-15 15:54:18+00:00
Your edit was a good one.

It's a rational default position to say, "I'll default to distrusting large corporate scientific literature that tells me neurotoxins on my food aren't a problem."

As with any rule of thumb, that one will sometimes land you on the wrong side of history, but my guess is that it will more often than not guide you well if you don't have the time to dive deeper into a subject.

I'm not saying all corporations are evil. I'm not saying all corporate science is bad or bunk. But, corporations have a poor track record with this sort of thing, and it's the kind of thing that could obviously have large, negative societal consequences if we get it wrong. This is the category of problem for which the science needs to be clear and overwhelming in favor of a thing before we should allow it.
by raw_anon_1111 | 2025-12-15 15:54:22+00:00
It’s taking my best to even go that far seeing they continue to deify people who demean people that look like me and say I - someone who has been coding either as a hobby or professional for literally 40 years - only got ahead because of “DEI”.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/11/charlie-kirk...

They can’t afford $5000 a year for software. I work in consulting, that is less than half of what my company bills me out for a week as a staff consultant.
by triceratops | 2025-12-15 15:54:54+00:00
> Some places do have a capital gains tax of zero. Switzerland is one of them, and Switzerland is economically more successful than the rest of Europe. Tax

Switzerland is a bad example because they tax capital more directly. In the form of a wealth tax. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Switzerland#Wealth...

GP said setting taxes on capital to zero was a bad idea. Switzerland has only set capital gains taxes to zero. It still taxes capital.
by agentultra | 2025-12-15 15:55:00+00:00
I’m just imagining the sweat on the poor IT managers’ brow.

They already lock down everything enterprise wide and hate low-code apps and services.

But in this day and age, who knows. The cynical take is that it doesn’t matter and nobody cares. Have your remaining handful of employees generate the software they need from the magic box. If there’s a security breach and they expose customer data again… who cares?
by moregrist | 2025-12-15 15:55:09+00:00
> Usually codebases disallow auto because without an IDE it's difficult to see the type. I think this reduces the cognitive load of C++ a bit. The only time it is allowed is getting iterators types from STL containers.

Strong agree here. It's not just because it reduces cognitive load, it's because explicit types allows and requires the compiler to check your work.

Even if this isn't a problem when the code is first written, it's a nice safety belt for when someone does a refactor 6-12 months (or even 5+ years) down the road that changes a type. With auto, in the best case you might end up with 100+ lines of unintelligible error messages. In the worst case the compiler just trudges on and you have some subtle semantic breakage that takes weeks or months to chase down.

The only exceptions I like are iterators (whose types are a pita in C++), and lambda types, where you sometimes don't have any other good options because you can't afford the dynamic dispatch of std::function.
The REAL Reason Behind Enshittification
by aniijbod | 2025-12-15 15:55:22+00:00
Sneer all you like at marketing consultants, but once profit has plateaued, then those 'give it all away free to get traction' and 'keep innovating just to get eyeballs' and 'blow them away with Zappos-level UX' (anyone remember Zappos? Holacracy? Amazon buying them for a billion?) brigade get replaced with 'accountants' who cut all of that 'waste' out. Removing everything they call shit. Whatever you think of marketing bozos, the enshittification is what happens when they're suddenly conspicuous by their absence.
by xpe | 2025-12-15 15:55:44+00:00
Looking around at the comments, I have a birds-eye view. People are quite skilled at jumping to conclusions or assuming their POV is the only one. Consider this simplified scenario to illustrate:

- X happened - Person P says "Ah, X happened." - Person Q interprets this in a particular way and says "Stop saying X is BAD!" - Person R, who already knows about X... (and indifferent to what others notice or might know or be interested in) ...says "(yawn)". - Person S narrowly looks at Person R and says "Oh, so you think Repugnant-X is ok?"

What a train wreck. Such failure modes are incredibly common. And preventable.* What a waste of the collective hours of attention and thinking we are spending here that we could be using somewhere else.

See also: the difference between positive and normative; charitable interpretations; not jumping to conclusions; not yucking someone else's yum

* So preventable that I am questioning the wisdom of spending time with any communication technology that doesn't actively address these failures. There is no point at blaming individuals when such failures are a near statistical certainty.
by lanthade | 2025-12-15 15:55:45+00:00
Also doctors: Patients want schedules to run on-time but come in with a laundry list of concerns and will expect to be carefully listened to for 30 minutes during their 20 minute appointment. Medical systems insist on a 20 minute appointment even for complex cases or instances where translators are needed. Patients are non-compliant with discharge instructions and then get re-admitted which penalizes the MDs who discharged yet insurance pushes hospitals to discharge ASAP. I could go on and on...
by dbsrbals26 | 2025-12-15 15:55:47+00:00
Every time I start a new FastAPI project, I find implementing the same Repository Pattern boilerplate: basic CRUD, filtering logic, pagination, and type handling.

The repetition becomes especially painful when each domain requires nearly same CRUD and filter functions, just wired to a different model.

To reduce this overhead, I built a base repository that centralizes these patterns. It provides standard CRUD operations.
by omgJustTest | 2025-12-15 15:55:52+00:00
If there's no better growth story probably people have already trimmed for short term gains.

In some ways the technology companies, which such large growth, are their own consumers.

Unless they feel pressure from another growth story or a technical monetary effect, and I emphasize story because its about future returns, its unlikely.

Additionally this has grown so quickly that there is amazing talent being applied to these problems, its hard to imagine every good person has been sufficiently compensated that progress will stall.
by stuffn | 2025-12-15 15:55:52+00:00
Chevron didn’t establish clearer guidelines.

It was weaponized by both parties to create defacto laws without proper legal procedure. It should’ve been unconstitutional from the beginning as only Congress can make laws. Regulatory agencies are far easier to control, generally contain administration-friendly plants, and are not expected to provide any justification for their decisions. The result is laws that change as the wind blows, confusions, and rights restrictions done by people who should have no business doing so. The “reasonable interpretation” rule allowed Congress to completely defer to them and force citizens to spend tremendous capital getting a case to the Supreme Court.

Chevron’s overturn was objectively a huge win and hardly a “rogue” decision. That editorialization is not a fair representation of the problems it has caused when regulatory agencies begin attempting to regulate constitutional rights. It was overly vague and gave far too much power to people who cannot be trusted with it.

We shouldn’t need Chevron Deference to make laws that protect people from harm done by corporations. Period. If we do, it’s a failure of Congress to do their jobs and a mechanism should be in place to have a “reset button” (like many other countries when they form a government).
by kkylin | 2025-12-15 15:56:06+00:00
Yup. Back in my day there was 1.00, a Civil Engineering course, a pretty standard intro to programming in plain old C. I don't know if it still exists. There was nothing of that sort in EECS, though there are lots of IAP courses (which take place in January, before spring semester starts). IMO a month is about right to spend on (leisurely) picking up a programming language for fun. A friend and I learned APL that way.
by 0cf8612b2e1e | 2025-12-15 15:56:42+00:00
Surely the only intended customers are giant organizations with petabytes of data. Millions of dollars for their archival system does not seem unreasonable. I recall reading a story that movie studios refresh their physical media for their archives every N years to prevent data loss. If these slabs of glass are stable that removes an ongoing operational burden. Just make a single chip with all of the assets per movie.
by KronisLV | 2025-12-15 15:57:31+00:00
They should publish the token limits not just talk about conversations or what average users can expect: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/11145838-using-claude...

For comparison’s sake, this is clear: https://support.cerebras.net/articles/9996007307-cerebras-co...

And while the Cerebras service is pretty okay, their website otherwise kinda sucks - and yet you can find clear info!
by estimator7292 | 2025-12-15 15:57:36+00:00
As a hacker and tinkerer I hate ESPHome. Yes it's super cool to have a turnkey "I want these sensors, give me firmware" but all of the code is hidden away and you can't easily modify or add to it.

If I want to run custom logic, I have to bundle a custom component into the esphome thing. Not bad I guess but I still don't like the lack of control
by airstrike | 2025-12-15 15:57:40+00:00
The Switzerland model is unique in several ways, both in its history, which cannot be replicated, and in embracing of...questionable financial services.

It's unclear that the model can be replicated generally, let alone whether it should. Importantly, there may not be sufficient demand for banking services like the Swiss provide.

Your three step plan says nothing about how much should be taxed at the personal vs corporate income level, or on the gap between capital gains and labor income taxes.

I'm not arguing for higher tax revenue overall. I don't believe in that, but I also wouldn't even need to make the argument even if I believed in it.

The simpler, more defensible argument is that taxes on capital gains must be much closer to income taxes. Historically they were, even in the US, and we seemed to be fine.
by danielmarkbruce | 2025-12-15 15:58:32+00:00
"corporatism" - come on now. The reason why news was decent and the job was decent for a good amount of time was that newspapers were a natural monopoly. Fat, juicy profits and "owned" cities meant the owners could just say "I don't really care, just print approximately the truth and don't alienate readers across the broad spectrum that we have".... "oh, and I guess pay the journalists decently too, because I'm swimming in money"