MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Arrowmaster | 2025-12-19 06:59:01+00:00
I don't think the port names is what they were referring to.

The actual names for each data transfer level are an absolute mess.

1.x has Low Speed and Full Speed 2.0 added High Speed 3.0 is SuperSpeed (yes no space this time) 3.1 renamed 3.0 to 3.1 Gen 1 and added SuperSpeedPlus 3.2 bumped the 3.1 version numbers again and renamed all the SuperSpeeds to SuperSpeed USB xxGbps And finally they renamed them again removing the SuperSpeed and making them just USB xxGbps

USB-IF are the prime examples of "don't let engineers name things, they can't"
by lern_too_spel | 2025-12-19 06:59:04+00:00
The analysis requires understanding the total addressable market of greater fools. Bitcoin, like any speculative asset, has value as long as people believe its value will go up. When there are no more greater fools to buy in, its value stops going up, so it loses value as a speculative asset. People will sell off to buy other speculative assets, causing a price drop and accelerating sell-off from others who do not want to be bag holders until the asset reaches its intrinsic utility value. Since Bitcoin is strictly worse than alternatives as a form of payment, that value is 0. While this is the ultimate price of Bitcoin, correctly estimating when it will happen requires an understanding of the addressable market, which can change sharply as different countries implement regulation.
by acituan | 2025-12-19 07:00:55+00:00
I don't know why you'd think your analogy wasn't clear in the first place. But your analogy can't support you on the assertion that optimizations will be sophisticated and reliable enough to completely forget about the programming language underneath.

If you have any first principles thinking on why this is more likely than not, I am all ears. My epistemic bet is that it is not going to happen, or somehow if we end up there the language we will have to use to instruct them is not going to be different than any other high level programming language that the point will be moot.
by fasbiner | 2025-12-19 07:01:10+00:00
People pay the mafia protection money because it's cheaper than fighting the mob and it makes the mob go away for awhile, and in the long run, we're all dead. Most mafia-like entities don't have an inexorable existential drive to take it all, they just charge what the market will bear.

And if you think there's a definitional difference between a government, a corporation and a mafia that stands up to any objective measure and isn't based entirely on social cues and special pleading, I think that's an extraordinary claim you have no evidence for.

Go lead a maoist insurgency or don't, but the fingerwagging moral appeal is worse than useless.
by Someone | 2025-12-19 07:01:58+00:00
I think that, on the App Store, ads may be the least worse solution.

Currently, some developers try to get into your view by creating multiple similar apps, as that gets them screen space for free.

Given developers the ability to pay to have their app show above the sea of (almost) clones may revert that trend, as such developers would either have to pay for multiple adverts or to put all their money on one horse.

(It wouldn’t make the iOS App Store good, though. One thing it definitely also needs is clearer information on what features you get for free, what you can buy as add-on, and what requires a subscription)
by thesumofall | 2025-12-19 07:02:42+00:00
While obvious, it’s still interesting that its morals and values seem to derive from the texts it has ingested. Does that mean modern LLMs cannot challenge us beyond mere facts? Or does it just mean that this small model is not smart enough to escape the bias of its training data? Would it not be amazing if LLMs could challenge us on our core beliefs?
by Imagenuity | 2025-12-19 07:02:43+00:00
The App Store has one slot at the top of the search listing for a promoted app. This will change to multiple slots.

As an app developer, I used to have to outbid everyone to get the one and only spot. Now I need only outbid the top 3 bidders (or however many slots there are).

I advertised for many months back when App Store ads first started, and it was worth the expense because of higher sales. I no longer advertise because the one and only slot is far outbid what that slot is worth to me, and that I can recoup without spending a lot or raising the price for the app.

So I chose not to advertise and keep the app price lower.
by Mikhail_Edoshin | 2025-12-19 07:03:02+00:00
Technically each side needs an index plus a single bit. The bit is a counter, you increment it on every wrap. It overflows, but this is correct, we only need the last bit. Initially it is 0. By comparing the indexes and the bit you tell apart all cases and do not lose an entry.

(I think this was published in one of Llang's papers but in a rather obscure language.)
by dangus | 2025-12-19 07:03:11+00:00
It's crazy that a piece of marketing material like this isn't gated behind an advertiser portal. For a company that's been so professional and protective of its brand this is a pretty insane look. Just posting a public article telling its customers that they're getting more ads soon! Could this article not be gated to the paid developer audience?

This would be like if Disney put a press release out bragging about how Mickey Mouse was going to help sell alcohol sales inside their theme parks.
by pjmlp | 2025-12-19 07:03:39+00:00
The only software that I want to run on my TV are TV channels, and all the streaming operators, for anything else I have devices that I don't need to root.

My Android TV on the other room is equally just good enough to run Android, also not going to win any benchmarks.

Agree that the overlay menus on WebOS take their time to come up, but I am not going into them all the time for them to get into my nerves.
by globular-toast | 2025-12-19 07:04:11+00:00
This sounds like victim blaming to me. "What do you mean you don't understand how software and the internet works and thought this was just a TV?!"

If you want to make a free market argument you need to look up what a free market is. In particular, consumers need to have perfect information. Do you really think if manufacturers were obligated to make these "features" clear that most people wouldn't care?
by dangus | 2025-12-19 07:05:51+00:00
Ah, so using a different advertisement platform instead of this one.

Let me put this another way: if you want to manually kick off app updates, you literally have to see ads. App Store > Today tab (the default view) has ads. Then you hit your profile button to escape the ad center and there is your app update interface.

This has been normalized by basically all commercial OS platforms, but imagine how insanely negatively received it would be if apt upgrade or brew upgrade displayed ads before your packages downloaded.

Apple even shows ads for stuff like Apple Music/TV+/Fitness/News+ free trials in the settings pane.

And people give Microsoft shit for having ads in their platform...at least they don't show you ads in Windows Update!
by simianparrot | 2025-12-19 07:06:17+00:00
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grooming_gangs_scandal

"Can"? Sure. "Does"? Now that's debatable. Still waiting for the latest scandal to wrap up. Any day now. Surely it was the last. Surely the limp response hasn't led to more. _Surely_ arresting people for talking about it on social media hasn't led to more of it going on.
Show HN: My own stolen JavaScript Server powered by Rust
by StellaMary | 2025-12-19 07:06:49+00:00
This hobby project was created using stolen code from deno tbh. Also I have submitted my framework to TechEmpower benchmarks and other bench marks. I'm attaching the framework score for your reference.

https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=test&runid=2...
by jsrozner | 2025-12-19 07:07:46+00:00
Seriously, why can't we just have a law that makes entirely illegal the retention of any personally identifiable information in any way that is legible to the retainer.

You can store my data for me, but only encrypted, and it can be decrypted only in a sandbox. And the output of the sandbox can be sent only back to me, the user. Decrypting the personal data for any other use is illegal. If an audit shows a failure here, the company loses 1% of revenue the first time, then 2%, then 4, etc.

And companies must offer to let you store all of your own data on your own cloud machine. You just have to open a port to them with some minimum guarantees of uptime, etc. They can read/write a subset of data. The schema must be open to the user.

Any systems that have been developed from personal user data (i.e. recommendation engines, trained models) must be destroyed. Same applies: if you're caught using a system that was trained in the past on aggregated data across multiple users, you face the same percentage fines.

The only folks who maybe get a pass are public healthcare companies for medical studies.

Fixed.

(But yeah it'll never happen because most of the techies are eager to screw over everyone else for their own gain. And they'll of course tell you it's to make the services better for you.)
by vivzkestrel | 2025-12-19 07:08:00+00:00
- the frontend has a decryption module that ll show users what they want to see,

- the backend has an encryption module.

- The bots and crawlers will see the encrypted text

- Can someone who peeks deeply inside the client side code decrypt it? YES

- Will 99% of the scrapers bother doing this? NO

- The key can be anything, it could be a per session key agreed upon between the client and the server, a csrf token, or even a fixed key
by bmandale | 2025-12-19 07:08:10+00:00
Point is, a blockade in and of itself is an act of war, and will get the corresponding response. You cannot hope to just starve them out. You can go full ham if you'd like, but that will also get a corresponding response. If you just want "a bit" of war, then you need to leave them an out.

All moot now, as anyone could have predicted, but it was fun to think about.
by BLKNSLVR | 2025-12-19 07:08:50+00:00
Apple is just another runner in the race to the bottom, and they're trying their best to catch up to 'the leaders'.

One thing I've noticed with the Play Store is that top-level advertised app results are, more often than not, totally unrelated to what I searched for, and therefore completely useless as both a suggestion to the user and an 'opportunity' for the app creator. In fact, it usually invokes a 'this app must be a scam' response from me.

Thank you, Apple, for increasing the number of opportunities for getting scammed and manipulated on your platform. I will be telling my friends.
by nottorp | 2025-12-19 07:10:32+00:00
> One of the differentiators between iOS and Google was a lack of ads

Newsflash: the first slot in an app store search is an ad that is not marked as such. Your extra $100 are already wasted.

Here's a nice ad I ran into recently:

https://imgur.com/a/sq1HFHK

I was trying to install microsoft authenticator and the first "result"... I don't want to know what that is.

If they add more ads at the top I suppose I'll have to only use external searches to install apps.
by taproottap | 2025-12-19 07:11:06+00:00
Being incompetent and going beyond the requirements? The point is to have a minimum viable legal complication to put him into process that could convert to extradition while preferably having some anonymity requirements to hinder public scrutiny.

It is hard to criticize what works, but the second witness appears to be their asset.. Managing a vulnerable person into a situation and then into filing a complaint.
by lucas_membrane | 2025-12-19 07:11:32+00:00
I just found out that if one is developing a wxPython app, this:

menuFont = wx.Font(12, wx.DEFAULT, wx.NORMAL, wx.NORMAL) # 12pt font

Will be flagged as an error by ty, wx.DEFAULT and wx.NORMAL being some kind of wxPython place holder that wxPython can interpret into a value later on, not a value just yet. Can you get past that kind of late binding?
by blagie | 2025-12-19 07:13:50+00:00
For future ML developers: A post like this should include system requirements.

It's not clear from the blog post, the git page, and most other places if this will run on, even in big-O:

* CPU

* 16GB GPU

* 240GB server (of the type most business can afford)

* Meta/Google/Open AI/Anthropic-style data center
by auxiliarymoose | 2025-12-19 07:14:28+00:00
Yes. Much better to handle all untrusted data safely rather than try to transform untrusted data into trusted data.

I found this page a helpful summary of ways to prevent SVG XSS: https://digi.ninja/blog/svg_xss.php

Notably, the sanitization option is risky because one sanitizer's definition of "safe" might not actually be "safe" for all clients and usages.

Plus as soon as you start sanitizing data entered by users, you risk accidentally sanitizing out legitimate customer data (Say you are making a DropBox-like fileshare and a customer's workflow relies on embedding scripts in an SVG file to e.g. make interactive self-contained graphics. Maybe not a great idea, but that is for the customer to decide, and a sanitization script would lose user data. Consider for example that GitHub does not sanitize JavaScript out of HTML files in git repositories.)
by jpgvm | 2025-12-19 07:14:32+00:00
They didn't invent LiPo (and you probably don't want those in a car), nor did they invent LFP (LiFePO4) but they did license it when no one else wanted to and turned it into probably the best EV battery tech you can buy today. They didn't innovate a ton on the chemistry but they did on the packaging side, BYD and CATLs structural pack designs exploit the low thermal runaway characteristics in a way that wouldn't be safe for NMC etc to reach near parity on density but with better longevity and cost.

They will be the first to sodium ion and solid state though.
by InterlooperX | 2025-12-19 07:14:41+00:00
Still, with Point 1) I wonder what exactly was happening. To think straight away "suspected fraud/criminal activity" for merely entering a voucher code a second time?

As a sane person I would expect a mere popup saying "Voucher code was already redeemed. try another one" Nothing more.

The ONLY other thing I can currently think of why Apple straight away went to "criminal" would be that the brick and mortar store failed to activate the card when they sold it.

You know, someone shoplifts such a card thinking they got it made. Even though you'd think everybody should know that the code you scratch of that card is only active after the clerk at the register did his thing.

If Apple then receives this voucher code that they must have in their databases but it has a big "not activated flag" next to it, THEN I could start to believe why they would lock down the account that tried to redeem, it.

And even then it seems iffy. Because how should I as the consumer know if the clerk did everything right with the activation?
by unsungNovelty | 2025-12-19 07:15:45+00:00
Billions were spent in the last 5+ years saying AI can do coding. Increase speed. Reduce headcount. Remove processes. It's irritating to see that people are NOW changing the narrative of... You need to review the code... You need test it...

Devs already know this. Tell this to Managers, CEOs and non-engineers who believed billions worth of marketing BS. Cos devs don't have voice most of the time. They set the timelines. The want to push this end results to their team/company. So that is the constraints devs are working with. So to them, NOT to us Simon. WE KNOW! :)
by mort96 | 2025-12-19 07:16:06+00:00
I mean sure, that would seem suspicious. But not suspicious enough that I'd likely have caught the problem. It's not that far fetched that Intel may occasionally make new CPUs for older sockets, and when Intel's documentation for the motherboard says "uses socket FCLGA2011" and Intel's documentation for the CPU says "uses socket FCLGA2011", I too would have assumed that they use the same socket.
by al_borland | 2025-12-19 07:16:27+00:00
It’s still early. The model for AI that will seem as if it was inevitable in 10 years is likely something we haven’t seen yet. There are a ton of chatbots and they are all in the App Store. Apple brings nothing to the table by doing another chatbot, and their users can still use all of them. I don’t see why everyone seems to harp on that so much.

Where Apple can do something useful is using AI to integrate solutions to real world stuff throughout the OS. These features are rarely flashy, but they become an indispensable part of people’s daily workflow.

Current LLMs also seem to have a much higher tolerance for hallucinations than Apple does. I’d rather wait for something good and reliable than have them rush out a copy-cat chatbot that lies to me. People are much more forgiving with OpenAI than they’d be with Apple.
by cess11 | 2025-12-19 07:16:36+00:00
I'm not all that familiar with the intricacies of this industry but it seems they have at least one corporation with ambitions in this area:

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3333641/chin...

That mention of "quantum" seems suspicious, but it's beyond me to judge whether their presentations are credible:

http://lumi-universe.com/?about_33/

If they actually produce machines that can do ~14 nm stuff on "desktop" sized equipment, perhaps we'll see a lot of it eventually. As far as I can remember a lot of decent processing and storage chips were made with ~14 nm processes over the last decade or so.
by gspr | 2025-12-19 07:17:40+00:00
> For example a Natural Gas plant that emits CO2 is not even remotely "dirty" the way that a Coal plant is.

Wait, are you saying that because there is more than one way to be dirty (I agree, there is), then something that is (far) less dirty by being dirty in fewer of those ways can't possibly be called dirty at all? I really struggle with this logic.
by vintermann | 2025-12-19 07:18:33+00:00
Because the problem of bad faith attacks can only get worse if you fold every time.

Sooner or later society has to come emotionally to terms with the fact that other times and places value things completely different from us, hold as important things we don't care about and are indifferent to things we do care about.

Intellectually I'm sure we already know, but e.g. banning old books because they have reprehensible values (or even just use nasty words) - or indeed, refusing to release a model trained on historic texts "because it could be abused" is a sign that emotionally we haven't.

It's not that it's a small deal, or should be expected to be easy. It's basically what Popper called "the strain of civilization" and posited as explanation for the totalitarianism which was rising in his time. But our values can't be so brittle that we can't even talk or think about other value systems.
by recursivecaveat | 2025-12-19 07:19:00+00:00
Just too small I think. It's neither hosted on a common forum software or worth targeting specifically. If you turn on `showdead` in your profile you can see the caught spam. It's usually pretty thin on the ground, and when it does it occur there's almost no diversity, suggesting just 1 bot source being interested in the site at a time.
by jauntywundrkind | 2025-12-19 07:19:16+00:00
I dunno man. The past was a shit show & you seem extremely resistant to trying at all.

I struggle to figure out what it is that the systemd haters club actually struggles with, what is actually the hard parts. I do in fact sometimes use a 3 line .service file and it works fine. It feels like there is a radically conservative anti progress anti learning anti trying force that is extremely vocal that shows up all the time everywhere in any thread, to protest against doing anything or learning anything. I really really am so eager to find the learnable lessons, to find the hard spots, but it's almost entirely the same low grade discursive trashing with no constructive or informative input.

It feels like you use emotional warfare rather than reason. The culture I am from is powerless against that if that's all you bring but I also feel no respect for a culture that is so unable to equivocate what the fuck it's problems actually are. Imo we all need a social defense against complaints that are wildly vacuous & unspecific. Imo you are not meeting any baselines for taking your whinges seriously.
by dtech | 2025-12-19 07:19:48+00:00
I don't think those cables are in spec, and there are a lot of faulty devices and chargers that don't conform to the spec creating these kinds of problem (e.g. Nintendo Switch 1). This is especially a problem with USB C.

You can maybe blame USB consortium for creating a hard spec, but usually it's just people saving $0.0001 on the BOM by omitting a resistor.
by auxiliarymoose | 2025-12-19 07:19:53+00:00
Also remember that if the untrusted SVG file is served from the same origin and is missing a `Content-Disposition: attachment` header (or a CSP that disables scripts), an attacker could upload a malicious SVG and send the SVG URL to an unsuspecting user with pretty bad consequences.

That SVG can then do things like history.replaceState() and include <foreignObject> with HTML to change the URL shown to the user away from the SVG source and show any web UI it would like.
by tavavex | 2025-12-19 07:20:09+00:00
> There may be some milquetoast books targeted by the religious but many of them are legitimately in the category of erotica

How much erotica are you seeing in the list linked above? Maybe a few could be kind of misconstrued for it, if someone was interpreting them with active hostility, but the far more obvious theme that ties them together is dealing with "heavy" themes in general - mental illness, discrimination, abuse, prostitution, suicide. Especially books that are overt in their themes and/or make the "wrong" conclusions in the eyes of the censors. You just set the rules for the argument by just filing all of that away as erotica, while most of it is anything but.

> I've never seen a religious scripture that fell into the category of erotica

That's because the hypocrisy that people argue about tends to concern things way worse than just some plain erotica. With their millennia-old standards for morality, religious texts from most religions often feature and endorse horrific acts and social standards that would without a doubt be instantly censored in schools much like the books above, if they weren't religious.

> Let's be real. The types of people who bother to bring up the supposed hypocrisy of it are very much in favor of keeping the erotica, and may very well be in favor of pushing out religious texts because of "the science" or some shit

"Being real" in this case seems to be a way of making a leading argument. I am on the side of those "types of people", and I know many more like that. The vast majority of people hold the stance of minimum book censorship, if at all possible. While I disagree with many religious books on most levels, censoring them would be equally misguided and pointless. At this point, they're important historical texts that frame a lot of how our society works. Anyone who wishes to access them should be able to do so, as should be the case with most other information.

> I know some people have said that they had trouble finding a bible in their library on YouTube

I don't know if YouTube content, especially from people who no doubt were looking for this specific conclusion, is enough to convince me that the most printed document in existence is suddenly impossible to find nowadays.

> Somehow I doubt it was merely a case of them all being checked out either

This is the crux of your argument, and you leave it up to subjective doubting? How many libraries have banned religious books as policy, rather than just having them vaguely be unavailable at some specific point in time?

Every day, hundreds if not thousands of these books are given away for free, on a range of anything from charity to forcing them down people's throats. The argument for this extreme of a level of anti-Christian persecution and censorship in the most religious country in the West isn't looking very good.