MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Esophagus4 | 2025-12-10 23:52:12+00:00
Jeez... this seems like another condescending HN comment that uses "source?" to discredit and demean rather than to seek genuine insight.

The commenter told you they suspect they save time, it seems like taking their experience at face value is reasonable here. Or, at least I have no reason to jump down their throat... the same way I don't jump down your throat when you say, "these tools are a waste of time in my experience." I assume that you're smart enough to have tested them out thoroughly, and I give you the benefit of the doubt.

If you want to bring up METR to show that they might be falling into the same trap, that's fine, but you can do that in a much less caustic way.

But by the way, METR also used Cursor Pro and Claude 3.5/3.7 Sonnet. Cursor had smaller context windows than today's toys and 3.7 Sonnet is no longer state of the art, so I'm not convinced the paper's conclusions are still as valid today. The latest Codex models are exponential leaps ahead of what METR tested, by even their own research.[1]

[1]https://metr.org/blog/2025-03-19-measuring-ai-ability-to-com...
by squigz | 2025-12-10 23:52:18+00:00
You continue to ignore the very glaring issue with trying to address these issues by de-anonymizing speech - that is, any such system will be easily circumvented.

Furthermore, the idea that we can't address this in any other way is wrong. We can work to combat and ban misinformation and propaganda campaigns. We can outlaw it for domestic politics. We can work with other countries where such efforts come from to stop them. We can put warnings and other labels on misinformation. To say nothing of the education angle.
by dugidugout | 2025-12-10 23:52:18+00:00
This rhetoric worries me. If you insist on degrading others at least fix it to something like:

> [They seemingly] can't think on their own without an AI [moderating]

They _literally_ can think on their own, and they _literally_ did think up a handful of prompts.

A more constructive way to make what I assume to be your point would be highlighting why this shift is meaningful and leaving the appeal to ego for yourself.
by sunshowers | 2025-12-10 23:52:19+00:00
> Rust should have done exactly one thing and do that as good as possible: be a C replacement and do that while sticking as close as possible to the C syntax.

The goal of Rust is to build reliable systems software like the kind I've worked on for the last many years, not to be a better C, the original goal of which was to be portable assembler for the PDP-11.

> Now we have something that is a halfway house between C, C++, JavaScript (Node.js, actually), Java and possibly even Ruby with a syntax that makes perl look good and with a bunch of instability thrown in for good measure.

I think Rust's syntax and semantics are both the best by some margin across any industrial language, and they are certainly much better than any of the ones you listed. Also, you missed Haskell.
by technothrasher | 2025-12-10 23:52:28+00:00
> Are we all going to be paranoid schizophrenics?

Paranoid, maybe. Schizophrenics? No. Firstly, "paranoid schizophrenia" is an outdated diagnosis. Paranoia is a common symptom of schizophrenia, but schizophrenics exhibiting paranoia are not considered to have separate mental illness from those who are not. Secondly, schizophrenia is not caused simply by psychological stress, and is associated with a large cluster of positive and negative symptoms, with paranoia being only one of them.
by pavpanchekha | 2025-12-10 23:52:58+00:00
Author here. This specific quirk of CSS is minor, and probably if CSS didn't have this quirk it'd be fine. But I'd guess that you've at least once in your life been on your phone and been browsing a website which used a really long word (or a really long line of code!) in centered text (maybe a heading) and you've scrolled right to read the whole thing. Are you sure your website doesn't have such a thing, if you have centered text somewhere?

So, yes, CSS could have fewer edge cases and workarounds---what I refer to in the post as less implicit knowledge---and then it would be simpler. But the resulting layouts would probably be worse. And a radical simplification like a constraint system would probably be even simpler and the results (I assert) would be even worse. It's fine to want a better life for browser developers, but I don't think it's unthinkable for CSS to create new edge cases and sometimes-surprising behavior if it also results in, typically, better outcomes.
by cherryteastain | 2025-12-10 23:53:28+00:00
Maduro is a corrupt dictator who holds sham elections, but that does not change the fact that he unfortunately is the president of the internationally recognized government. Will you also propose US seize Turkish or Russian freighters because Erdogan and Putin "won" elections under highly suspect circumstances?

If Putin came out in 2020 and said "I do not recognize Joe Biden as US president, he stole the election, Donald Trump was the real winner, so I am sanctioning America and seizing American LNG tankers" everyone would take that as a hostile action and even a casus belli.
by FridayoLeary | 2025-12-10 23:53:37+00:00
That's just wishful thinking.

I would argue that by going after Israel in such a blatantly biased way the ICC and the UN have fallen to precisely the sort of groups you want to use them against.

Not saying the ICC can't be useful, you would just have to massively limit the scope of their "authority" to realistic targets. I.e. South American dictators and various warlords. And of course islamic terrorists.

Plenty of international law works because it actually serves a useful purpose for states like shipping. Countries don't like domestic terrorists and crime organisations. They would also prefer africa to be developed so they can trade.
by acdha | 2025-12-10 23:53:48+00:00
This is really hard to do in practice: for example, if you block YouTube.com you just broke a ton of lesson plans which rely on students watching things like scientific materials from NASA, HHMI, etc. It turns your approval process into a source of political blowback unless it’s really fast, and it’s usually not a good idea to be in your users’ minds negatively all the time.
by 0xbadcafebee | 2025-12-10 23:54:05+00:00
> calling his predecessor Antony Blinken's decision to adopt Calibri a "wasteful" diversity move, > The department under Blinken in early January 2023 had switched to Calibri, a modern sans-serif font, > saying this was a more accessible font for people with disabilities

Man, helping disabled people is so woke. Who was the woke politician who made the government support disabled americans?
by jMyles | 2025-12-10 23:54:06+00:00
You've written this with a certain sardonic tone, seemingly in efforts to show the person to whom you're responding that their view necessarily leads to the particular brand of anarchism you're espousing.

And I must say, I find your argument and phraseology very convincing. I agree with everything you've said here; states are not imbued with any particular magic. They simply convince people to do things that, if people weren't filled with the mindset of exceptions that seem to come when engaging in public services, they'd never ever do.

I have a degree in political science, and I wish that the reading material required to get that degree displayed more of the technique you've used here.
by 0cf8612b2e1e | 2025-12-10 23:54:27+00:00
I enjoyed the argument that this is going to open up a new time point for digital forensics. Many people have doctored documents pretending to have made them in the past. Except they did not realize that the vintage software used font X, but the modern default is now Y. There have been a few court cases where essentially someone is able to say, “This font is clearly Calibri which did not exist at the time this document was supposedly printed.”

If you are a Deep Space 9 fan, this is where you get to scream, “It’s a fake!!!”
by pavpanchekha | 2025-12-10 23:54:52+00:00
Author here. I suppose it depends on what "rely on" means, but... have you ever used CSS to center text? Did you think much at all about what happens if the zoom level is high enough and the screen size small enough that the text doesn't fit? I assume not (I don't think I'd ever thought about that before I read that part of the standard), so in that sense you were relying on this behavior. I do think that in most cases where it activates, the quirk implemented by CSS probably improves the layout.
by josephg | 2025-12-10 23:54:59+00:00
You're right that I'm appealing to authority, but that doesn't make my argument invalid.

The people who decided rust has value in the kernel are linux kernel developers. Ie, traditional C developers who see value in using rust in linux. Rust in linux has caused plenty of headaches. If rust didn't add commensurate value to make the trouble worth it, it wouldn't be getting adopted.
by seabrookmx | 2025-12-10 23:55:12+00:00
I don't. What I'm saying is that the vast majority of companies are, and many of these business using IBM/RedHat/etc. products would follow the tide if not for other things in their way. I've seen it first hand where a fortune 500 kept their large IBM and SAP footprint (because the cost to migrate to something else was huge) and used AWS EKS for all the new apps.

Personally I think at their scale, self hosting and creating more interoperability between the stacks would have been a better investment but I was not CTO or an SVP so I didn't get to make those decisions.
by SpicyLemonZest | 2025-12-10 23:55:13+00:00
"Woke" is not, in fact, their words. The source article doesn't quote Rubio as saying "woke". The NY Times coverage (https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/09/us/politics/rubio-state-d...) goes into a lot more detail than Reuters, as is typical; they don't publish the full text of the order (IIUC this is common to protect sources), but they say Rubio cited a number of coordination and messaging issues, along with a metric of document accessibility requests which he says did not decrease in the Calibri era.

Again, I say this not to nitpick or to dispute that it's kinda silly, but to emphasize that this is a provocation you shouldn't and don't need to rise to. The State Department's font choices do not matter, and it will not hurt anyone nor create a bad permission structure if they use Times New Roman. The only possible way this story could become even a tiny bit consequential is if Democrats take the bait and radicalize against serifs.
by defrost | 2025-12-10 23:55:39+00:00
Why is the question;

> There's not really any plausible explanation as to [..] other than social contagion.

is a leap.

> Why would childhood referrals have become shifted

\1 Have they really shifted, or have the stats on a relatively new thing in a few countries firmed up from nothing, to bugger all, to enough to see a pattern?

\2 As to the pattern now seen - a few boys question whether they like being boys at an earlier age than a few more girls then question whether they like being girls ..

there are other factors, eg: I heard there's a "big change" in the lives of young girls at an age that coincides with a 'surge' (small numbers in a country the size of the UK) in girls exploring whether they want to be girls after all.

Social patterns, depth of communication about places existing where gender question can be asked, word of mouth, etc are factors that play a role - but they are not the sole factors at play in these very low incident observations.

My suggestion to yourself, looking at the questions you've raised and how you've framed them, is to perhaps study some epidemiology and find a mentor with first hand real world experience with low frequency data that gradually comes to light as social norms about reporting evolve - eg: SIDS data in the 1970s / 1980s.

You seem to be making a great many mistakes based on preconceptions and "feels".

If only the Dutch hadn't destroyed quite so many records in "their" East Indies .. there might be other gender frequency records to draw on <shrug>.
by tacker2000 | 2025-12-10 23:55:56+00:00
Very interesting, ive always wondered how google decides to show restaurants or other POIs if they overlap and there is a large density.

Im sure they favour the ones that use google ads, but i would not think that they are bullying places a la yelp.

Anyway its pretty crazy that nowadays your success as restaurant is so dependent on one huge platform. (… and actually, lets not forget the delivery platforms also)
by dragonwriter | 2025-12-10 23:56:19+00:00
> Yeah because normal people never have to deal with alphanumeric strings...

Natural language tends to have a high degree of disambiguating redundancy and is used to communicate between humans, who are good at making use of that. Programming languages have somewhat less of disambiguating redundancy (or in extreme cases almost none), and, most critically, are used to communicate with compilers and interpreters that have zero capacity to make use of it even when it is present.

This makes "letter looks like a digit that would rarely be used in a place where both make sense" a lot more of a problem for a font used with a programming language than a font used for a natural language.
by rvz | 2025-12-10 23:57:13+00:00
> We use deterministic algorithms because we need control and predictability. A hallucination in a portfolio allocation is a non-starter for us.

At least with this project, there is a sense of reason when knowing when you need to use LLMs instead of throwing it everywhere where it is not needed.

> My question for this crowd: Are you fine with AI running your money if the UX is good? Or do you genuinely prefer a traditional, transparent algorithmic approach? What would actually get you to pull the trigger on a trade?

IANAL but I don't think you would want a liability risk if you are unable to explain why the AI malfunctioned when managing someone else's money. Given that LLMs really cannot be held to account, you likely need lots of disclaimers on your product so that the users know what they are interacting with.

On the other hand, If you can transparently explain why the AI is not functioning as expected, if something goes wrong then that is more trustworthy than: 'We don't know where your money went as the AI hallucinated the result by misreading a single digit in the data'.
by eek2121 | 2025-12-10 23:57:36+00:00
I've never had issues at all. I use their consumer offerings (iCloud, Apple Music, Apple TV+, Apple Arcade, etc.) and I've never personally witnessed an outage or problem. I regularly transfer stuff to iCloud from my PC running Linux, and I use the email service with a custom domain that used to live on Google until Google canceled the free tier of small business and also raised prices on the paid tier.
by ml- | 2025-12-10 23:57:40+00:00
Doing something similar for a non-public project. How do you deal with remixing feeds, and the potential mix of formats (rss, atom, etc)? I need to create new feeds as well, and if its done by normalizing, sanitizing content, etc. I feel I misrepresent the original content, and probably breach the implicit license granted by syndicating via feed.

Probably very few creators care one way or another, as the links are going to the original content. Just interested if people had an opinion on the matter.
by xg15 | 2025-12-10 23:58:09+00:00
This more so, as the two countries "upgraded" their relations to an "all-weather strategic partnership":

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-02/us-venezuela-global-a...

https://english.www.gov.cn/news/202505/10/content_WS681e8bd6... (chinese state media)

I guess this will show what "all-weather" is supposed to mean. It doesn't seem to include any military support and at least others are sceptical with respect to the current situations as well:

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/3335116/china-unlike...
by pavpanchekha | 2025-12-10 23:58:26+00:00
Author here. You're right that a lot of CSS's edge cases and implicit rules stem from other choices and implicit rules that maybe need to be reconsidered. But take this logic a step further. The way text with mixed font sizes is laid out is kinda weird—should we just get rid of that? Mixed Chinese-Latin text is weird (search "idiographic baseline"); should we get rid of that? In fact, variable-size characters are weird, maybe just stick to all-Chinese? I'm joking, of course, but my point isn't that a simpler system is inconceivable, just that it would be inconvenient.
by heavyset_go | 2025-12-11 00:00:28+00:00
Companies and governments see age verification as an opportunity to hoard data for facial recognition and other ML/AI training sets.

It will always be cheaper to go with a vendor that forces you to scan your face and ID, because they will either be packaging that data for targeted advertising, selling the data to brokers, or making bank off of using it as population-wide training datasets.

Governments will want the data and cost savings, as well.

Both corporations and governments will want to use the platforms to tie online activity to real human beings.

Arguments like these end up like arguments for PGP in email: yes, in a perfect world we'd be using it, and platforms would make it easy, but the incentives aren't aligned for that perfect world to exist.
by ekjhgkejhgk | 2025-12-11 00:00:30+00:00
> the LLMs mostly used factual information to influence people

No, you see. This is how I used to think when I was a teenager.

Democracy isn't about being factually correct. It's about putting in place rules to make accumulation of power to the point that it can bend the rules themselves, very difficult.

It's not a silver lining that LLMs are persuasive by being mostly accurate, if they're used to increase the power of their owner further.
by ekipan | 2025-12-11 00:00:47+00:00
Cannot stand robot code. Thanks for the genuinely cool thing though. I hope you don't mind me rewriting, if only for my own satisfaction.

{ const s = window.scroller = {} const press = (key, code) => () => document.dispatchEvent(new KeyboardEvent('keydown', { key: key, keyCode: code, which: key, code: code, bubbles: true })); const step = () => { const div = document.querySelector('.animal-name') const name = div?.textContent.trim() if (name === 'Pando Clone') s.dir = s.left if (name === 'DNA') s.dir = s.right s.dir() } s.left = press(37, 'ArrowLeft') s.right = s.dir = press(39, 'ArrowRight') s.start = (ms) => s.ival = setInterval(step, ms) s.stop = () => clearInterval(s.ival) } scroller.start(5000)
by pavpanchekha | 2025-12-11 00:01:13+00:00
Author here—it is from Tufte CSS. I have a blog post [1] about how floats work. It is a nice example of there being unintuitive and also more-intuitive ways to achieve things in CSS. These days I believe CSS Anchor Positioning provides a simpler way to do this, but I haven't used it yet.

[1]: https://pavpanchekha.com/blog/css-floats.html
by uaksom | 2025-12-11 00:01:38+00:00
(author here) I agree that it's a lot of complexity, and I acknowledge this in the article: You can get quite far with just a bump allocator.

I didn't go into this at all, but the main benefit of this design is how well it interacts with CPU cache. This has almost no effect on the parser, because you're typically just writing the AST, not reading it. I believe that subsequent stages benefit much more from faster traversal.

(By the way, I am a huge fan of your work. Crafting interpreters was my introduction to programming languages!)
by kmeisthax | 2025-12-11 00:01:48+00:00
There's a difference between "infringing IP[1]", "stealing IP", and whatever we should call AI training. And it turns out the worse the behavior gets, the less likely the law is going to recognize it as bad.

IP infringement is what we're used to talking about. This is when I go and give a stranger a copy of some music I don't own. Or when some sketchy ass guy resells IPTV services to an entire island in Greece or whatever. They're not saying it's their work, they're just refusing to pay the appropriate licensing fee for it. And sometimes we might even agree that a license fee shouldn't have to be paid. What the Linux video driver people want is for the HDMI people to say "yes, you can tell people how to light up this video card in such a way that it successfully negotiates a connection at HDMI 2.1 bitrates", which shouldn't even be infringement at all, but here we are.

What China does is wholesale IP theft. They don't just make their own version of someone else's thing, or just do industrial espionage, they actively make an attempt to deny the original creator of their own work. This can include things like forcing foreign entities to go through a JV, or playing games with trademark law to allow domestic companies to actually take legal ownership over foreign works. This is why a lot of American companies spent time and money carrying water for Xi Jinping, despite it going against everything they claimed to stand for.

AI training doesn't fit in either mold. It's more like rugpulling human labor by turning know-how and creativity into ownable capital distinct from that of traditional copyright and patents. Copyright gives you ownership over your own work, but says nothing about having your entire craft being automated away by a robot that can turn your work into legally distinct knockoffs of it[0]. So we have an entirely new form of enclosure of the commons, where if you ever do a thing, someone else can turn that thing into their own property that everyone else can pay to rent. Like, to be clear: AI is not Napster. AI is the opposite of Napster. AI is the apotheosis of "you will own nothing and be happy".

[0] The only way that copyright claims on AI even sort of fit into recognizable harms is the fact that at some point a Facebook engineer pointed LLaMA's crawler at a torrent site. In fact, I kinda hate how this is sort of saying "well actually fair use only applies if you bought the book first". Which is a problem, because the condition of sale can be "don't make a fair use of it", and the only way to avoid that was to pirate the work and then make your fair use.

[1] As Cory Doctorow said, paraphrasing: Intellectual property is the laws that allow you to dictate the conduct of your competitors.
by tptacek | 2025-12-11 00:01:59+00:00
I don't agree, but we don't have to agree on this point to recognize the illegitimacy and coerciveness of Hezbollah and the IRGC. Even factoring Israel's most recent strikes in, the largest military losses Hezbollah has incurred in the last 10 years weren't with Israel, but rather in Syria, on behalf of the Assad regime, a client of the IRGC's, where Hezbollah (and the Lebanese security forces Hezbollah dragooned into the conflict) gleefully targeted civilian populations.
by x0x0 | 2025-12-11 00:03:08+00:00
You clearly didn't read it. A direct quote:

> At minimum, ranking algorithms with this much economic consequence should be auditable.

"At minimum". Immediately preceded by a paragraph starting by "For policy", with sentences like "If discovery now shapes small-business survival, then competition, fairness, and urban regeneration can no longer ignore platform ranking systems" or "tools of local economic policy".

That's perhaps not an outright call for regulation, but it's certainly suggesting it's warranted.
by chamomeal | 2025-12-11 00:03:24+00:00
I’ve almost moved on from online reviews. So many are fake, so many these days are slop. Half the time a 3.5 place is rated so low because people pick the most random ass reasons to slap it with 1 star.

Also I’ve decided I don’t want to live my life by following what Google says I should do as a default. Sometimes I go to a place that sucks. But that happened when I checked Google reviews anyway!!
by pavpanchekha | 2025-12-11 00:03:32+00:00
That pretty much is how CSS works! At the most basic level, Flow level is about widths down, heights up. But this basic model doesn't let you do a lot of things some people want to do, like distributing left-over space in a container equally among children (imagine a table). So then CSS added more stuff, like Flex-box, which also fundamentally works like this though adds a second pass.