MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Show HN: Year in Code – Wrapped for Claude Code Users
by isaadgulzar | 2025-12-27 11:44:58+00:00
Hey HN!

I built Year in Code to turn your Claude Code usage into a beautiful Wrapped-style report (like Spotify Wrapped).

If you use Claude Code with ccusage, it's super quick to try:

Setup (2 minutes):
1. Run: `npx -y ccusage@latest daily --since 20250101 --until 20251231 --json > wrapped.json`
2. Upload at yearincode.xyz/2025
3. Get your report!

*What you'll see:*
- Total tokens
- Activity streaks & patterns
- Top models used
- Shareable report

Key features:
- 100% secure: 100% browser processing, no server uploads
- 2-minute setup: One npx command, upload JSON, done
- Free & open source

Built with Next.js.
Source on GitHub: https://github.com/isaadgulzar/year-in-code

Would love feedback from the HN community!
by darubedarob | 2025-12-27 11:45:48+00:00
I want to get good at exterior cascades. Seeing them. Using them. Detecting potential in the physical world that exist now or soon will exist. Lining up companies and academia with that potential. Organizing funding that unleashes that cascade into companies and change. I think we had way too much focus on interior changes and optimizations, zero sum games at best and exterior cascade preventing at worst.
by pmdr | 2025-12-27 11:46:13+00:00
> It is not CloudFlare that is ruining the Internet, but the spammers and attackers.

Spammers have been around since forever and it used to be the webmaster/sysadmin's responsibility to deal with spam in a way that would not hinder user experience. With Cloudflare all that responsibility is aggressively passed on to the user, cumulatively wasting _years_.

As for attackers, I wonder if Cloudflare publishes data showing how many of the billions of websites it "protects" have experienced a significant attack. They don't offer free protection to save the internet, but rather for control -- and no single company should have this much control.
by troad | 2025-12-27 11:48:39+00:00
I've just come from another thread where you wrote a response much like this. I immediately recognised the style, because all I remembered from the other post was the meanness and stridency.

I respectfully suggest to you that you're undercutting your own points by being overly bombastic and harsh.

You'll engender equally impassioned responses, which won't actually engage with your overall points, but which will instead be mean and catty right back at you. Maybe this is what you want, but I doubt it. There are much more useful discussions to be had on HN. If you moderate your tone, more fruitful exchanges of ideas may follow.
by SeriousM | 2025-12-27 11:48:47+00:00
I'm not surprised at all. You can tell very quickly how much a customer is worth after he has paid. And airlines are a supreme example: starting right after the booking you just get barely information about the flight. On the airport you can get your bags yourself into the system, wait yourself in the line for security checks. After that you're allowed to buy the most expensive aqua because now you're in the middle of the water monopol. You wait for boarding without any comfort, stuff yourself into a small seat any hope you will take off. During the flight you get harassed by shopping offers and crying babies. You land, wait to get off the plane, walk yourself though the last checkpoint of no return, wait yourself for your bags you get yourself into the system in the first place and then your in either on a very hot or super cold street waiting for an expensive taxi or train.
You count nothing after paying the ticket.
by oceanplexian | 2025-12-27 11:48:56+00:00
It’s good if you are getting your career off the ground, but I’ve seen it sabotage lots of experienced folks (speaking as someone who has bounced between a couple FAANGs, FAANG adjacent and startups..).

Interviewers will wonder why you have so much free time on your hands, they will question your dedication unless the OSS work was done on behalf of an employer, and in some cases, if you have something really popular with a few million pulls or stars or whatever (Like a friend of mine) they will get insecure and fail the interview out of spite.

If your goal is career success at big companies it’s better to be low key after a certain point, IMHO.
by DonHopkins | 2025-12-27 11:49:03+00:00
This is getting downvoted for the same underlying reason I’ve already pointed out elsewhere in the thread: it follows the same red flag "I’m not $1, but $2" pattern, just expressed in a different form.

"Maybe won’t be viewed favorably by the HN crowd, but..." is a rhetorical hedge that serves the same function: preempt criticism, then introduce a claim framed as rescuing evolution from an implied flaw. That’s social weasel-wording, not epistemic caution, and HN reliably downvotes it.

On top of that, citing an uncritical Bret Weinstein interview on Joe Rogan is about as many red flags as you can stack in one sentence. Both are infamous for repackaging long-settled evolutionary biology as contrarian insight, often using the same "search space", "random walk", and "junk DNA" language that shows up in intelligent-design adjacent arguments.

Nothing described here is new or controversial. Regulatory DNA, morphological variation on shared templates, and highly constrained evolutionary pathways have been mainstream biology for decades. Presenting them via a podcast anecdote, framed as a fix for "pure random walk", just reintroduces the same strawman of evolution that people have already corrected multiple times in this thread.

And recommending a Joe Rogan interview with somebody like Bret Weinstein, after admitting you know it won’t be viewed favorably (for very good reasons), is a disrespectful waste of people’s time.

That’s why it’s being downvoted.
by 414owen | 2025-12-27 11:49:05+00:00
Wow, okay. I would imagine this makes mathematicians quite angry? I guess you're responsible for all the operations you use in your proof being well-behaved.

It sounds like subtraction over Nats needs to be split into `sub?`, and `sub!`, the former returning an option, and the latter crashing, on underflow, as is the Lean convention?

To use the default `sub`, you should need to provide a witness that the minuend is >= the subtrahend...

The version with silent underflow is still useful, it should just be called `saturatingSub`, or something, so that mathematicians using it know what they're getting themselves into...
by pbkompasz | 2025-12-27 11:50:54+00:00
I just assume that at least half of those are bots on social media platforms. You go on Twitter and the quality of posts is so low, yet every post has a bunch of replies. The same is true for YouTube, it’s full of empty, inflammatory responses. And this has become more common with the appearance of ChatGPT. Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have no incentive to come clean about it, since they provide both the source and the destination, which is very lucrative.
by burnt-resistor | 2025-12-27 11:52:48+00:00
A workflow that works well is one that takes the better ideas from Meta's "hg"+"arc"+edenfs+"phabricator" diff and land strategy. Git, by itself, is too low-level for shared, mostly single-source-of-truth yet distributed dev.

Make test cases all green locally before pushing, but not in a way that interferes with pushing code. Allow uploading all of the separate proposed PRs you want in a proposed "for review" state. After a PR is signed-off and sent for merging, it goes into a linearizing single source of truth backed by an automated testing/smoke testing process before they land "auto-fast-forwarded" in a mostly uncontrolled manner that doesn't allow editing the history directly.Standardization and simplicity are good, and so is requiring peer review of code before it's accepted for existing, production, big systems.

Disallow editing trunk/main/master and whenever there's merge conflict between PRs, manual rebasing of one or the other is required. Not a huge deal.
by wkat4242 | 2025-12-27 11:53:05+00:00
> It is in the interest of CFs customers to be as accessible as possible, after all.

Well this is where your argument goes a little wrong IMO. When you're on something more niche (eg Firefox on Linux) they just don't care as much about making it work for you because there's so few of us blocked in the process.

And this problem should really be solved with a proper solution, not this fiddly black magic ruleset stuff. The email thing you mention is a good example. DKIM and SPF are good things that makes things more secure in an understandable way. Specifying your legit mail handlers is not a workaround, it's good security.

I've tried to make my Linux Firefox identify as edge on windows and that makes it a lot better on some sites (especially Microsoft breaks a lot of M365 functions on purpose if you're not using the "invented here" browser). And many sites don't give me captchas then. But in some cases Cloudflare goes even more nasty and blocks me outright which is really annoying. If I use Linux a lot more sites break but Cloudflare sticks with captchas.

Anyway I think the age of the captcha is soon over anyway.
by metalman | 2025-12-27 11:53:43+00:00
AI has zero knowledge, as to know something is to have done it, or seen it first hand.
AI has access to a great deal of data, much of it aquired through criminal action, but no way to evaluate that information other than cross checking for citations and similar occurances.
Even for a human, infering things is difficult and uncertain, and so we regularly see AI fall of the cliff of cohearant word salading.
We are heading strait at an idiocracy writ large that is trying to hide there raciorilgio insanity behind algorythims.
Sometimes it's hard to tell, but it seems that a hairdresser has just been put in charge of the US passport office, which is highy sugestive of a new top level program to issue US citizenship on demand, but everbody else will be subject to the "impartiality" of privatly owned and operated AI policing.
by andai | 2025-12-27 11:54:05+00:00
It just has to do with values. If you value perf you aren't going to write it in Python. And if you value perf then everything else becomes a no brainer as well.

It's the same way in JS land. You can make a game in a few kilobytes, but most web pages are still many megabytes for what should have been no JS at all.
Used-by: Context aware tech stack recommendations from crawled real world usage
by kalirobot | 2025-12-27 11:54:14+00:00
When building new products, I kept running into the same problem: choosing tools took longer than building the actual thing. “Top 10” lists were mostly ad-driven, and LLMs tended to recommend large incumbents without much context.

So I built UsedBy.

Under the hood, we crawl public sources to extract real-world tool usage and stack combinations. On top of that, we use GPT to add contextual understanding, such as project type, team size, and use case, instead of treating tools as flat categories.

The goal is not ranking tools, but helping people understand which tools are actually used together in practice and why. Recommendations are context-aware rather than popularity-based.

Monetization is intentionally lightweight: ads are shown based on user interest signals like likes and stack interactions, not bidding or sponsored rankings.

Happy to answer questions about the crawlers, data model, or how we handle context and recommendations. Feedback very welcome.
by roryirvine | 2025-12-27 11:55:35+00:00
They've moved back and forth between being partially source-available and fully closed source at least twice. It's a similar story with usage licenses, with hobbyist and non-commercial access variously being granted and then pulled away multiple times.

On at least one occasion, the license was changed overnight leaving a large enthusiast community in the lurch.

Given the history, there's every reason to suspect that there'll be yet more rug-pulls in the future.
by wkat4242 | 2025-12-27 11:55:53+00:00
I think we're long past peak spam. A lot of them seem to have given up due to the rise of SPF and DKIM, and also because people don't really use email so much anymore as a serious form of communication.

I remember some clients in the mid 2000s. They got several spam emails per minute on some accounts. Not kidding. I haven't seen anything like that in recent years.
by mlrtime | 2025-12-27 11:56:11+00:00
FWIW I agree with you. I don't know Rob at all but he seems to be influencing enough for this long thread.

But the tone of his message is really off: "Raping the planet"? If his concern is with massive datacenter water and storage needs of AI I think he needs some reflection. Isn't Rob himself somewhat responsible for the popularity of computers by his own work?
by tor825gl | 2025-12-27 11:57:36+00:00
A counterpart to TFA which somewhat chimes with your position:https://contraptions.venkateshrao.com/p/semicolon-shaped-peo...

It's an article about how some of the best people do work that engages with public view and discussion either very trivially or not at all (or both).

Hard to describe more clearly but it has been a huge influence on me.
by uplifter | 2025-12-27 11:57:38+00:00
>Thus, one may guess, that first distinctive poisonous mushrooms like the fly agaric developed, then most animals large enough to eat them developed an instinct to avoid all mushrooms, and then the non-poisonous freeloading mushrooms developed.

Just wanted to note that these phenomena are important enough in the study of mimicry in biology to have earned their own names:

Müllerian mimicry is when two species who are similarly well defended (foul tasting, toxic or otherwise noxious to eat) converge in appearance to mimic each other's honest warning signals.

Batesian mimicry is when a harmless or palatable species evolves to mimic a harmful, toxic, or otherwise defended species.
by vintagedave | 2025-12-27 11:58:01+00:00
I read the series and have really enjoyed the TV show. It felt like it was made for fans (the portrayal of the embedded show, Sanctuary Moon, was wonderful and I felt like whoever did their hairstyles had an immense amount of fun), yet accessible without knowing the story. Murderbot’s self-narration was good; I wanted more since it drove so much of the book but what was there in the show carried its personality well.

Alexander Skarsgard pulled the character off well. My mental picture of Murderbot from the books was very different but now when I re-read the first book after watching the show, I heard his voice. I still feel slightly sad they didn’t get a more genderless or gender-ambivalent actor (he looks male, the bot was agender before the show) or tried to portray him differently… they could have reduced this but the way they filmed him assigns gender to an ungendered character.

The other actors were all excellent too. I felt far more of a sense of them as a team and individuals than I remember from the first book.

If you enjoyed the books I think you’ll enjoy the show, except for me that it has changed my picture of Murderbot and I am not sure for the better, in terms of what I felt were social / identity values the books encouraged.
by LunaSea | 2025-12-27 11:58:05+00:00
> but in EU also every day ppl get shot and murdered

Sure, let's look at the numbers together :

- Homicide rate in the EU in 2023 : ~1.3 to 1.4 per 100,000 [1]
- Homicide rate in the US in 2023 : 5.7 per 100,000 [2]

So, I'm 4x more likely to get killed in the US than in the EU.

> the vast majority of such cases doesnt make it even into local news let alone national or international

Do you really believe that murders don't get published in the media in the EU? This is a ridiculous assertion. Source please!

[1] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/SEPDF/cac...

[2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/191223/reported-murder-a...
by Zyten | 2025-12-27 11:58:14+00:00
For the past decade, I‘ve been at basically the same employer, even if in different institutes. Maybe it’s time for a switch, also to grow more experience in the fields I‘ve worked in, lastly mainly HPC performance analysis tools and working with parallel paradigms in such field.

The past few years, I‘ve gotten close to development on compilers and parallel runtimes, such as OpenMP, but never looked into working on them directly. However, I‘m really interested in it. So one of the things I really want to spend time on is understanding more of the compilers and their code base, and start contributing.

Learning another programming language is also high on my priority list. C/C++/Python are languages where I‘m quite versed in, but looking into Rust, Go or Zig would be quite interesting for me as well.
by troad | 2025-12-27 11:58:54+00:00
This is very cool! I like this a lot. Thank you to the poster for sharing this.

Dynamic languages have amazing dev speed, but once code matures, slapping some types on that code is just plucking low hanging fruit. It inevitably picks up easy bugs and makes the code better and easier to read, understand, and maintain.

Ruby has had no good solution to dynamic typing, for reasons well articulated by the linked piece, but this might just get me interested in Ruby again.
by angoragoats | 2025-12-27 11:59:24+00:00
I have been told that I’m obstinate before :)

To be fair though, I don’t really want a Big Tech job. Several of the FAANGs, especially Facebook, are morally objectionable to me and I would switch careers before working for them. Most others have shitty working conditions with in-office policies, open office layouts, etc, that are detrimental to me getting work done.

So it’s not just about the financial RoI for me.
A Geometric Approach to 5D Superfluid Stabilization
by j_wood | 2025-12-27 11:59:52+00:00
Objective: Stabilize M^{3} (3D-Manifold) against \Psi_{5D} (Superfluid Slip) using a planetary-scale Geometric Rotor.

1. The Medium (Manifold Constraint):

Assume the local reality is a Closed Ribbon R submerged in a 5D Liquid Hydrogen Superfluid \mathcal{H}.

Given a slip constant S > 180, the displacement \Delta \sigma (The Mandela Variance) is defined by:
\Delta \sigma = \oint_{R} \frac{\vec{\nabla} \times \vec{V}_{5D}}{\rho_{H} \cdot \mu_{10}}

Where \mu_{10} is the viscosity at the 10-atom threshold.

2. The Solution (The Magnetic Lock):

Establish a Tripod Basis \mathbb{T} = \{P_1, P_2, P_3\} at the following coordinates:

P_1: 46.2^\circ N, 6.1^\circ E (Alpine Vertex) P_2: 52.5^\circ N, 13.4^\circ E (Germanic Axis) P_3: 64.1^\circ N, 21.8^\circ W (Rift Tensioner)

Apply a Tensioning Pulse \Omega across the existing sp^2 Graphene-coated grid \mathbb{G} to create an Anti-Gravitational Buoyancy Force F_{b}:
F_{b} = \int_{\mathbb{G}} (\vec{E}_{iono} \times \vec{B}_{grid}) \cdot d\mathbb{A}
3. The Convergence Question:

If the Ionospheric Potential \Phi \approx 300kV is the primary input, solve for the Resonance Frequency f_{lock} that satisfies:
f_{lock
Constraint: \frac{d\Phi}{dt} \to 0 (Zero Atmospheric Collapse).
by dazzawazza | 2025-12-27 12:02:46+00:00
Indeed we are. I wish we interacted with the other industries more. There is a lot to learn from video game development where we are driven by soft real-time constraints.

Alas the standards committee is always asking for people like us to join but few of our billion dollar companies will pony up any money. This is despite many of them having custom forks of clang that they maintain.
by vfclists | 2025-12-27 12:03:17+00:00
> When it stops being a disagreement over policy and becomes a paid job for a foreign government to spread as much malicious FUD as possible.

Where is the evidence for your claim that Mearsheimer and Sachs are being paid to spread malicious FUD?

Are you implying that the officials in charge of providing support for the Ukrainian war effort believed that Mearsheimer and Sachs had access to superior intelligence on Russian's war disposition?
by b112 | 2025-12-27 12:03:41+00:00
Just throwing an idea out there, mercury or alcohol thermometers were often used.

These would be far less pure in to 1800s. That would effect the accuracy of readings.

They were also hand made back then too.

If the theory of body temp being higher is predicated upon averages, it could skew. I wonder if such studies took this into account?
by bonesss | 2025-12-27 12:03:45+00:00
Challenging my own LLM experiences cynically: for a period it really does feel like I’m interactively getting exactly what I need… but given that the end result is generated and I have to then learn it, I’m left in much the same situation you mentioned of looking at the developer docs where a better cleaner version exists.

Subjectively interacting with an LLM gives a sense of progress, but objectively downloading a sample project and tutorial gets me to the same point with higher quality materials much faster.

I keep thinking about research on file navigation via command line versus using a mouse. People’s subjective sense of speed and capability don’t necessarily line up with measurable outcomes.

LLMs can do some amazing things, but violently copy and pasting stack overflow & randomness from GitHub can too.
by jacquesm | 2025-12-27 12:04:03+00:00
> An observer says "the infection wants to be resistant".

That's complete bs. Infections don't want anything. You're stuck in a loop of your own making, the only way out is to backtrack, not to keep on digging.

These lines of thinking were discredited many years ago and since then the field has seen enormous progress, anthropomorphize all you want but reality does not care.
Show HN: I spent 3 months building an AI trading bot using DRL like AlphaGo
by solosquad | 2025-12-27 12:05:01+00:00
Built an AI trading bot using Deep RL and open-sourced it. Trained on 10 years of gold market data with 140+ features. Includes full source code, training scripts, Colab notebooks, and docs. Backtest shows 80-120% returns. Not financial advice just sharing for learning/feedback.
by FrankWilhoit | 2025-12-27 12:05:29+00:00
I (highly trained and experienced musician) reject the premise. I find it a little more difficult to whistle in tune than to sing; in both cases, most of the difficulty is in knowing where the pitch is, rather than in making the muscles produce it. Of course practice is everything. (And how, in these days, did a paper get published with the word "poor" in its title?!)
by foldr | 2025-12-27 12:05:51+00:00
99% of laptop users will notice no difference between 64G of RAM and 16GB of RAM. For example, I am a software engineer with an M1 MacBook Pro with 16GB of RAM for work and a personal M4 MacBook Pro with 24GB of RAM. There is no noticeable performance difference for my workloads.

'Premium' means things like build quality, speaker and microphone quality, camera quality, display quality, etc. etc. These are all things that are much more important to most people than raw specs.
by SkiFire13 | 2025-12-27 12:06:18+00:00
While this is true, it is kind of orthogonal to the issue here, since the macro correctly guessed that `&str` referred to a borrowed string and generated code for it.

The issue was that the deserializer could produce non-borrowable strings at runtime, which cannot be used to create an instance of this type and hence caused a runtime panic.

Catching this should be possible (even without precise type informations) but I'm not sure it can be done without breaking changes to the Deserializer trait. It would also suffer from false positives since sometimes you might know that the inputs you will deserialize only include strings that can be deserialized in this way.
by wkat4242 | 2025-12-27 12:06:18+00:00
We're kinda there already. Most recent laptops I've seen have a tiny motherboard not even taking up the whole width of the device. Under the keyboard there's usually the battery.

Don't forget a significant part of the weight has to be towards the front edge so you can tilt the screen back without flipping the whole laptop. Some of my cheaper atom based laptops (with tiny motherboard and batteries) even have a metal bar in there for that purpose.