MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jcynix | 2025-12-03 09:15:35+00:00
> retried 1/2/4/8 Minuten apart

That's generally not very clever, as it will impose an unneeded burden on a receiving server which actually has temporary resource problems, and it will collide with greylisting, for example.

RFC 5321 states in section "4.5.4.1. Sending Strategy" that the retry interval should be at least 30 minutes, while the give-up time needs to be at least 4–5 days:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5321#section-4.5.4
by kelnos | 2025-12-03 09:16:05+00:00
I think that's a little bit of a weird way to look at the probabilities. Sure, for a one-off activity I might look at 1 in 7,700,000 and decide that's an acceptable risk. But many people in the US take several car rides per day.

At, say, 4 rides per day, that's about a 1 in 5300 chance of death over a single year. That's still small, but not that small. Someone in a decent-sized town or city could expect to lose someone they know once every few years with those odds.
by herbst | 2025-12-03 09:16:15+00:00
Not even a fifth. However other than the cold trading war with the US we haven't been in any war situation for a while.

And we don't exactly need military against you guys. We attack with rolex and suited super rich

Edit:// if Russia is such an easy problem? How comes orange man did nothing so far even thought he spends days talking about how he did?

We are also actually the main sponsor for America by capita. (As in owning state papers and your dept) So essentially we finance you guys to do the dirty stuff!?
by latexr | 2025-12-03 09:16:29+00:00
The original post was specifically about technical grievances, “MS tools being used by the baddies” was mentioned only in passing.

https://ziglang.org/news/migrating-from-github-to-codeberg/

> Putting aside GitHub’s relationship with ICE

That was the extent of it. Six words.

Furthermore, this submission is an independent post, not from Zig, reporting on the original and adding more context.

> To use a great quote "either do or don't, but I got places to be".

What exactly is your complaint? The move had already been completed at the time of the original Zig post. They did do it.

There’s no incongruence between posts. The nature of your discontent or how it could possibly affect you isn’t clear in the slightest.
by gherkinnn | 2025-12-03 09:17:11+00:00
I remember, maybe 2-3 years ago, chuckling at Google with their Bard naming and being late to the game and so on. It seems like I was very wrong and that they caught up quickly enough. I was also wrong in thinking MS doing well, when their recent Copilot moves across Office, Windows, and GitHub have been a joke.
by gynvael | 2025-12-03 09:17:17+00:00
Yeah, we need to onboard more Print-on-Demand providers - perhaps some with easier purchase flow (this said, I have to give it to lulu that they have solid customer support, at least in my experience).

But - per your edit - the PoD option is for folks who either really want a printed Paged Out!, or want to throw some money into the project. This year we got back to finding sponsors to pay for prints to distribute them (for free) on various events - https://pagedout.institute/?page=event-prints.php - and we plan to keep increasing our presence at more events next year. So the "in the right circles" just means "one of these events".

Anyway, whichever way you choose to enjoy Paged Out! - bought, received for free, or just the PDF version - glad to have you with us :)
by some_furry | 2025-12-03 09:17:38+00:00
In addition to the malleability attack (high-S and low-S both being valid for a given value of R), ECDSA doesn't provide a property called exclusive ownership: https://soatok.blog/2023/04/03/asymmetric-cryptographic-comm...

In contrast, EdDSA (which is based on Schorr signatures) does, by construction: the public key is included in one of the hashes, which binds the signature to a particular public key.

I haven't investigated whether cryptocurrency's use of Schnorr satisfies this property or not. (Indeed, I do not care about cryptocurrency at all.) So it's an exercise to the reader if it's satisfactory or not :3
by CuriousRose | 2025-12-03 09:17:56+00:00
It would be perfectly fine as a daily - I use it for SQL Server on-prem infra that I also RDP to for SSMS 8 hours a day.

It’s clear to me it’s the best of the worst if you need to use Windows.

I daily macOS Sequoia - you don’t want my unfiltered thoughts on Tahoe.
by witheredspirit | 2025-12-03 09:18:26+00:00
This is a bogus statement. EU countries have met or surpassed defense budget goals, usually the ones that don't have the contracts in progress but the full payouts not done yet since they are still in progress. Percentage of GDP to military spending has been criticized as a bad way to measure how much military spending is done and needed. Additionally, the European countries are paying for the war while the US is taking that money and the optics of providing certain military supplies. This whole situation is just exploitation of the EU with the benefit of the US' companies.
by mothballed | 2025-12-03 09:18:49+00:00
I'll always catch hate for saying this, but the quickest way to get people into small more efficient vehicles is to eliminate public roads and make the fuckers pay whatever the market rate is for their super-sized diesel coal rolling environmental destruction machine to be on a road.

They'd quickly find out when they're not being subsidized by the general public and people actually have to pay their way to use their vehicles through tolls to people amortizing their road maintenance costs, that the smaller more pedestrian safe cars are the ones that make sense to operate.
by thefz | 2025-12-03 09:19:06+00:00
> AI renders their disagreement moot by violating the premise they shared. When your talents become training data harvested without consent, when your creative work becomes parameters in a model, you’re being used as a pure instrument.

I wonder if the "vibe coders" can fix their own code. Or find a very subtle logic error in it. Hell, I wonder if someone with access to AI can fix a bicycle if they haven't even touched a spanner.
by 9dev | 2025-12-03 09:19:49+00:00
> car design is probably a small factor

That probably is doing a lot of work here. A truck with a driver sitting so high above the street they can't physically see a child or bicycle in front of them is just an inherent risk to pedestrians and cyclists, no matter how you twist it. And don't even get me started on Cybertrucks, which are pretty much designed to cause accidents with casualties.

Even if the causal link is more complex than the numbers make it seem, acting like putting heavier and bigger vehicles with less restrictions on streets won't cause accidents is just plain dishonest.
by g-b-r | 2025-12-03 09:20:03+00:00
With three citations I was about to give in, and accept that my experience might have been limited, but then I checked those citations and... are you trolling? Or were those given you by an llm?

1. "End-To-End Arguments in System Design" (https://web.mit.edu/Saltzer/www/publications/endtoend/endtoe...) argues that it's appropriate to perform various functions at the high-level, application, ends, rather than for example leaving encryption to devices external to the hosts.

It's really a stretch to affirm that it considers "end-to-end encryption" a proper term for transport, client-server encryption.

Actually, I'd say that transport-level, origin-server -> server-destination encryption is precisely one of the things that the paper would not consider end-to-end.

2. "Analysis of the SSL 3.0 Protocol" (https://www.schneier.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/paper-ss...):

a. it doesn't "outline the plans for ssl", it's an analysis of its third version??? b. It doesn't reference "End-To-End Arguments in System Design" anywhere, and doesn't even contain the expression "end-to-end"

3. "Limitations of end-to-end encryption in secure computer networks" is mostly concerned with warning about side-channels, that they can be used to disseminate information despite encryption.

Its usage of end-to-end encryption is defined in the paper that's being criticized (https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/1499799.1499812): «The term end to-end encryption refers to data being enciphered at the source and remaining unintelligible until it deciphered at its final destination.»
by iso1631 | 2025-12-03 09:21:05+00:00
I don't see the issue with the driving standards in the photo. Road is quite wide too, and those yellow lines suggest some town area.

You do get problems in rural areas with idiots in Chelsea Tractors though. Leave them in the city -- there's no room for you in rural areas.

(For those whining about having to do the school run, just got back in my 1.6m wide car with 2 kids, 6 bags, skateboard and guitar, no problems on the 8 miles of single track road even when the lorries come the other way)
by messe | 2025-12-03 09:21:32+00:00
I was slightly wrong. You can manually mirror things, but they have removed a feature that allowed one to automatically mirror repositories hosted elsewhere. It was originally intended as an ease of migration tool, but ended up consuming too many resources.

From their FAQ:

> Why can't I mirror repositories from other code-hosting websites?

> Mirrors that pull content from other code hosting services were problematic for Codeberg. They ended up consuming a vast amount of resources (traffic, disk space) over time, as users that were experimenting with Codeberg would not delete those mirrors when leaving.

> A detailed explanation can be found in this blog post.[1]

[1]: https://blog.codeberg.org/mirror-repos-easily-created-consum...
by jacquesm | 2025-12-03 09:21:58+00:00
Your lack of understanding can not be remedied with information.

You have a habit of 'just asking questions' when in fact you are trying to steer the conversation in the direction of the conclusion that you prefer. This is not productive. If you have something to say then you can just say it without the question marks. That way people know that you are making a statement instead of pretending to be asking a question.
by kelnos | 2025-12-03 09:22:55+00:00
I'm not sure why you're responding to a measured, factual rate of death with some random weird thing that you just made up.

So ok, I'll do it too: what if reducing the size of a ball point pen by half reduces the rate of death by ball point pens by 0.01%? (Answer: you don't do it, because the benefit to doing so is low, and that measured effect could be well within the margin of error anyway.)

(And my weird made-up number sounds a lot more likely than your weird made-up number.)
by bayindirh | 2025-12-03 09:23:00+00:00
You can always use a small Hetzner server (or a free Oracle Cloud one if you are in a pinch) and install tailscale to all of your servers to create a P2P yet invisible network between your hosts. You need to protect the internet facing one properly, and set ACLs at tailscale level if you're storing anything personal on that network, though.
by robot-wrangler | 2025-12-03 09:23:18+00:00
> LLMs solve reliably entire classes of problems that are impossible to solve otherwise.

Is it really ok to have to negotiate with a toaster if it additionally works as a piano and a phone? I think not. The first step is admitting there is obviously a problem, afterwards you can think of ways to adapt.

FTR, I'm very much in favor of AI, but my enthusiasm especially for LLMs isn't unconditional. If this kind of madness is really the price of working with it in the current form, then we probably need to consider pivoting towards smaller purpose-built LMs and abandoning the "do everything" approach.
by isolli | 2025-12-03 09:23:54+00:00
"EU vehicle safety regulations have supported a 36% reduction in European road deaths since 2010. By contrast, road deaths in the US over the same period increased 30%, with pedestrian deaths up 80% and cyclist deaths up 50%."

Everyone rightfully highlights this striking statistic. But I notice a sleight of hand ("have supported" = correlation) and would like to see a breakdown of the factors that may have contributed to this divergence.
by vidarh | 2025-12-03 09:24:25+00:00
> and the routing engine was routing to smaller, specialized dumber models that cost less on inference?

That this was part of it was stated outright, except maybe that they "cost less" which was left for you to infer (sorry), in their launch announcement.

Paying for pro, and setting it to thinking all the time, I saw what seemed like significant improvements, but if your requests got (mis-)routed to one of the dumber models, it's not surprising if people were disappointed.

I think they made a big mistake in not clearly labelling the responses with which of the models responded to a given request, as it made people complain about GPT 5 in general, instead of complaining about the routing.
by krylon | 2025-12-03 09:24:51+00:00
I'm a little sad to see i386 go, but I understand the reasoning. Lots of Linux distros have gone down the same route, and I don't there hasn't been a new PC sold in the last 15 years that wasn't 64-bit.

But I am happy to read about the unification of freebsd-update and pkg.

Other than that, I don't find anything in the release notes to excite me, just more of the same goodness. Which is fine by me, I appreciate the reliability.

Thanks to everyone who made this possible! <3
by delusional | 2025-12-03 09:24:59+00:00
> having used gerrit 10 years ago there's nothing about github's PRs that I like more, today.

I love patch stack review systems. I understand why they're not more popular, they can be a bit harder to understand and more work to craft, but it's just a wonderful experience once you get them. Making my reviews work in phabricator made my patchsets in general so much better, and making my patchsets better have improved my communication skills.
by impossiblefork | 2025-12-03 09:25:05+00:00
What you'd do is that you'd write a distributed remailer where fixed-size messages are sent on fixed timeslots, possibly with some noise in when it's transmitted, with a message always being sent on its timeslot, even if a dummy message must be sent.

I've been writing a system like this in Erlang, intended to be short enough that you can take a picture of the source code and then type it in by hand in a reasonable amount of time, as a sort of protest against Chat Control. I'm not sure I'm going to release it-- after all, they haven't passed it yet, and there are all sorts of problems that this thing could needlessly accelerate, but I've started fiddling with it more intensively recently.
by arghwhat | 2025-12-03 09:25:29+00:00
I can't speak for where you live of course, but they park in pedestrian areas where I live.

It's the norm in many businesses for employees to drive their work vehicle home and park it where they live, so they're everywhere. Not as many as regular passenger cars of course, but you'll see them on any residential road. Gardeners, plumbers, electricians, delivery services, this is the norm for all of them (a perk of sorts). Even big name-brand logistics companies, as it's common for the drivers to be independent contractors owning the van themselves so home is the only place to park.

They are also used for errands. They're legal for private use proportionate to the amount of VAT paid irrespective of registration type here, so you'll see them pick up/drop off kids, do groceries, recycle bottles, etc. in such vehicles too. Pretty sure that would be just as legal where you are given familiar EU rules.
by mrweasel | 2025-12-03 09:25:33+00:00
For some reason we decided to put a great deal of jobs in the city centers. Commuting to the edge of a city and then taking public transport to office doesn't really work, unless massive amounts of money are pumped into trains, busses and trams.

There's this weird perception that Europe has excellent public transport, while in reality it only works, sort of, in a few larger cities. Everywhere else functioning in society really requires a car or assumes that you're living within biking distance of work and daycare.
by wongarsu | 2025-12-03 09:25:35+00:00
The traditional framing would be cost per flop. At some point your total costs per flop over the next 5 years will be lower if you throw out the old hardware and replace it with newer more efficient models. With traditional servers that's typically after 3-5 years, with GPUs 2-3 years sounds about right

The major reason companies keep their old GPUs around much longer with now are the supply constraints
by thaumasiotes | 2025-12-03 09:25:45+00:00
> I understand that Unicode denotes single characters for both Chinese and Japanese (and Korean outside of Hangul?) even though there are differences between how nations write these 'single' characters, so the result is a Unicode font will look like a Chinese font, or a Japanese font, but not both.

This is "Han Unification", a terrible idea from early in the development of Unicode. The idea was so bad that the affected glyphs are now also given always-Chinese and always-Japanese Unicode points, making it possible to, for example, compare a Chinese character to a Japanese character in the same document.

But the fix exists. You can specify that you have no idea what you're trying to write by coding it as U+76F4 (直). Or you can specify a Chinese character by coding U+FAA8 (直). Or you can specify a Japanese one by coding U+2F940 (直). There isn't actually a reason you'd want U+76F4 - it's just a dead, useless unicode point - but we can observe here that my default font doesn't include a glyph for either U+FAA8 or U+2F940 even though U+FAA8 is by definition identical to U+76FA (since this is a Chinese font).
by 59nadir | 2025-12-03 09:26:32+00:00
GitHub (or any repo host) is/was pretty much the only thing I care about when looking at people's applications, because it's the only thing that has anything to do with incontrovertible reality. I certainly don't give a shit about whether or where you went to university and it's unlikely that I value your tenure at some company highly unless I know the people in that company.
by jacquesm | 2025-12-03 09:26:43+00:00
What a strange question. The answer is of course 'rather not'. But those are for the most part unavoidable without society paying a (potentially) much higher price. So we have decided to accept those risks.

In this case it is another country trying to impose their 'way of life' on the rest of the world, or in this case, the EU, which has a different set of values.

That doesn't really have anything to do with having buses or trains vs cyclists, it is not a personal decision and there are many alternatives compared to US vehicles that were never designed for European (or Asian, for that matter) traffic in the first place. The USA is very car centric to the point that walking is frowned upon (I got picked up by the police in North Dakota for walking). The EU is simply not like that, and that's fine. The USA should set their own standards for car safety and so should the EU, if that leads to incompatible products I think the mantra is 'let the market sort it out'. The Japanese seem to have figured out how to make vehicles for different markets, there is no reason the USA can not do the same thing.
by 0xEF | 2025-12-03 09:26:43+00:00
Living in the US, what I find even more wild is just how many people purchase them here who have zero need to own a truck that size. It's got to be the most absurd parts of our modern cultural identity.

Even if the owner is using it as a rugged machine for hauling tools and supplies back and forth, they make for terrible work vehicles. A bed that's advertised as 6 foot actually measures about 5' 7" if you're lucky and the wheel wells eat into it so much that loading anything wider than maybe 4' just feels stupid. Nothing about it feels convenient or helpful when compared to a proper work van or a small flatbed. It's basically just a comfy exoskeleton for the driver to pickup groceries.

Meanwhile, I'm driving from site to site with a 4-cylinder hatchback full of tools in custom boxes I made getting twice the gas mileage. It gets some funny looks, but it gets the job done, which is more than I can say for most of the not-a-scratch-on-them trucks I see on the road, here.
by martijn_himself | 2025-12-03 09:26:50+00:00
This seems to be concerning but as a Dutch person who has lived in the UK for a long time the relatively recent home-grown 'fatbike' issue seems to be a much more pressing problem for Dutch road safety than this and isn't being dealt with effectively as far as I understand.

Having said that I think these American pick-ups (and large SUV's, they are part of the same problem) are a common sight here as well and should not be allowed on the road (unless maybe you can show you need one for work or business).
by johnnyanmac | 2025-12-03 09:28:19+00:00
>Most shops want software teams that are either silently embedded black boxes that you insert rough instructions into and get working software as output or an outsourced team

Well that explains why AI excacerbates this. It's all they ever wished for and they don't need to make do with that facsimile of "human interaction" anymore. It's not perfect but that's a sacrifice they are willing to make.

Or you know, they just really want to be as cheap as possible in production (hence, outsourcing).

>It seems silly to deny that it's directly related to why it's so hard to mentor or hire juniors.

I'll give a slight BOTD here after my disdain above and admit tha a small team probably isn't the best enviroment to train a junior. Not unless you either

a) truly believe that the skillet you need isn't out there, and you are willing to train it yourself to alleviate your workload, or

b) you are thinking long term efficiency and are willing to lose early productivity to power the future prosperity. Which, to be frank, is not how modern businesses operate.

And yes. Any teacher in any field (but especially education) will tell you that the star players make their day, week, and year. But the worst cases make you question your career. Our natural negativity bias makes the latter stick out more. Those in industry won't get star players as they are either filtered out by these stupid hoops or gobbled up for 100k above your budget by the big players. It's rough.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-12-03 09:28:36+00:00
> I didn't know this, but it is absolutely crazy.

It's crazy because the numbers don't line up with the theory. If you look at US traffic deaths by year, they were basically flat in terms of vehicle miles traveled between 2010 and 2019 and then took a big jump from COVID which is only now starting to come back down.

Meanwhile in Europe road fatalities were also fairly flat up until 2019, and then went down significantly from COVID.

Now we have to guess why the responses to COVID had the opposite effect in each place, but it's pretty obvious that the difference was a primarily result of COVID rather than differences in vehicle safety regulations, unless the vehicle safety regulations all changed in 2020 and everyone immediately replaced the installed base of cars everywhere overnight.
by sznio | 2025-12-03 09:30:16+00:00
Less lights is less cost. On European streets the easiest way to detect an American-designed car is that they only have one reverse light, the bare minimum. Only suitable as an indicator to the driver behind you. Ever considered trying to reverse into a parking spot without any streetlight nearby? Reversing blind is awesome!

In any European car you get two lights, not in the center but in the corners so you can actually see stuff in your side mirrors while parking.