MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 | 2025-12-18 18:48:18+00:00
"... meaning that typosquatting may actually be underexploited."

Missing from the paper is an examination of web user behaviour

Over time, so-called "direct navigation" where the domain name, e.g., example.com, was typed into the browser address bar, has declined. By the time Google terminated "Adsense for domains" in 2012 IMO it had managed to systematically subsume most of the traffic and associated revenue from the typosquatting/domain parking racket

https://web.archive.org/web/20250320184725if_/https://domain...

With the introduction of the so-called "omnibar" or "omnibox" in Firefox^1 and Chrome, typographical errors in domain names are submitted as "searches" to a company that sells ad services. For example, Safari, Firefox, Chrome all sending search traffic to Google, LLC. From the DoJ antitrust litigation we know that Google has been paying ridiculously large sums of money to various companies for this traffic

1. Firefox originally called this the "awesome bar"

https://web.archive.org/web/20250927011424if_/https://www.cn...

Not to mention increasingly common user practice of direct navigation to a search engine webpage, e.g., google.com, then searching for the desired website, e.g., example.com

As everyone knows, one company, in some cases through acquisitions and/or anticompetitive conduct, came to control 1. search, 2. "the web browser", 3. online advertising services on the open web, 4. operating systems (mobile, "chromebook"), ...

If parked domains only get traffic from "direct navigation",^2 then it stands to reason that such traffic has declined as it has been increasingly captured by advertising-sponsored "default browsers" and, ultimately, Google. IMO, it makes sense that domain parking as a means of delivering ads and generating revenue would give way to these domains becoming unregistered or registered to malware distributers or the like

What are the registration histories for the unregistered edit distance 1 typosquatting domains. Consider the number that are "currently unregistered" versus "never before registered"

2. Perhaps the registrants are using other ways to send traffic to these domains
by rayiner | 2025-12-18 18:48:32+00:00
I think that's basically correct, but you don't even have to put it in quite those terms. Life expectancy measures are dominated by early deaths. The group of people without a college degree probably includes most of those who are likely to die early (teen moms, structurally unemployed, lumberjacks or electrical linemen, etc.) It also includes a bunch of people without those risk factors (administrative assistants, etc). So as more of the latter group get a degree, the high-risk population comprises a greater and greater share of the group without a degree.
by convolvatron | 2025-12-18 18:48:35+00:00
Base Address Register

this term can be used at a couple different points (including mappings from physical addresses to physical hardware in the memory network), but a PCI BAR is a register in the configuration space that tells the card what PCI host addresses map to internal memory regions in the card. one BAR per region.

the PCI BARs are usually configured by the driver after allocating some address space from the kernel.

DRAM BARs in the switching network are generally configured by something running at the BIOS level based on probes of memory controllers and I2C reads from the DIMMS to find out capacity.
by mrkeen | 2025-12-18 18:48:44+00:00
I don't see most PRs because they happen in other teams, but I am part of Slack channel where there are too many "oops" messages for my liking.

I.e. 1-2 times a month, there's an SQL script posted that will be run against prod to "hopefully fix data for all customers who were put into a bad state from a previous code release".

The person who posts this type of message most often is also the one running internal demos of the latest AI flows and trying to get everyone else onboard.
by freedomben | 2025-12-18 18:49:03+00:00
The cybersecurity angle is interesting, because in my experience OpenAI stuff has gotten terrible at cybersecurity because it simply refuses to do anything that can be remotely offensive (as in the opposite of "defensive"). I really thought we as an industry had learned our lesson that blocking "good guys" (aka white-hats) from offensive tools/capabilities only empowers the gray-hat/black-hats and puts us at a disadvantage. A good defense requires some offense. I sure hope they change that.
by germandiago | 2025-12-18 18:49:10+00:00
I am quite possed with the implementation of social control and restrictions that increasingly look like the only purpose is to keep power tight and half-slaving people.

I think we should all massively move to crypto, gold and such things, avoid KYC when possible and show these people that we will not go through their wishes no matter the oppressive laws they try to come up with.

They can put a few in jail. But when we are millions, what are they going to do?

Being hostile to these agendas is becoming a necessity.
by btilly | 2025-12-18 18:49:15+00:00
It's called pay-to-stay. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pay-to-stay_%28imprisonment%29 for more.

This happened in Oregon to my kind of brother in law. (Married to half sister of my half siblings - what do you call that?)

He's Native American, so the local police thought that they could target him with a BS charge. They lost. The private jail that he'd been kept in, now that they weren't getting paid by the state, sued him for the cost of keeping him. Incidentally the counter sheriff is on the board of directors for the private prison in question.

Can you spell conflict of interest? Of course you can! Can you spell corruption? That too, wow!

Can anyone do a danged thing about it? Of course not! As long as they are only targeting people that nobody likes, like Native Americans, their victims won't get the time of day in our wonderful United States of America.

(I really wish I was making this up.)
by toomuchtodo | 2025-12-18 18:49:28+00:00
6 dead after private jet crashes in North Carolina

https://apnews.com/article/plane-crash-north-carolina-c39536...

https://www.cnn.com/2025/12/18/us/north-carolina-private-jet...

https://www.wcnc.com/article/news/local/statesville-regional...

https://www.wccbcharlotte.com/2025/12/18/confirmed-plane-cra...

https://old.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/1ppuoks/plane_cra...

https://old.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/1ppwf9y/a_closer_...

https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/N257BW/history/20251...

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/563730

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Biffle
by bradley13 | 2025-12-18 18:49:33+00:00
I've seen this on some of the domains speculatively registered by companies hoping to sell them for a fortune. Pick a dictionary word, or just a short (3 or 4 letter) Domain Name. If it's not actually in use, somebody had registered it and would love to sell it for some stupid amount. In the mean time, I guess they pay the fees by renting to scammers...

I really wish the domain registrar's would prohibit speculation, but there's money to be made, so...
by LanceH | 2025-12-18 18:49:38+00:00
> It doesn't generate good tests by default though.

I agree with this.

I've found I need a whole separate cycle of test writing to get proper (in both scope and accuracy) coverage.

It does help tremendously with all the boilerplate of tests, and it seems to be quite good at setting up numerous tests for all combinations of variables. It does have to be done explicitly, though.

And you do need to mind when a test fails whether it fixes the test or the code.
by acituan | 2025-12-18 18:50:05+00:00
First problem is turning engineers into accountability sinks. This was a problem before LLMs too, but now a much bigger and structural problem with democratization of the capacity to produce plausible looking dumb code. You will be forced to underwrite more and more of that, and expected to absorb the downsides.

The root cause is the second problem; short of formal verification you can never exhaustively prove that your code works. You can demonstrate and automate that demonstration for a sensible subset of inputs and states and hope for the state of the world approximately staying that way (spoiler: it won't). This is why 100% test coverage in most cases is something bad. This is why sensible is the key operative attitude, which LLM suck at right now.

The root cause of that one is the third problem; your job is to solve a business problem. If your code is not helping the business problem, it actually is not working in the literal sense of the work. It is an artifact that does a thing, but it is not doing work. And since you're downstream of all the self-contradicting, ever changing requirements in a biased framing of a chaotic world, you can never prove or demonstrate that your code solves a business problem and that is the end state.
by vlucas | 2025-12-18 18:50:06+00:00
Not really sure how to answer this, because there are varying degrees of "self hosted" vs. "cloud hosted".

This is a Next.js app hosted on Render.com, which is a managed VPS offering similar to Heroku. BudgetSheet is also of course completely reliant on Google Cloud though with Google Apps Script and the Workspace Marketplace where it is listed.
by ShowalkKama | 2025-12-18 18:50:08+00:00
>And yet, not much has changed in that decade, right?

the performance difference between SteamOS and Windows did

>Well, other than the Steam Deck, which is a well-defined set of hardware for a specific purpose, and which is the main driver for Linux game compatibility... >And that's great! But for a random owner of random hardware. the experience is, well... same as it ever was?

the 2025 ars technica benchmark was performed on a Legion Go S, not on a steam deck
by lxgr | 2025-12-18 18:50:14+00:00
To be fair, security wasn’t even a consideration until RFCs were well into triple digits. We’re still very early, as they say.

> I have not seen a single "AI company" propose an RFC that was reviewed by the IETF and became a proper internet standard.

Why would the IETF have anything to do with LLM/agent standards? This seems like a category error. They also don’t ratify web standards, for example.
by CupricTea | 2025-12-18 18:50:44+00:00
Wow, what a nauseating subreddit. They are notorious for poisoning the well, bad faith cherrypicking to misrepresent positions, and blowing their positions completely out of proportion, all for the sole effort of smearing whoever or whatever they make a topic about.

And everything in that post are bad faith links to secondary reactionary sources.

I don't really know much about Jonathan Blow or Jai or really follow it but it's astonishing to me that anyone could possibly take anything from that toxic subreddit with any sort of seriousness.
by throwuxiytayq | 2025-12-18 18:50:51+00:00
It's weird, suspicious, and plain annoying. I like the the tool and my tests have shown it to be very powerful (if a bit rough and buggy), but this is ridiculous - I won't use it for any real world projects until this is fixed.

Then again, I wouldn't put much trust into OpenAI's handling of information either way.
by kragen | 2025-12-18 18:50:53+00:00
No, they did not. They made it free to download, but open-access† licensing would permit third parties to legally mirror it on servers that don't block access from Algeria or Switzerland or privacy-focused browsers, and so far that licensing hadn't happened. I'm happy to see that apparently it's happening today.

______

† As defined in the Berlin Declaration 22 years ago: https://openaccess.mpg.de/Berlin-Declaration
by mhitza | 2025-12-18 18:51:15+00:00
I had to use it a couple times recently in Firefox on Android, and it's a nice thing to have.

The UX is not polished, and not responsive. No indicator that translation is happening, then the interface disappears for the translation to materialize, with multisecond delays. All understandable if the model is churning my mobile CPU, but it needs a clear visual insicator that something happening
by mapontosevenths | 2025-12-18 18:51:24+00:00
The article mentions that more permissive models would be invite only. I think it's a solid approach, as long as they don't make getting one of those invites too difficult.

> "In parallel, we’re piloting invite-only trusted access to upcoming capabilities and more permissive models for vetted professionals and organizations focused on defensive cybersecurity work. We believe that this approach to deployment will balance accessibility with safety."
by arjie | 2025-12-18 18:51:32+00:00
Huh, interesting. Well, the only reasonable thing to do is to tell everyone that Apple gift cards are unsafe. I probably will do this. The problem with the “only buy from Apple Store” is that the recipient cannot ask for the source of the purchase without looking a bit ungracious.

So a blanket ban on Apple gift cards is probably the safest thing. I shall inform everyone in my extended family.
by samschooler | 2025-12-18 18:52:00+00:00
I'm going to chime in here, I think 1. This is great and Mozilla is listening to it's core fans and 2. I want Firefox to be a competitive browser. Without AI enabled features + agent mode being first class citizens, this will be a non-starter in 2 years.

I want my non-tech family members/friends to install Firefox not because I come over at Christmas, but because they want to. Because it's a browser that "just works." We can't have this if Firefox stays in the pre-ai era.

I know Mozilla doesn't have much good will right now, but hopefully with the exec shakeup, they will right the ship on making FF a great browser. While still staying the best foil to Chrome (both in browser engine, browser chrome, and extension ecosystem).
by mccoyb | 2025-12-18 18:52:21+00:00
If by "just breaks" means "refuses to write code / gives up or reverts what it does" -- yes, I've experienced that.

Experiencing that repeatedly motivated me to use it as a reviewer (which another commenter noted), a role which it is (from my experience) very good at.

I basically use it to drive Claude Code, which will nuke the codebase with abandon.
by pjmlp | 2025-12-18 18:52:35+00:00
Vulkan is not supported on game consoles, with the exception of Switch, and even there you should use NVN instead.

It is not officially supported on Windows, it works because the GPU vendors use the Installable Client Driver API, to bring their own driver stack. This was initially created for OpenGL, and nowadays sits on top of the DirectX runtime.

On the embedded space, the OSes that support graphical output many are stil focused on OpenGL ES.
by bluGill | 2025-12-18 18:52:49+00:00
Cheaper options almost always mean less jobs. I know lots of cheap places to live - in the middle of nowhere. Small towns that can't even support a gas station: the locals drive half an hour to get groceries. (they are close to their job on the farm, or at least some job that needs to be out there because the farm is there)

These places were great places for the poor. They are close to lots of people and that implies some of those people will be willing to hire you for a something cheap. It isn't a great life, but if you have very limited abilities you likely prefer to make your own choices in life vs whatever the shelters force on you. (some shelters/institutions have been very abusive in the past)
by neilgsmith | 2025-12-18 18:53:13+00:00
OP, I built this chart as a way to stress-test AI narratives using a simple structural framework.

The “thing” I’m showing is the mapping itself: it separates two questions that often get conflated: (1) how structurally aligned a public entity is with long-horizon AI value creation, and (2) how much of that story already appears to be priced in.

The x-axis (M.I.N.D.) is a composite structural-alignment score (Material, Intelligence, Network, Diversification, inspired by the “Last Economy” framing). Scores are synthesized per entity after a skills/assets/capabilities analysis and a review of analyst research, using an LLM as a structured aggregation tool rather than an oracle. Roughly speaking: Material captures control over scarce physical inputs, Intelligence reflects leverage over computation and models, Network captures ecosystem and data flywheels, and Diversification reflects exposure across multiple AI value paths.

The y-axis (valuation tension) is a rough proxy for expectation saturation. I’m treating it as a secondary signal; the primary thing I’m testing is whether structural alignment and narrative intensity decouple in interesting ways.

One weakness I’m actively unsure about is the M.I.N.D. formulation itself. Multiplying the four dimensions strongly penalizes any missing leg, which may or may not reflect how value actually compounds in AI systems. If that assumption is wrong, the framework will systematically mislead.

I’m especially interested in: - whether these four dimensions are the right ones - whether multiplication is the right way to combine them - where this framework would clearly fail

Happy to answer questions or clarify assumptions.
by shwaj | 2025-12-18 18:53:18+00:00
We don’t know that, AFAICT (after reading the Ars article and the Bluesky post). Some of the puzzles are probably reused, and other new ones using the same mechanics may have been written. I’m not sure why you’d so confidently state “Blow didn’t design these puzzles at all”… do you have something against him personally?
by Seattle3503 | 2025-12-18 18:53:25+00:00
I think the "just do it" mindset requires management who understands that follow up requests might need to clean things up and refactor. I think some engineers have been traumatized by repeated applications of "just do it" and try to avoid technical debt up front, which is really really hard unless you are a SME with years of experience on building that exact thing.
by thaumasiotes | 2025-12-18 18:53:39+00:00
You convinced me that they lack skill.

The clothing does often look good. In folio 16v ( https://www.medievalists.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Vill... ), it's been overdone and appears to be far wrinklier than fabric could support, suggesting that Jesus is embedded in some kind of strange plant.

The faces are terrible in all cases.

In general, perspective is off, anatomy is off, and you get shown things that aren't physically possible.
by palmotea | 2025-12-18 18:54:00+00:00
> is precisely that the style of code it uses in the language I'm using puts out a lot of things I consider errors based on the "middle-of-the-road" code style that it has picked up from all the code it has ingested.

That is a really good point: the output you're gonna get is going to be mediocre, because it was trained (in aggregate) on mediocrity.

So the people who gush about LLMs were probably subpar programmers to start, and the ones that complain probably tend to be better-than-average, because who would be irritated by mediocrity?

And then you have to think about the long-term social effects: the more code the mediocrity machine puts out, the more mediocre code people are exposed to, and the more mediocre habits they'll pick up and normalize. IMHO, a lot of mediocrity comes from "growing up" in an environment with poor to mediocre norms. The next generation of seniors, who have more experience being LLM operators than writing code themselves, and probably more likely to get stuck in mediocrity.

I know someone's going to make an analogy to compilers to dismiss what I'm saying: but the thing about compilers is they are typically written by very talented and experienced people who've spent a lot of time carefully reasoning about how they behave in different scenarios. That's nothing like an LLM (just imagine how bad compilers would be if they were written by a bunch of mediocre developers from an outsourcing body shop, that's an LLM).
by philistine | 2025-12-18 18:54:21+00:00
You've highlighted a very cogent comparison!

Dinosaurs in the first Jurassic Park were fairly well represented considering what we knew in the late 80s. But our knowledge of dinosaurs has grown, with feathers being the most emblematic change. Yet the Jurassic Park movies steadfastly refuse to put feathers on their 3D monsters in the current movies, because viewers do not expect feathers on the T-Rex.

We might be at that point with repainted statues. Museum visitors are now starting to expect the ugly garish colours.
by cpursley | 2025-12-18 18:54:24+00:00
Bringing Up Bebe, The Danish Way Of Parenting, The Coddling of the American Mind. These are pretty similar to Soviet style, but perhaps a bit less structured.

We are basically raising our daughter Soviet-style to the extent that we can; so far so good. It's difficult in a culture where ADHD American style of child raising is prevalent.
by yjftsjthsd-h | 2025-12-18 18:54:24+00:00
> New CEO says he's not going to remove adblockers, people suspect him for planning to remove adblockers.

New CEO says they've run the numbers and decided to not kill adblockers, leading to people asking why exactly they were running those numbers (if it was an actual ideological commitment, the numbers wouldn't matter).

> Mozilla says they'll add a killswitch for all AI features (so that the tiny but vocal anti-AI minority will be happy), and people blame them for not having it as an enable-switch.

Yes, opt-in vs opt-out is kinda an important distinction. And you're assuming that opposition is a "tiny but vocal", which - especially among people bothering to use firefox - seems unfounded. Which brings use neatly to,

> Whatever they do, they simply cannot win. I'm personally starting to suspect the main issue with Mozilla is its users.

Well, yes. If you build a userbase out of power users and folks who care about privacy and control... then you have a userbase of power users and folks who care about privacy and control. If Mozilla said up front that they were only interested in money and don't care about users, then fair enough, but don't go trumpeting how you fight for the user and then act surprised when the user holds you to that.
by asadotzler | 2025-12-18 18:54:25+00:00
involved in is meaningless. if 10 people at a table all offer their inputs, it doesn't matter if mine is the rational one, or even if I hedged against their irrationality with an inflated estimate, the 9 other estimates will dominate. That's the whole problem here, a lack of autonomy and a lack of expectations for responsibility. Make the developer responsible for the estimate, and hold them accountable for the results. Letting the organization make the estimate and then blaming an LLM for the failure is a recipe for company collapse.
by superkuh | 2025-12-18 18:54:33+00:00
This seems like a cultural mismatch more than anything. Mozilla makes software that human people use and human people use normal language rather than avoiding the non-profitable aggravation associated with emotive language that a company employee might be used to.

Look at the point that op made instead of the tone: the AI feature should be opt-in not opt-out.

That's a good point. Let's talk about that. It seems like it's a simple thing to do to show good faith that this won't be a normal corporate AI push.
by adamzwasserman | 2025-12-18 18:54:39+00:00
The debugging question has a direct answer: when you capture User State from the DOM (via manifest) and send it to pure functions on the backend, you get a perfect event source pattern.

Not only can I can tell you exactly who and what triggered any piece of HTML being sent to screen, I can rewind and replay it like a tape recorder.

The broader philosophical difference: I don't treat "state" as one thing. User State (what the user sees and expects to persist across refresh) lives in the DOM.

Auth state, db cursors, cache: backend concerns. Pure functions on the backend are deterministic; same input, same output, trivially testable.

I have no hate for React; I was a core member of the React Studio team. But for my use cases, this model gives me better debuggability, not worse.