MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by rtkwe | 2025-12-11 00:43:58+00:00
They're a bit less usable that way now. The legs are basically completely hollow these days so you're not actually able to bear much weight on the screws so the only option is stacking the items so the weight is born by whatever surface is below the "rack" at which point you could just as easily call stacking the equipment an air rack (or an iLackaRack maybe /s).
by xpe | 2025-12-11 00:44:01+00:00
> One thing this really highlights to me is how often the "boring" takes end up being the most accurate.

Would the commenter above mind sharing the method behind of their generalization? Many people would spot check maybe five items -- which is enough for our brains to start to guess at potential patterns -- and stop there.

On HN, when I see a generalization, one of my mental checklist items is to ask "what is this generalization based on?" and "If I were to look at the problem with fresh eyes, what would I conclude?".
by evilbob93 | 2025-12-11 00:44:28+00:00
I won't live long enough to care, but it seems like we are setting up for a Y2100 problem. The Y2k issue was understandable and justifiable - when a lot of the systems were built, the dominant carrier of data was an 80 column punch card or card image. Two digits was VERY expensive.

It seems we have fallen into the habit of doing 2 digit years again in a lot of cases and there isn't an architectural reason for it. Am I the only one seeing this?
by jimbokun | 2025-12-11 00:45:17+00:00
The one about LLMs and mental health is not a prediction but a current news report, the way you phrased it.

Also, the boring consistent progress case for AI plays out in the end of humans as viable economic agents requiring a complete reordering of our economic and political systems in the near future. So the “boring but right” prediction today is completely terrifying.
by samdoesnothing | 2025-12-11 00:45:36+00:00
Is your redesign live for chipscompo? Because if so, and absolutely no offence meant here, the UI looks like it was built by an intern. And fair enough, you sound like a backend guy so you can't expect perfection for frontend work. My experience with AI is that it's great at producing intern-level artifacts very quickly and that has its uses, but that certainly doesn't replace 95% of software development.

And if it's producing an intern-level artifact for your frontend, what's to say it's not producing similar quality code for everything else? Especially considering frontend is often derided as being easier than other fields of software.
by fireflash38 | 2025-12-11 00:46:00+00:00
Interesting. I don't know if you intended it, but algorithm free means no recommendations to me - even no recommended videos alongside existing videos. You want a video? You have to search for something.

I think that is a surprisingly good solution. You can still access educational information, or really whatever videos you want, but you have to actively seek them out rather than ingest whatever is spit out at you.
by thrance | 2025-12-11 00:46:15+00:00
If this attack had been carried on US soil it would have been grounds enough to justify another pointless war in the Middle East. But since it was committed by Israel unto a random Arabic country most Americans would fail to place on the map, it's "probably legal".

This is obviously terrorism. The methods are the same as terrorists, the intent is the same, the results are the same. 3000 wounded, this is extremely far from the "surgical precision" claimed by the fascist apartheid state of Israel.
by zamadatix | 2025-12-11 00:46:17+00:00
I think the point of negative returns for gaming is going above the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell + AMD 9800X3D CPU + latency optimized RAM + any decent NVMe drive. Seems to net ~1.1x more performance than a normal 5090 in the same setup (and both can be overclocked about equally). Aside from what the GPU is optimized for, the CPU in these servers being ARM based ends up adding more overhead for games (and breaks DRM) which still assume x86 on Windows/Linux.
Privacy-first budgeting tool – all data stays in localStorage, works offline
by cobrapi | 2025-12-11 00:46:34+00:00
I'm adding a budgeting app to my collection of client-side web tools. The core premise: no server, no account, no Plaid integration. All financial data lives in IndexedDB/localStorage and never leaves the browser.

Stack is straightforward—vanilla JS with WebAssembly for any heavy lifting, same approach I've used for the file converters and PDF tools I've already built. Planned feature set:

- Envelope budgeting - Recurring transactions - Cash flow projections - CSV import/export - PWA with full offline support

Business model is ads with an optional paid tier to remove them. No paywalled features. Curious if others have built local-first financial tools and what edge cases I should anticipate. Particularly interested in thoughts on:

IndexedDB storage limits for multi-year transaction history Backup/sync strategies that don't compromise the privacy model Whether anyone actually trusts browser storage for financial data long-term

Site: https://practicalwebtools.com
by Workaccount2 | 2025-12-11 00:46:53+00:00
It might seem vindictive, but these are the ads that google shows people who block all of Googles tracking or are new/blank profiles. Hear me out...

When Google has a bad/empty profile of you, advertisers don't bid on you, so it goes to the bottom feeders. Average (typically tech illiterate) people wandering through the internet mostly get ads for Tide, Chevy, and [big brand], because they pay Google much more for those well profiled users. These scam advertisers really don't pay much, but are willing to be shown to mostly anyone. They are a bit like the advertiser of last resort.

All of that is to say, if you are getting malware/scam ads from Google, it's probably because (ironically) you know what you are doing.
by shalmanese | 2025-12-11 00:47:04+00:00
I never understood why the "collaborative filtering" approach never took off with most review options. Google Maps shows you what the average person thinks is a good restaurant, meaning the rich get richer faster and tiny statistical noise converts to durable competitive advantage.

Instead, I'd love for Google to understand me well enough to show me which restaurants I would disproportionately love compared to other people based on its understanding of my taste profiles. That way, the love can be shared amongst a much wider base of restaurants and each distinctive restaurant could find its 10,000 true fans.

On top of that, it actually gives me an incentive to rate things. Right now, you only rate from some vague sense of public service instead of "this can actively improve your experience with our product".

It's not just Google Maps, Netflix used to operate on the model of deep personalization that they've slowly de-emphasized over the years. I'm still waiting for Letterboxd to introduce a feature to give me personalized film recs based on the over 1000 ratings I've given it over the years as a paying customer but they seem in no hurry to do so. Amazon used to take your purchase history into account when ordering search results but I think that's also been significantly de-emphasized.

About the only arena this is widespread is streaming music services like Spotify.
by xpe | 2025-12-11 00:47:21+00:00
> This is the best thing I've seen all month. I'm actually blown away at just how accurate it is in making up the potential front page posts.

Hold on. The future hasn't happened yet.

I think what you mean is that you are blown away at just how plausible of a prediction it is. Probably meaning that something about it meshes with ideas already kicking around your head.
by array_key_first | 2025-12-11 00:49:12+00:00
No, we should ban the technology, at least until we can somewhat verify the students understand the underlying concepts.

Like, yes, we allow calculators for highschoolers. But we'd never give a calculator to a 3rd grader learning their times tables. Because then they'd never learn that 9 * 9 is 49, and now they're permanently handicapped in math. And now, when they are in high school, the calculator doesn't even matter, because they can't do math at a basic level.

Or, consider reading. Certainly high schoolers can use audio books. But imagine if we didn't teach reading at all, and just used audio books, from kindergarten. Would anyone know how to read? I doubt it.

Learning is unique in that it builds on lower-level stuff. If you just skip that stuff, sure, it might look efficient - but it's not. You actually learn much less if you do that. It's not like me at my job, where if I use AI I finish a project in half the time and I'm better off. No, if I learn in half the time, I've learned less!
by Pitskhela | 2025-12-11 00:49:13+00:00
Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: Flutter, Java, Kotlin, Swift, Objective-C, React Native

Web Technologies: React.js, TypeScript, JavaScript, Node.js, Angular, Grails, Express.js

Backend, Tools & Other: REST APIs, GraphQL, Docker, Fastlane, Shorebird, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, MySQL, GIS, Firebase, Sentry, Kochava, Amplitude, Meta SDK

Résumé/CV: https://pitskhela.github.io/

Email: mailto:pitskhelauri.elene@gmail.com
by shalmanese | 2025-12-11 00:49:31+00:00
I've said for decades that Google is terrible at search in every area except Google Search. Youtube search? Terrible! Chrome history search? Abysmal! Gmail search? Atrocious! Google Maps Search? At some point, standing in a middle of a mall searching for "coffee" returned only 3 SERPs despite me standing in front of a coffeeshop that I could not get to show up.
by rpdillon | 2025-12-11 00:49:50+00:00
> "if I spent the time, risk, effort, and money to develop the pre-eminent protocol and hardware used by most TV's in the world... would I want to give that work away for free?"

Only if you want people to use it. Developing a protocol is an investment in defining the direction a technology follows; the benefits are not best accrued by charging for access to the standard, but rather by leveraging the ability to direct the trend.

The alternative is that the licensing charge causes a bunch of stupid friction and prevents the standard from being truly universal.

EDIT: Implementing a standard is enough work, paying for the privilege to do so is often a non-starter.
by codebje | 2025-12-11 00:51:28+00:00
Absolutely this. We have limits in place for usage of a bunch of this sort of stuff, from not at all to up to an hour, and we'd be constantly tested and pushed on these limits. Constantly. "But my friends are..." is the usual start to it.

Government says you can't chat with just anyone in Roblox, and suddenly it's accepted that this is just what it is. Not only that, but limits and rules on how much and when you can watch YouTube and the like are also suddenly more acceptable.

So far what my kids are saying is that this is broadly true across their peer groups. The exceptions are just that, exceptions. The peer pressure to be in on it all is lessened. And in turn, that means less push-back on boundaries set by us, because it's less of a big deal.

(And I face less of a dilemma of how much to allow to balance out the harm of not being part of the zeitgeist vs. the harm of short form, mega-corporation curated content).
by DevDesmond | 2025-12-11 00:51:31+00:00
Text is an LLMs input and output, but, under the hood, the transformer network is capable of far more than mere re-assembly and remix of text. Transformers can approximate turing completeness as their size scales, and they can encode entire algorithms in their weights. Therefore, I'd argue they can do far more than reassemble and remix. These aren't just Markov models anymore.

(I'd also argue that "understanding" and "functional brain" are unfalsifiable comparisons. What exactly distinguishes a functional brain from a turing machine? Chess once required a functional brain to play, but has now been surpassed by computation. Saying "jobs that require a human brain" is tautological without any further distinction).

Of course, LLMs are definitely missing plenty of brain skills like working in continuous time, with persistent state, with agency, in physical space, etc. But to say that an LLM "never will" is either semantic, (you might call it something other than an LLM when next generation capabilities are integrated), tautological (once it can do a human job, it's no longer a job that requires a human), or anthropocentric hubris.

That said, who knows what the time scale looks like for realizing such improvements – (decades, centuries, millennia).
by themafia | 2025-12-11 00:51:36+00:00
> This is an absurd concept when it comes to international trade.

In this case it's just wrong. I don't know what people think "e-waste" recycling actually is or what happens to their "unrepairable" units after they rid themselves of them.

> Even intellectual property is mostly meaningless outside a state.

Interestingly the Dollar is most definitely meaningful outside of our state. I think the assumption becomes, that if this is true, then using it's power to enforce trade sanctions isn't that big a stretch.

> Of course people will evade sanctions

What's less clear if they should expect their government to actively help them in this evasion or not. I think the Chinese citizens are in unique international territory here.

> what is the us going to do, invade singapore or malaysia?

Deny our exports to them. This will cost the political donor class a lot of profits. So this is why it doesn't get done.

None of this is a fait accompli. This is the result of years of intentional corruption of the core systems involved.
by array_key_first | 2025-12-11 00:52:01+00:00
It's not, because most gun death are actually from the person owning the gun or people close to them.

It's much more likely that you shoot yourself or your kid shoots you or your husband/brother/other-troubled-man has a bad day and shoots you than a criminal shooting you.

The relationship between gun deaths and guns is not correlative, it's causative. Because, surprise! Guns cause gun death.

Generally, less guns = less gun death. Which might seem like such a simple understanding that it must be naive or stupid. But no, it's actually just that simple.

On a related note, less automobiles = less automobile deaths.
by rkagerer | 2025-12-11 00:52:33+00:00
Sometimes, if they said tough luck.

Other times they turn a blind eye and choose to provide the service (and collect my money) despite the lack of agreement to some part of their standard terms and their tacit acknowledgement that I didn't accept them. On two occasions their legal team responded and said "that's fine", and once they actually fixed their ToS.

People who didn't grow up dealing with paper contracts where you could easily redline and send back for countersigning don't seem to understand that you don't just need to blindly say "yes" to everything a company tries to foist upon you.
by DaSHacka | 2025-12-11 00:53:11+00:00
Yeah, turns out the government taking a strong-arm approach to managing private industry and enforcing cultural cohesion is not necessarily a bad thing.

Half things people criticize the current administration for enforcing wouldn't fly in China either (and more), but the real and final blackpill is we really should be copying them in more ways than one.

And we don't even have things like hidden police officers stalking influencers that conveniently drop by to check on them when they show something problematic on stream. (See: Hasan's recent trip to China, where officers surrounded him to check his phone within 30 seconds of him showing a Xi Jinping meme to his stream)
by em-bee | 2025-12-11 00:53:34+00:00
before you can work on unique problems, you need to learn to solve problems that have already been solved. the problem then is that if a problem has already been solved, AI has been trained with the solution and is able to reproduce it.

think about it this way: any question or task you give to a student that is similar to a question or task that you gave students a year earlier, can be solved by applying the solutions collected from the previous year. and if that is the case, then a machine can solve those tasks too.

the amount of effort needed to design questions and tasks so that a machine can not solve them is way to big to be realistic for any subjects that are not novel. which is everything you learn in school.
by irishcoffee | 2025-12-11 00:53:34+00:00
IIRC, and I’ll try and check tomorrow, what I was able to do in the past was set breakpoints in both qtcreator and a browser, and step through both. I believe there was a web dev tools tab that showed the c++. I’ll try and verify.

I’m not a professional webdev, I was just messing around with qt+wasm for a few weeks a little while ago.
by mcswell | 2025-12-11 00:53:58+00:00
"You would be ripped apart by tides falling straight into black hole." I'm aware of that--Larry Niven "Neutron Star". (The Puppeteers reportedly wouldn't have understood, though.) That still doesn't explain why the water bulges at the side of Earth away from the Moon, because that water would be attracted toward the Moon just as much as the rock it's next to. (There's a trivial difference in mid-ocean, where the water ranges from direct contact with the ocean floor, to a few miles above it. But that's not the same as the gravitational difference of thousands of miles between the Earth's center of mass vs. the far edge.)
by mothballed | 2025-12-11 00:54:10+00:00
Show the evidence you have that it is causative rather than correlative.

>Generally, less guns = less gun death. Which might seem like such a simple understanding that it must be naive or stupid. But no, it's actually just that simple.

It's really not, in many cases it's been found anti-correlative i.e. https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/guns4.jpg
by Dylan16807 | 2025-12-11 00:54:11+00:00
> Edit: my “subtle” point was, we already know LLMs censor history. Trusting them to honestly recite historical facts is how history dies.

I mean, that's true but not very relevant. You can't trust a human to honestly recite historical facts either. Or a book.

> “The victor writes history” has never been more true.

I don't see how.
by 9rx | 2025-12-11 00:54:17+00:00
A compiler can be deterministic in some cases, but not necessarily so. A compiler for natural language cannot be deterministic, for example. It seems you're confusing what a compiler is with implementation details.

Let's get this topic back on track. What is it that you think a compiler does if not take in what you typed out for what you want and use that to generate code?
by dogemaster2028 | 2025-12-11 00:54:22+00:00
You are speculating wildly.

You don’t have to be racist. Even British can be bad spellers. And non native English speakers can be perfect English grammarians.

In America, foreigners can be citizens.

In certain polls, not all legal immigrants want America to become their shitty country they came from. Maybe that’s why they came in the first place?

What statement of mine is “fixated on nativism”?

American engineers can be bad grammarians too.
by giobox | 2025-12-11 00:54:45+00:00
> I'm also curious if say TikTok and YouTubed simply deactivated their social features? No comments, DMs, and so on for example? Would they be allowed again?

The YouTube Kids apps and services are not included in the ban for this very reason, only the "adult" YouTube app and service. I imagine Google absolutely could create a YouTube "aussie edition" that could avoid the ban for the main service.
by asveikau | 2025-12-11 00:54:54+00:00
> I couldn't figure out how to use COM or what it's purpose was.

A shorter version than the other reply:

COM allows you to have a reference counted object with callable virtual methods. You can also ask for different virtual methods at runtime (QueryInterface).

Some of the use cases include: maybe those methods are implemented in a completely different programming language that you are using, for example I think one of the historical ones is JavaScript or vbscript interacting with C++. It standardizes the virtual calls in such a way that you can throw in such an abstraction. And since reference counting happens via a virtual call, memory allocation is also up to the callee. Another historical use case is to have the calls be handled in a different process.
by heavyset_go | 2025-12-11 00:55:14+00:00
90% of all childhood sexual assaults are perpetrated by close family and friends[1].

If stranger danger is a motivating factor here, statistically, you should side-eye your close friends and family much, much more often and never leave them alone with your kids.

> But I'm pretty sure that like 50+% of interactions with family aren't crime.

You can say the same thing about social media interactions.

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/child-abuse-neglect/about/about-child-se...
by kybernetikos | 2025-12-11 00:55:30+00:00
I think a better approach might be to require that any algorithm used to suggest content to users must be made open source so that people whose world views are being shaped by the content you're feeding them can analyse how you're deciding what to show them.

I feel like there's definitely a problem here with social media and its effect on society, but our first approach should be to increase transparency and accountability, rather than to start banning things by force of law.
by jackling | 2025-12-11 00:55:41+00:00
Twelve civilians killed and 4,000 injured does not indicate a precise attack.

There is no credible figure for the number of combatants killed or injured. The Times of Israel reported that 1,500 fighters were injured. Taking these two data points together, a majority of those injured were civilians rather than combatants.

Where are you getting the claim that this was “probably the most precisely targeted large-scale military strike of the last 100 years”? That is a far-reaching assertion, especially given the lack of sources.

You say this is not a value judgment but a descriptive claim, yet the claim does not appear to be backed by facts.

(The 4000 figure) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Lebanon_electronic_device... (The 1500 figure) https://www.timesofisrael.com/a-year-on-some-lebanese-bystan... (General HRW source) https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/09/18/lebanon-exploding-pagers...
by akersten | 2025-12-11 00:55:47+00:00
So, you haven't identified any actual problems with them being on social media though. For example, were this lament that parenting is hard written 50 years ago:

> As the parent of a teenager affected by this ban (plus one who has aged past it): I wish that it had been in place 8-10 years ago, before either of my kids got introduced to Rock n' Roll. We tried to be reasonably conservative in their introduction to music and lyrics, on the rationale that it would do them no harm to delay using those for a couple of years through their early brain development. The real difficulty turned out to be the network effect of their peers having access to Rock n' Roll, which increased the social pressure (and corresponding social exclusion) to be dealing with vinyl. Not having access to The Stones, AC/DC, etc. at that point meant that they were effectively out-group, which is a Big Deal for a teenager.

> We ended up allowing them a radio earlier than we'd have liked but imposed other controls (time and space restrictions, an expectation of parental audits, etc.) These controls were imperfect, and the usual issues occurred. My assessment is that it was a net negative for the mental health of one child and neutral for the other.

I'm being a bit facetious here but my point is that everyone who is in support of this kind of Parenting-as-a-Service is not identifying any real issue the government should concern itself with. Just that kids are doing something new and sometimes scary and gosh it's just hard being a parent when they don't listen.