MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bitexploder | 2025-12-16 20:59:02+00:00
I feel if you have a camera on your property with a view of public spaces they have a losing argument. I doubt none of that holds water constitutionally. This is first amendment protected. If you are filming a public space with no expectation of privacy the government has no constitutional authority to restrict you if you are retaining the data private and never sharing it.

So far the only legal area that matters is the government itself being regulated in how they use ALPR since they are the entity that can actually infringe upon constitutional rights.
by bikenaga | 2025-12-16 20:59:10+00:00
Abstract: "The brain is a metabolically vulnerable organ as neurons have both high resting metabolic rates and the need for local rapid conversion of carbon sources to ATP during activity. Midbrain dopamine neurons are thought to be particularly vulnerable to metabolic perturbations, as a subset of these are the first to undergo degeneration in Parkinson’s disease, a neurodegenerative disorder long suspected to be in part driven by deficits in mid-brain bioenergetics. In skeletal muscle, energy homeostasis under varying demands is achieved in part by its ability to rely on glycogen as a fuel store, whose conversion to ATP is under hormonal regulatory control. In neurons, however, the absence of easily observable glycogen granules has cast doubt on whether this fuel store is operational, even though brain neurons express the key regulatory enzymes associated with building or burning glycogen. We show here that in primary mid-brain dopaminergic neurons, glycogen availability is under the control of dopamine autoreceptors, such that dopamine itself provides a signal to store glycogen. We find that when glycogen stores are present, they provide remarkable resilience to dopamine nerve terminal function under extreme hypometabolic conditions, but loss of this dopamine-derived signal, or impairment of access to glycogen, makes them hypersensitive to fuel deprivation. These data show that neurons can use an extracellular cue to regulate local metabolism and suggest that loss of dopamine secretion might make dopamine neurons particularly subject to neurodegeneration driven by metabolic stress."
by JoshTriplett | 2025-12-16 20:59:18+00:00
Productivity is incremental. In a couple of hours, you could figure out enough to clone a repository of a project you care about, build it successfully, and make a trivial change (e.g. improve an error message, or add an alias to a command-line argument). That doesn't mean you know enough to start using Rust for your next project.
by wongarsu | 2025-12-16 21:00:08+00:00
This feels like half the document is missing. What does this HTTPS metadata actually look like? What do the payloads look like? Section 3 states "Authorization, policy enforcement, and result verification are defined by AIIP" but this is the AIIP specification and doesn't define any of them. Authorization and policy enforcement are somehow supposed to be big selling points that are solved in some amazing way, but are not specified at all.

I don't get how this is better than an HTTP API (especially since payloads are just UTF8 json), and that's entirely down to the document not telling us anything of substance. I get it's "experimental", but there isn't much of an experiment being described here apart from a different message frame that allows us to leave out the http headers and add a signature (while apparently using the assumption that each ip only hosts one AIIP service)
by Marsymars | 2025-12-16 21:00:16+00:00
> Sure, maintenance is a thing, but honestly, flinging java, docker and a few other things onto a build agent isn't the time-consuming part of maintaining CI infrastructure.

Depending on your workplace, there's a whole extra layer of bureaucracy and compliance involved if you self-host things. I aggressively avoid managing any VMs for that reason alone.
by tim333 | 2025-12-16 21:00:26+00:00
On the other hand take a look at the world's largest companies by market cap https://companiesmarketcap.com/usd

The top 8 are American and 17 of the top 20. Seven of the top 8 are into AI. I'm not convinced it's going nowhere. Even if AI on it's own isn't profitable, companies like Nvidia, Apple and Google are doing fine.
by peterldowns | 2025-12-16 21:00:34+00:00
I appreciate being able to pay for a service I rely on. Using self-hosted runners, I previously paid nothing for Github Actions — now I do pay something for it. The price is extremely cheap and seems reasonable considering the benefits I receive. They've shown continued interest in investing in the product, and have a variety of things on their public roadmap that I'm looking forward to (including parallel steps) — https://github.com/orgs/github/projects/4247?pane=issue&item....

Charging "more than nothing" is certainly not what I would call maximizing revenue, and even it they were maximizing revenue I would still make the same decision to purchase or abandon based on its value to me. Have you interacted with the economy before?
by zeeg | 2025-12-16 21:00:55+00:00
I'm not talking about RedHat, I'm talking about the perspective that "FSL / BUSL aren't effective enough". They solve the problem. O'saasy is just freeware at the end of the day, FSL creates more open source, and BUSL often has (though unfortunately the license doesnt require it).

The idea that FSL ~= Closed Source is entirely wrong and misunderstands the value that an open distribution gives. We have 10s of thousands of customers that run Sentry self-hosted. We regularly get contributations back to our core service - both in code and (what we prefer) other artifacts like feedback.

We were "Single Origin Open Source", which is extremely common whether people like to believe it or not. Its the entire premise of the sustainability issue in the industry. Thats not just an issue for commercial entities, its also most of the big open source software people rely on. In our case though we have a great business model that makes it entirely sustainable, and now have built a solid licensing mechanism around it that protects that, while ensuring our community is still successful.

Ive written about a lot of these kinds of things:

https://cra.mr/open-source-is-not-a-business-model https://cra.mr/open-source-and-a-healthy-dose-of-capitalism https://cra.mr/the-busl-factor

These same issues around single origin open source are why we started the no-strings-attached funding mechanism via Open Source Pledge (https://opensourcepledge.com), why we push Fair Source (https://fair.io).

Maybe others will find defensible models, but I'm skeptical. I also respect Adam, but last I understood it the model they were going after sounded pretty similar to trademark protection (which doesnt work).
by TehCorwiz | 2025-12-16 21:01:00+00:00
Nope, he was a Democrat and Republicans and their propaganda outlets like Fox news use the disinfo technique "accusation in a mirror" to discredit complaints about things they plan to do by poisoning discourse early. So they can point back to their bad faith complaints and say "they're copying me" and then the rest of the media just goes "ho hum he said she said." because corporate media doesn't care to actually separate fact from fiction when they can just make boatloads of money from ad views.

So they complained about Obama "destroying presidential norms"
by zeroonetwothree | 2025-12-16 21:01:05+00:00
Unlike most business, social media relies on having a high market saturation to provide value. So having a subscription model doesn’t work very well.

Of course perhaps it’s a bit different now since most people consume content from a small set of sources, making social media largely the same as traditional media. But then traditional media also has trouble with being supported by subscriptions.
by nwmcsween | 2025-12-16 21:01:08+00:00
Have you worked at an organization without RFCs, ADRs, etc? The alternative is really just the wild west and whatever politics or pull a person has. RFCs and ADRs are good in the sense that they document _something_ even if the document is junk it's better than an assumption.

Really though it's the organization (and people) that makes or breaks anything.
by llsf | 2025-12-16 21:01:12+00:00
> 200 years ago, 95% of the workers in my country worked in subsistence farming. Today, only 2% are farmers.

Yes, it took some time to go from manual/animal labor (energy used is food) to mechanical labor (mostly oil energy). And oil is more energy dense than food, and tractors are more powerful than horses. And bonus points for the oil, it allowed to build fertilizers to boost productivity per acre. So, yes eventually we just need 2% to do what what 95% used to do in farming.

AI is promising to do the same but in virtually all industries (manufacturing, services, healthcare, etc.) and in a way shorten span.

Work used to be labor (human/animal) fueled by energy (food) + intelligence (human) fueled by energy (food), then labor (machine) fueled by energy (oil/electricity) + intelligence (AI) fueled by energy (electricity).

IF work is mostly done by AI/machines fueled by energy. Then work's price is mostly a function of energy price (assuming materials can be extracted/transported/transformed is also a function of energy).

If energy becomes abundant and cheap, then there is no reasons to not let AI do the work.

But then what happens to the rest of us, how the economy keeps humming ?
by agumonkey | 2025-12-16 21:01:13+00:00
I wonder if for a large class of jobs, simple unit tests will be enough to be a negative that the llm output will try to match. Test driven delegation in a way.. that said i share the same worries as you. The fact that the LLM can wire multiple files / class / libs in a few seconds to pass your tests doesn't guarantee a good design. And the people who love vibe coding the most are the one who never valued design in the first place, just quick results..
by Nevermark | 2025-12-16 21:01:54+00:00
Take those 40,000 satellites, and combine their solar panels, and combine the cooling panels, and centralize all the compute.

Distances are not our friend in orbit. Efficiency hyperscales down for many things, as distances and area scale up.

Things that need to hyperscale when you scale distance and area:

• Structural strength.

• Power and means to maneuver, especially for any rotation.

• Risk variance, with components housed together, instead of independently.

• Active heat distribution. Distance is COMPOUNDING insulation. Long shallow heat gradients move heat very slowly. What good does scaling up radiative surface do, if you don't hyperscale heat redistribution?

And you can't hyperscale heat distribution in 2D. It requires 3D mass and volume.

You can't just concatenate satellites and get bigger satellites with comparable characteristics.

Alternatives, such as distributing compute across the radiative surface, suffer relative to regular data centers, from intra-compute latency and bandwidth.

We have a huge near infinite capacity cold sink in orbit. With structural support and position and orientation stabilization for free. Let's use that.
by rpdillon | 2025-12-16 21:02:13+00:00
The wording was very careful to say the pursuit of the desire changes you. That's very different than obtaining the desire changing you.

It's not a real remedy for your comment because we could probably come up with an example where the pursuit of the desire changes you in a bad way. For example, if you're a heroin addict and you're breaking into homes to steal things so that you can buy drugs. But I think it does help narrow the scope enough that the intent behind the statement becomes more clear.
by game_the0ry | 2025-12-16 21:02:31+00:00
With the exception of instagram fb marketplace, meta just looks and feels like a chaotic, sloppy mess of a company. Between the incoherent and buggy garbage that is ads manager (something I have used for my own business) and zuck saying he laid off poor performers (effectively screwing those people for no reason), it all looks like poor business operations. So its no surprise they can't figure out AI even with all the ads profits and brain power.

An adult needs to show up, put zuck back in a corner and right the ship.
by Askiir | 2025-12-16 21:03:06+00:00
The way I do it is write tests, then commit just the tests. Then when you have any agent running and generating code, before committing/reviewing you can check the diff for any changes to files containing tests. The commit panel in Jetbrains for example will enumerate any changed files, and I can easily take a peek there and see if any testing files were changed in the process. It's not necessarily about having a separate codebase.
Show HN: Deterministic PCIe Diagnostics for GPUs on Linux
by gpu_systems | 2025-12-16 21:03:25+00:00
I built a small Linux tool to deterministically verify GPU PCIe link health and bandwidth.

It reports: - Negotiated PCIe generation and width - Peak Host→Device and Device→Host memcpy bandwidth - Sustained PCIe TX/RX utilization via NVML - A rule-based verdict derived from observable hardware data only

This exists because PCIe issues (Gen downgrades, reduced lane width, risers, bifurcation) are often invisible at the application layer and can’t be fixed by kernel tuning or async overlap.

Linux-only: it relies on sysfs and PCIe AER exposure that Windows does not provide.
by dingnuts | 2025-12-16 21:04:12+00:00
Honestly the comment is so poorly written I can't figure out what the GP is trying to say. They think agent coding is going to replace all existing coding because the only reason manual coding is hanging on is because engineers can't convince middle management to let them use it?

in my experience it's management forcing agent workflows on reluctant senior engineers who are afraid to speak up about how poor the tools are, as it would be career suicide to argue that agentic workflows are anything less than the inevitable future.

Isn't there something wrong with that? I have extreme suspicion towards any tech or movement that is forced top down. How can we know the effectiveness of these tools if only praising voices are allowed? Why is the inevitability of this tech a foregone conclusion?

The critical voices are self censoring
by sans_souse | 2025-12-16 21:04:13+00:00
Excellent piece, easy to read and I agree on most until this part:

'The surveys all point the same direction: rising anxiety, rising depression, rising rates of loneliness even as we've never been more connected. How could this be, when we've gotten so good at giving people what they want? Maybe because we've gotten good at giving people what they want in a way that prevents them from wanting anything worth having'

As much as it is true we are technologically more connected than ever, I would argue that much was taken away in parallel to what was given. The capabilities came to fruit but at the same time the governance and politics thinned out much of our desires at their core; ie now we're being told we want more and more because it's been determined we can't have certain things.
by ewoodrich | 2025-12-16 21:04:15+00:00
IMHO your comment would have been far more constructive if you actually explained what "copium factory" is supposed to mean in this context.

As it stands I literally have no idea what you are trying to say except for the broad dismissal of the post as pop psychology. (And yes I'm familiar with the word, it still just doesn't make any sense to me).
by neom | 2025-12-16 21:04:20+00:00
Thanks for taking the time for this comment. Although not as involved as you (kudos) - I have done the same some 20 years ago, and again 10 years ago, although maybe at the time I didn't call them values. I've had some deep conversations with people about this type of thing throughout my life and I've found it interesting (although I suppose not surprising) how much nihilism is out there, people who I otherwise like will act in an off way sometimes or say something weird, and sometimes I get a chance to dig in and I've found many people just think, life is awful and nobody else is living a moral or just life, nobody else has values, so why should I? However then I also think, well they probably do have values they're just no the same as mine! Anyway, I thought it was interesting you mentioned it and I appreciate you providing the thoughts. :)
Show HN: A24z – AI Engineering Ops Platform
by brandonin | 2025-12-16 21:04:36+00:00
Hey HN! I am the founder at a24z.

I have been doing software development for over a decade in healthcare, education, and non-profits.

I recently started a24z after talking to over 200 engineering leaders about their largest pain points.

It originally started off as an Observability tool so that engineering leaders can see adoption, ROI, etc. for their engineering organizations, but as teams started to evolve with the way they utilize AI Coding tools, so did the platform I was building.

We are now looking at features that do security scanning, autonomously upgrading your Claude Code with Skills, Plugins, and guardrails to help optimize engineering teams.

Think of us as an in-house Platform Engineer.
by sangeeth96 | 2025-12-16 21:05:00+00:00
I have fond memories of using GitLab CI in 2018–2019 and I'm still pissed GitHub didn't just life and shift that kind of a model. Not sure about the particular issues you're running into but I remember GitLab supporting a lot of the YAML features missing in GitHub like anchors in order to build/compose stuff.

Oh and turns out GitHub also has that now: https://github.blog/changelog/2025-09-18-actions-yaml-anchor...

UPDATE: okay they botched it https://frenck.dev/github-actions-yaml-anchors-aliases-merge...
by JoshTriplett | 2025-12-16 21:05:19+00:00
> actively looking to subvert software freedom

Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by apathy. We have, unfortunately, reached a point where most people writing new software default to permissive and don't sufficiently care about copyleft. I wish we hadn't, but we have. This is not unique to Rust.

Ironically, we're better off when existing projects migrate to Rust, because they'll keep their licenses, while rewrites do what most new software does, and default to permissive.

Personally, I'm happy every time I see a new crate using the GPL.

> GPL-hostile

Rust is not GPL-hostile. LLVM was the available tool that spawned a renaissance of new languages; GCC wasn't. The compiler uses a permissive license; I personally wish it were GPL, but it isn't. But there's nothing at all wrong with writing GPLed software in Rust, and people do.

> having a Microsoft dependency through Github registration is aggravating

This one bugs a lot of us, and it is being worked on.
by KaiserPro | 2025-12-16 21:05:29+00:00
As someone who's startup got bought out by facebook, many years ago, its not surprising to read.

The politics surrounding zuck is wild. Cox left then came back, mainly because hes not actually that good, and has terrible judgement when it comes to features and how to shape effective teams (just throw people at it, features should be purely metric based, or a straight copy of competitors products. There is no cohesive vision of what a meta product should be. Just churn out microchanges until something sticks)

Zuck also has pretty bad people instincts. He is surrounded by egomangics, and Boz is probably the sanest out of all of them. Its a shame he doesn't lead engineering that well (ie getting into fights with plebs in the comments about food and shuttle timings)

He also is very keen on flashy new toys, and features, but has no instinct for making a product. He still thinks that incremental slightly broken features, but rapidly released is better than a product that works well, is integrated and has a simple well tested UI pathway for everything. Common UI language? Pah, thats for android/apple. I want that new shiny feature, I want it now. What do you mean its buggy? just pull people off that other project to fix it. No, the other one.

Schrep also was an in insightful and good leader.

Sheryl is a brilliant actor that helped shape the culture of the place. However there was always a tinge of poison, which was mostly kept in check until about 2021. She went full politician and started building her own brand, and generally left a massive mess.

Zuck went full bro and decided that empathy made shit products and decided that he like the taste of engineer's tears.

but back to TBD.

The problem for them is that they have to work collaboratively with other teams in facebook to get the stuff the need. The problem is, the teams/orgs they are fighting against have survived by competing against others ruthlessly. TBD doesn't have the experience to fight the old timers, they also don't really have experience in making frontier models.

They are also being swamped by non-ML engineers looking to ride the wave of empire building. this generates lots of alignment meetings and no progress.
by mindcrash | 2025-12-16 21:05:29+00:00
A 2025 Linux kernel with all recent features is able to boot on a system from 2006.

Likewise the Windows 11 (which is just a rebranded Windows 10, just look at the full build number which should start with 10.x) kernel could boot systems from ~2017 onwards. Maybe with some kernel features disabled which most (if not all) Windows 10 users would not miss anyway, but it could still boot without any issues. Those running a Rufus-patched Windows 11 are living proof of this.

This never was a technical issue, or one which could cost them money, but a cold blooded business decision which generated thousands upon thousands of kilos of e-waste.

And for what?
by tobr | 2025-12-16 21:05:31+00:00
I have to say, I don’t understand what ”for you” means in ”best/worst possible life for you”. At first I read it roughly as ”given the fundamental unchanging circumstances of your life, such as where and when you were born, who your parents are, and your basic health” but maybe they mean something like ”in your subjective perspective on what is good/bad”?
by dmos62 | 2025-12-16 21:05:43+00:00
You think I think there isn't a difference between bias and prejudice, while I think you think there isn't a difference between prejudice and knowledge.

What I really care about is guilty-until-proven-innocent masquerading as civilized, or false-until-proven-true masquerading as scientific. The starting position should be I don't know. I may have seen cases that look like this, I might know where to look first, but I don't know what I'll find. Until I do, not before.
by sunshine-o | 2025-12-16 21:05:56+00:00
What I meant is he is a guy who have evolved in the center of the tech revolution in the 90s and 2000s. If he is not horribly bad with money he probably made a lot at least in various investments.

So I would guess $1000 was almost nothing to him. He is not really supporting anything by donating $1000.

I listened to him in a interview once, he really feel like a nice guy.
by apawloski | 2025-12-16 21:06:27+00:00
I remember you trying to defend the tariff policies as a defense against China. Do you still honestly perceive China as a threat to American power and livelihood? If so, how do you square this stance of conceding global power to China at the same time? At the very least, surely you can see the importance of global supply chains to American manufacturing that you want to protect?

I'm asking these questions specifically based on your arguments in the past. I don't understand how you can believe America can thrive in a world without allies and trade partners.
by apsurd | 2025-12-16 21:06:38+00:00
I find myself doing this for anything "work related" like slack. It's definitely a thing on Linkedin posts.

The idea is it's like TikTok for text. Short self-contained visual "things" that keep grabbing back your fading attention. I don't like it, but I like that I think about why it is and that, in a "professional" environment, it somehow (sadly) makes sense.