MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by babypuncher | 2025-12-15 21:43:49+00:00
It's been clear to me since the very beginning of this TikTok drama, even before the war in Gaza, that it was never about TikTok being naughty; it is about TikTok not being owned by the wealthiest people in America. These people have no problem with Facebook, Instagram, et al. being naughty because they profit from it.

That's why the every proposed TikTok ban is so specific to TikTok, and never does anything to actually regulate the naughty things TikTok does, because that would mean hurting American social media companies.
by tomhow | 2025-12-15 21:44:02+00:00
I took that bit out. I only added it as an afterthought but without enough thought.

I like Crikey. I paid close attention to it right from its inception, I've known people who have written for it, I have subscribed to it at times. All I meant was it's not a mainstream outlet doing traditional reporting; it has always specialized in outsider, stir-things-up takes on issues. That's always been its reason for existing and it's a very important reason to exist.

Personally I think that sometimes it gets so wrapped up in hubris that it can be a bit holier than though and can be too willing to believe in conspiracies, because, hey, its business model is built in exposing things so it's kind-of inevitable. And I don't think it's "extremely reputable"; it's shamelessly provocative and appealing only to a particular segment of the market – that's by design.

But it's fine. I still like it and I didn't meant to trash it.
by jncfhnb | 2025-12-15 21:45:19+00:00
I haven’t seen much of the “Sub Sea Baby” drones as they call them here but the regular sea baby’s are more like boats. They move across the surface. They are remotely controlled. They have weapons besides kamikaze attacks. I would guess this is the same thing.

I don’t think they are getting “launched” and reliant on maintaining that initial velocity like one imagined torpedos either.
by infogulch | 2025-12-15 21:45:57+00:00
Now all servers can participate in Encrypted Client Hello for enhanced user privacy: if clients open TLS connections with ECH where the server IP is used in the ClientHelloOuter and the target SNI domain is in the encrypted ClientHelloInner, then eavesdroppers won't be able to read which domain the user is connecting to.

This vision still needs a several more developments to land before it actually results in an increment in user privacy, but they are possible:

1. User agents can somehow know they can connect to a host with IP SNI and ECH (a DNS record?) 2. User agents are modified to actually do this 3. User agents use encrypted DNS to look up the domain 4. Server does not combine its IP cert with it's other domain certs (SAN)
by ErroneousBosh | 2025-12-15 21:46:12+00:00
> except maybe on Ryanair or other extremely low-cost carriers.

I fly on Lauda most often, who are operated by Ryanair. You show up, you get on, you sit down, a couple of hours you get off again. A trolley comes round with drinks and snacks, but it's a short journey even with a small child. Can't you just stick an orange and a bottle of water in your bag? It's what the Austrians do.

The first time I flew over with my small son he was three, and having been up since 5am was getting a little fractious and fidgety, so I explained he was probably a bit tired and bored and maybe he'd like to eat something and have a sleep, and I'd wake him up once we were back over land.

A bit later on someone further up the plane started remonstrating with the cabin crew that they didn't have the sandwich she wanted on the trolley, eventually shouting "IF IT'S ON THE MENU YOU GAVE ME I SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE THE DAMN SANDWICH!"

Well that shut everyone up.

And in the ringing silence that followed, a little voice, with the punch and clarity that only 3-year-olds have, that Brian Blessed or Meat Loaf would have given any limb you care to mention for, piped up:

"DADDY, DOES THAT LADY NEED A SNACK AND A WEE NAP TOO?"
by mandevil | 2025-12-15 21:46:28+00:00
As I recall, that's because it's basically impossible to have a US rewards card in Europe. European authorities tightly cap interchange fees (the fees that come out of the merchant's end of the deal).

US issuers are much less regulated. In the US there are cheap cards that offer no perks and take a small (0.2-1%) cut from the merchant, and the perks cards that have lots of perks and take a bigger (3.5%) cut from the merchant. The CC companies, naturally, want more people to use perks cards so they get more of a cut, so to encourage consumers to use these cards they give some of it back to the users in the form of these rewards.

This model recently came under attack when a whole bunch of merchants brought an anti-trust lawsuit against Visa and MC for their requirement that if you wanted to accept the cheap cards you had to accept the expensive cards as well, merchants want to be able to accept the cheap cards and reject the higher tier cards. The negotiations about that settlement continue, so we'll have to see how it all shakes out, but it could result in a major limiting of American reward cards. Or maybe not, always in motion the future is.

The EU parliament passed a law capping interchange fees at 0.3% (for local personal cards, business has some other limit that I don't remember) so there is just no money to offer rewards to customers of European banks. Much better for merchants, lower prices overall mean probably better for poorer folks, worse deal for wealthy people with good credit who pay attention and pay their bills in full every month. Speaking as an American one of those people who benefit from rewards cards, I think that it is better for society to go with the European choices than the American.
by theologic | 2025-12-15 21:46:28+00:00
There is very good research to indicate that when housing costs a lot, versus geos where housing costs a little, homelessness clearly is lower. while this is not causation, the correlation is extremely clear. I think that Gregg Colburn, The University of Washington has done a good job arguing for this correlation and it's difficult to argue against it. What's nice about his research is it's not reliant on self-reported surveys to dig out these trends.

So, if somebody is inside of the house, we definitely want to try to keep them inside of the house. I also agree with your contention that when somebody hits the streets, they actually turn the drugs. And I believe the evidence points toward the ideas of this being a system That doesn't have a reverse gear on the car. If you keep somebody in the house, they won't go homeless. But if you give homeless a house or lodging, it doesn't return them back to the original function.

But one of the really interesting facts to me, which is in the study that you linked, but also in the other studies that I've red covering the same type of survey data, is almost never highlighted.

When you actually dig into the survey data, what you find out is that there is a radical problem with under employment. So let's do that math on the median monthly household income. I do understand it is a medium number, but it will give us a starting point to think about at least 50% of the individuals that are homeless.

Your study reports a median monthly household income of 960 dollars in the six months before homelessness. If that entire amount came from a single worker earning around the California statewide minimum wage at that time (about 14–15 dollars per hour in 2021–2022, ignoring higher local ordinances), that would correspond to roughly:

- 960 dollars ÷ 14 dollars/hour ≈ 69 hours per month, or about 16 hours per week. - 960 dollars ÷ 15 dollars/hour ≈ 64 hours per month, or about 15 hours per week.

For leaseholders at 1,400 dollars per month, the same rough calculation gives:

- 1,400 dollars ÷ 14 dollars/hour ≈ 100 hours per month ≈ 23 hours per week. - 1,400 dollars ÷ 15 dollars/hour ≈ 93 hours per month ≈ 21–22 hours per week.

We need to solve the job issue. If thoughtful analysis is done on this, it may actually turn out to be that the lack of lodging is a secondary issue, It may be the root issue is the inability for a sub-segment of our population to a stable 40 hour a week job that is the real Core problem.
by watwut | 2025-12-15 21:46:31+00:00
> You got As in the type of question that required demonstration of a broad swath of literature ... but that just shows you how empty the question is?

Yeah. I think that the key to achieving A is that you must not care and just let the creativity in your brain go. Thinking back, basically I did what LLM do today. You have to be able to vaguely associate plot points you vaguely remember from books you did not liked. You have to be able to write argument sounding constructions without care for how much they are true. Without feeling ashamed that you wrote something meaningless.

It is the kind of question that does not provide any meaningful insight to anything. The answer does not matter except for the grade. It wont give you any insight to literature. It does not demonstrate you understood something about the book either. That is why it is empty question - its only purpose is to prove you vaguely remember plot points.

Kids dont read for fun, but they have vague idea that books are something educational that is generally good to do. These sort of exercises will only convince them that reading books is both unfun drag and meaningless thing to do.
by Barrin92 | 2025-12-15 21:47:00+00:00
>They're radically different because they're radically different regions.

They're radically different predominantly at the street level and everyday usage, but the kind of professional English of journalists, academics and writers that the author of the article was surrounded by is very recognizable.

You can tell an American from an Australian on the beach but in a journal or article in a paper of record that's much more difficult. Higher ed English with its roots in a classical British education you can find all over the globe.
by wilg | 2025-12-15 21:47:05+00:00
This is brainrot conspiracy garbage. Preventing a geopolitical rival which we have no democratic control over from exerting algorithmic influence over our country is a no-brainer. Efforts to remove TikTok from PRC control predate the Oct 7, 2024 attacks.

Additionally, information about what was going on in Gaza was widely available and widely discussed on all social media platforms and in the mainstream media.

Additionally, if you're defending TikTok because it allowed them to amplify support for the Palestinian cause, it's interesting that TikTok themselves claim that you are wrong, as they said to the US Supreme court that "allegations that TikTok has amplified support for either side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are unfounded". Are they lying here? If so, why should we trust them with control over mass social media? If they're not lying, you are wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_TikTok_in_the_...
by em500 | 2025-12-15 21:47:12+00:00
> Sure the 4,995 unemployed might be able to afford the gizmo, but the state does not receive the same taxes. So what happens to those 4,995 unemployed people ? who is paying for their health benefits and social security (retirement) ?

So are we're simultaneously facing a big unemployment crisis, and a big shortage of health care providers and retirement care takers?
by aaplok | 2025-12-15 21:47:41+00:00
> a bit more time actually parenting

Well, "blame the parents" is as hypocritical as "think of the children". It just displaces the responsibility of excluding kids from society from the community to the parents.

Creating a safe society for everyone is one of the roles of the state/government. That is why they are granted a monopoly on violence. As you rightly say, children are members of the society and therefore they are included in that responsibility.

The Australian government should be rightly criticized for passing a law that makes being online less safe for adults. However, that doesn't mean we should dismiss the alleged aim of the law, protecting children from harmful online content. It is a real problem that deserves serious attention.
by Tangurena2 | 2025-12-15 21:47:52+00:00
> Borrowing money against their stock holdings to fund their lifestyle. Loans are not considered income and are therefore not taxable, and the interest on the loans can sometimes be used as a deduction.

A loan should definitely be a taxable event and capital gains taxes should apply to rebase the value of the stock to the market value at the time the loan is taken out. Currently, very wealthy people use the loan dodge to avoid selling stocks and since the loan isn't paid off until death (usually), estate taxes wave their hands and any gains in the stock price go away, so that the next nepo generation gets to repeat the same dodge.
by jshmrsn | 2025-12-15 21:47:57+00:00
I don’t mean to suggest it alone would tip the scales. And I agree the hope for international intervention is dimmer than it ever has been. But it would be one thing on the scales, as it has been in Ukraine as well. While there has not been direct military intervention in Ukraine, the support that has been provided relies on political popularity, and Russia’s endangering of Zaporizhzhia has contributed to the disdain of and attention towards Russia’s invention.
by PaulHoule | 2025-12-15 21:47:57+00:00
The funny thing is that I know my bully in college (another comment in this post) did time but if he got out and managed to go ‘straight’ I would celebrate him because I know just how hard it is. The person I want an apology from that he won’t give is the dean of students who told me ‘his hands are tied’ who is treated as a hero because he did a lot of great stuff for my school. I want to ask him “what would you have done if your daughter was the victim?”
by ekr____ | 2025-12-15 21:48:34+00:00
I fear this reflects two misunderstandings.

First, one of the purposes of shorter certificates is to make revocation easier in the case of misissuance. Just having certificates issued to you be shorter-lived doesn't address this, because the attacker can ask for a longer-lived certificate.

Second, creating a new browser wouldn't address the issue because sites need to have their certificates be acceptable to basically every browser, and so as long as a big fraction of the browser market (e.g., Chrome) insists on certificates being shorter-lived and will reject certificates with longer lifetimes, sites will need to get short-lived certificates, even if some other browser would accept longer lifetimes.
by jfindper | 2025-12-15 21:48:37+00:00
While I believe you're posting questions out of frustration rather than genuine curiosity, I think it's worth pointing out two things.

One: most of the reasoning is available for reading. Lots of discussion was had. If you're actually curious, I would suggest starting with the CA/B mailing group. Some conversation is in the MDSP (Mozilla's dev-security-policy) archives as well.

Two: it's good to remember that the competing interests in almost every security-related conversation is the balance between security and usability. Obviously, a 60-second lifetime is unusable. The goal is to get the overlap between secure and usable to be as big as possible.
by ViewTrick1002 | 2025-12-15 21:48:43+00:00
Are you growing things on the outside of your balcony railing? [1]

West facing is perfect, means you get to take advantage of everyone else producing cheap power during the day and optimize your own delivery for when you are home in the late afternoon/evening.

I find it curious that the entire thought of balcony solar seems to upset you?

[1]: https://solarmuseum.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/shutterst...
by roadside_picnic | 2025-12-15 21:48:58+00:00
The hexagrams can be modeled with only 6-bits, but this does not contains enough information for a proper reading of I Ching which also need to account for line changes. So there are really 4 lines: young yin, old yin, young yang, old yang.

A fundamental part of I Ching reading is the implication that each present state is in the process of transforming to another.
Show HN: Operational web infra (Why we moved away from pure Computer Use agents)
by gargigupta | 2025-12-15 21:49:07+00:00
Hi HN,

I am from the engineering team behind Mino by Tiny Fish.

We’ve spent the last year building the web agents infrastructure for companies like Google and DoorDash. Today, we’re opening Mino, our API to developers.

95% of the web's value is no longer in static HTML documents. It's in operations: checking inventory behind a login, verifying compliance across government portals, or aggregating pricing. These tasks were made for human attention, but the web has outgrown human comprehension.

Traditional RPAs are too brittle. The current wave of Computer Use Agents (Claude, OpenAI Operator, Gemini, Browser Use) wants to solve this with Continuous Inference. They take a screenshot, reason, click, repeat. This is amazing for novelty, but fatal for production: 1. Reasoning loops introduce massive overhead. 2.Cost: "Looking" at a page 1,000 times costs 1,000x the tokens. 3. Indeterminacy: A probabilistic model might click "Back" instead of “Book Now" 1% of the time.

Mino’s architecture is different. We use AI to learn the workflow (navigation graph, logic), then codify that logic to make subsequent runs execute as deterministic code. 1. It is fast (no reasoning loop). 2. It is cheap (pennies per job). 3. It returns Structured JSON. Every single time.

We designed Mino to be the "Hands" for your application. Input: URL + Natural Language Goal ("Login, find the invoice from May, return total as JSON"). Output: Structured JSON. Concurrency: Stateless, parallel execution across websites via async calls.

We believe the internet will largely be used by non-human users, such as agents, robots, and devices. And this is the beginning of that infrastructure, to use and build on top of the "Deep Web".

Check it out: https://mino.ai/

50 Free Completed Jobs to test the architecture. Feedback is welcome.
by an-engineer | 2025-12-15 21:49:07+00:00
There are active discussions in the https://cdk.dev/ Slack channel #terraform-cdk about building community-driven forks of the existing Hashicorp/IBM CDKTF repositories. A number of developers who work at organizations that are heavily reliant on CDKTF have offered to pitch in.

There is currently a live proof of concept fork of the main cdktf repository that one developer made: https://github.com/TerraConstructs/terraform-cdk

And one Open Tofu developer said he and some other Open Tofu developers would be happy to collaborate with that community-driven effort to keep CDKTF alive: "The OpenTofu maintainers are happy to collaborate with that project once it's up and running, but we will not be directly involved." https://github.com/opentofu/opentofu/issues/3585
by westurner | 2025-12-15 21:49:12+00:00
> Until now, most attempts at 3D chips have relied on stacking separate chips. That approach works, but the connections between layers are coarse, sparse, and prone to bottlenecks.

> Instead of fabricating separate chips and then fusing them, the team builds each layer directly on top of the last in one continuous process. This “monolithic” method uses temperatures low enough to avoid damaging the circuitry below, allowing the researchers to stack components more tightly and connect them far more densely.

NewsArticle: "First truly 3D chip fabbed at US foundry, features carbon nanotube transistors and RAM on a single die — future devices could have up to 1000x improvement in energy-delay product" (2025) https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/semiconductors/st...
by gaogao | 2025-12-15 21:49:40+00:00
> Season 8: In this season, they introduced gender fluidity. Whilst an interesting problem on its own, this would have wreaked havoc on my model.

Well I guess free money except for that one. In that one, one of the contestants, Danny, did the math for optimizing their remaining Truth Booths and Match Ups to get it down to a 50/50 shot.
by Yizahi | 2025-12-15 21:50:01+00:00
Those people broadly fall under "the Oxford professor" catch-all phrase. Obviously. I was talking about 99.99% of random internet texts, which do not conform to any Manual of style and are not written by literature majors. If I see a text authored by some known figure or in a respectable journal/site, then I don't have a task of detecting LLM slop in the first place. But when I do want to know if the text is generated or not, it is usually written by less sophisticated crowd, or anonymous.
by maqp | 2025-12-15 21:50:10+00:00
The sad part is, that's what's keeping Signal safe from spam.

Also, average Joe is not using proxy to hide the IP-address of their device so they leak their identity to the server anyway. Signal is not keeping those logs so that helps.

Messaging apps cater to different needs, sometimes you need only content-privacy. It's not a secret you're married to your partner and you talk daily, but the topics of the conversation aren't public information.

When you need to hide who you are and who you talk to (say Russian dissident group, or sexual minorities in fundamentalist countries), you might want to use Tor-exclusive messaging tools like Cwtch. But that comes at a near-unavoidable issue of no offline-messaging, meaning you'll have to have a schedule when to meet online.

Signal's centralized architecture has upsides and downsides, but what matters ultimately is, (a) are you doing what you can in the architectural limitations of the platform (strong privacy-by-design provides more features at same security level), and (b), are you communicating the threat model to the users so they can make informed decision whether the applications fits their threat model.
by mwigdahl | 2025-12-15 21:50:19+00:00
But that would mean doing less, and that's by default bad. We must take action! Think of the children!

I tried at my workplace to get them to stop mandatory rotation when that research came out. My request was shot down without any attempt at justification. I don't know if it's fear of liability or if the cyber insurers are requiring it, but by gum we're going to rotate passwords until the sun burns out.
by ChuckMcM | 2025-12-15 21:50:21+00:00
Question, isn't this a bug? static enum hrtimer_restart perf_swevent_hrtimer(struct hrtimer *hrtimer) { - if (event->state != PERF_EVENT_STATE_ACTIVE) + if (event->state != PERF_EVENT_STATE_ACTIVE || + event->hw.state & PERF_HES_STOPPED) return HRTIMER_NORESTART;

The bug being that the precedence of || is higher than the precedence of != ? Consider writing it if ((event->state != PERF_EVENT_STATE_ACTIVE) || (event->hw_state & PERF_HES_STOPPED))

This coming from a person who has too many scars from not parenthesizing my expressions in conditionals to ensure they work the way I meant them to work.
by dgfl | 2025-12-15 21:50:22+00:00
You do realize how many arbitrary words and concepts that are nowhere to be found in “conventional” math there are here, right?

I know what all of these do, but I just can’t shake the feeling that I’m constantly fighting with an actual python. Very aptly named.

I also think it’s more to do with the libraries than with the language, which I actually like the syntax of. But numpy tries to be this highly unopinionated tool that can do everything, and ends up annoying to use anywhere. Matplotlib is even worse, possibly the worst API I’ve ever used.