MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by graeme | 2025-12-18 19:24:12+00:00
Apple actually does have pretty good support for this sort of case. I went wrong. Here is that the account was in a state where support even high-level Support was not authorized to unlock it.

I have personal experience here. I was gifted a meaningful chunk of Apple gift cards. I redeemed them to a secondary Apple ID as this ID is rarely used. It got locked when I tried to spend the Apple gift cards.

It took a couple tries over a few weeks, but Apple support were very helpful and able to unlock the account. Where I must've got lucky is the automated system must've allowed the Support to take this action and it sounds like in the case here whatever fraud flag triggered issued to far more severe response.

My case I should add the gift cards were totally valid. It just was rarely used to count. That might explain why it was easier to resolve in any event. They absolutely as human support. The real issue is when human support can't overrule the computer.
by jfindper | 2025-12-18 19:24:13+00:00
>A ‘banned book’ is one that you are not allowed to own by the State.

>Your school not stocking books you want is not a ban. It’s the prerogative of the institution to choose how it shapes minds.

At least some of these books are banned from schools by state-level law, not because the school district chose to not stock it.
by giraffe_lady | 2025-12-18 19:24:22+00:00
What should we call it when you may know of a specific book but be unable to access it through any path available to you?

Banned makes sense to me as shorthand though sure it's not quite exactly accurate. Suggest me an alternative?

EDIT: This was a sincere and I thought pretty neutral question but I have clearly touched a nerve with this. Everyone seems to be having a great time.
by lbreakjai | 2025-12-18 19:24:32+00:00
It feels like the worst of both worlds, what am I missing?

I get server-side rendering. I can boot my server, and everything is there. If my model changes, I can update the view. It's cohesive.

I get client-side rendering. The backend returns data, the frontend decides what to do with it. It's a clear separation. The data is just data, my mobile app can consume the same "user" endpoint.

This seems like a worst-of-both-worlds paradigm, where the backend needs to be intimately aware of the frontend context. Am I not getting it or is there a massive implicit coupling?

Now if I need to display the same "user" data twice, in different formats, on my website. Say, as a table in "My account", and as a dropdown in the menu bar. Do I need to write two endpoints in the backend, returning the same data in two different formats?
by chaseadam17 | 2025-12-18 19:24:33+00:00
Seems like most of the books deal with complex real-world issues like sexual identity, racism, school shootings, etc. and are banned due to "sexual" or "violent" content. My guess is these criteria can be selectively interpreted to target books that go against political or cultural beliefs but there is obviously some merit to wanting to protect young kids from certain topics. I wish the article mentioned what ages the books are banned for because that seems like an important piece of data. I'm assuming it includes all K-12 public schools?
by TheMagicHorsey | 2025-12-18 19:24:40+00:00
I feel like a lot of people go after Jai because of what Jon Blow says about XYZ political issue. Jai seems perfectly reasonable for at least the narrow task of making games in an indie studio. The macro capabilities might be terrifying in a large enterprise, but if you're handrolling all your own code and don't have to worry about a software supply chain, who cares?
by RagnarD | 2025-12-18 19:24:46+00:00
I'd made another post (that I can't reply to) pointing to an Israeli news article that Nuno Loureiro was Jewish. Apparently, he was not, so please note the correction here.

To those who say that being Jewish would NOT have been a motivation for some in the world: stop evading reality. Especially so soon after the Bondi beach massacre.
by Tarsul | 2025-12-18 19:24:58+00:00
After watching the video: It feels like this is basically the same result as what would've happened with ChatGPT in December 2022 with a custom prompt. I mean ok, probably more back and forth to break it but in the end... it feels like nothing's really changed, has it? (and yes, programmers might argue otherwise, but for the general "chatbot" experience for the general audience I really feel like we are treading water)
by koakuma-chan | 2025-12-18 19:25:11+00:00
> they have shipped tons of great features for the DevEx

Such as?

> again I’m not saying Codex is worse, they’re just different and claiming the only one you actively use is the best is a stretch

I am testing all models in Cursor.

> I initially dismissed Claude Code at launch, then loved Codex when it released. never really liked Cursor

I also don't actually like Cursor. It's a VSCode fork, and a mediocre harness. I am only using it because my company refuses to buy anything else, because Cursor has all models, and it appears to them that it's not worth having anything else.
by tiazm | 2025-12-18 19:25:28+00:00
That’s an interesting point. One thing I’ve noticed, though, is that even the people who are directly exposed to incentives (usually product and marketing) tend to focus almost exclusively on the final KPIs they’re measured on, like revenue or conversion rate.

Because of that, the analytics layer is often seen as something secondary. As long as the top line numbers are moving, there’s little perceived urgency to invest in a structured analytics foundation that explains why those numbers move.

So even when incentives exist, they’re often too outcome focused. Analytics that helps understand mechanisms, not just results, struggles to justify itself until something breaks or growth stalls.
by bccdee | 2025-12-18 19:25:42+00:00
The market for labour is a monopsony (the limited number of buyers relative to sellers make it a buyer's market). Just as suppressing price in a monopolistic market is unlikely to drive down supply and can actually increase overall sales, recent minimum wage increases have been found to have a net positive effect on employment.

> We present the first causal analysis of recent large minimum wage increases, focusing on 47 large U.S. counties that reached $15 or more by 2022q1. [...] We then find significant and larger positive employment effects, as the monopsony model predicts. We go on to document the presence of monopsony in the restau- rant industry. [...] The fast food industry’s monopsony power allowed it to accommodate large minimum wage increases and raise employment.

Source: https://irle.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Minimum...
by DonaldPShimoda | 2025-12-18 19:25:58+00:00
A lot of discussion about the benefits/drawbacks of open access publishing, but I don't see anybody talking about the other thing that's coming along with this commitment to open access: the ACM is introducing a "premium" membership tier behind which various features of the Digital Library will be paywalled. From their info page [0], "premium" features include:

* Access to the ACM Guide to Computing Machinery * AI-generated article summaries * Podcast-style summaries of conference sessions * Advanced search * Rich article metadata, including download metrics, index terms and citations received * Bulk citation exports and PDF downloads

The AI-generated article summaries has been getting a lot of discussion in my social circles. They have apparently fed many (all?) papers into some LLM to generate summaries... which is absurd when you consider that practically every article has an abstract as part of its text and submission. These abstract were written by the authors and have been reviewed more than almost any other part of the articles, so they are very unlikely to contain errors. In contrast, multiple of my colleagues have found errors of varying scales in the AI-generated summaries of their own papers — many of which are actually longer than the existing abstracts.

In addition, there are apparently AI-generated summaries for articles that were licensed with a non-derivative-works clause, which means the ACM has breached not just the social expectations of using accurate information, but also the legal expectations placed upon them as publishers of these materials.

I think it's interesting that the ACM is positioning these "premium" features as a necessity due to the move to open-access publishing [1], especially when multiple other top-level comments on this post are discussing how open-access can often be more profitable than closed-access publishing.

[0] https://dl.acm.org/premium

[1] The Digital Library homepage (https://dl.acm.org/) features a banner right now that says: "ACM is now Open Access. As part of the Digital Library's transition to Open Access, new features for researchers are available as the Digital Library Premium Edition."
by irrationalfab | 2025-12-18 19:26:04+00:00
Anthropic is positioning Claude in Chrome as a beta feature for day to day use, expanding beyond the earlier research preview.

- Pull data from dashboards into one analysis doc

- Address slide comments automatically

- Build with Claude Code, test in Chrome

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBJnWMD0Pho
by lo_zamoyski | 2025-12-18 19:26:20+00:00
Well, the failure in question is not the part failing to do what it is objectively defined to do, it is a failure to perform as we expect it to. Meaning, the failure is ours. Inductively, for `x` to FAIL means that either we failed to define `x` properly, or the `y` that simulates `x` (compiler, whatever...) has FAILed.

Of course, the notion of "failure" itself presupposes a purpose. It is a normative notion, and there is no normativity without an aim or a goal.

So, sure, where human artifacts are concerned, we cannot talk about a part failing per se, because unlike natural kinds (like us, where the norm is intrinsic to us, hence why heart failure is an objective failure), the "should" or "ought" of an artifact is a matter of external human intention and expectation.

And as it turns out, a "role in a system" is precisely a teleological view. The system has an overall purpose (one we assign to it), and the role or function of any part is defined in terms of - and in service to - the overall goal. If the system goes from `a->d`, and one part goes from `a->b`, another `b->c`, and still another `c->d`, then the composition of these gives us the system. The meaning of the part comes from the meaning of the whole.
by adamzwasserman | 2025-12-18 19:26:32+00:00
I think you misunderstood me. I use htmx where most people would use fetch. I do not just use htmx willy nilly for no reason.

I use pure front end manipulation to set state, then I send the state to the stateless back end with pure functions, and I get amazing performance: www.multicardz.com public test bed, 1M records, round trip usually around 160 ms for anywhere between 1 to 100K hits
by archagon | 2025-12-18 19:26:33+00:00
What do you mean by “exceptions”? Who are we, in our own infinitesimal slice of human history, to judge historic taste in art? And is naturalism the be-all, end-all of good taste? If so, we need to throw out the majority of art in the 20th century.

This is a question for an art historian, not some anon on a tech forum. (For what it’s worth, I find Medieval and Renaissance art to be about equally tepid despite the difference in execution. And plenty of people non-ironically enjoy Medieval art despite its supposed deficiencies.)
by bell-cot | 2025-12-18 19:26:35+00:00
I'd bet 90-ish percent of these banned books could be made available to 90% or so of U.S. schoolchildren within a month-ish - if a bunch of anti-book-banning idealists cared to chip in donations to buy up publication rights, then publish the books on a simple readbannedbooks.org web site.
by jfindper | 2025-12-18 19:26:40+00:00
>I find the dishonesty really off-putting. None of these books are "banned". School libraries don't stock them, they might be removed from curricula, but they are not "banned"

You can look into it, if you're curious! Some of these books are indeed banned from schools (even if they want to stock it!), by state-level law no less! It's not a curation choice.
by vablings | 2025-12-18 19:26:54+00:00
> This sort of thing wasn't really possible before the internet age. We need new laws to deal with it.

Yes, it was and it always has been[1]

>I disagree. The issue is these huge platforms can arbitrarily ban people and consumers have no recourse

This is par for course with every single EULA ever. I will say in the case of Steam it's hard pressed to find your account completely disabled and unable to play the games you rightfully purchased. I think the worst-case scenario is that you will be banned from engaging with the steam online community which restricts your ability to play with other users on steam

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining
by nightpool | 2025-12-18 19:27:10+00:00
Although I'm not actually sure how much the watchdog is "warning" here, despite the article claiming it is. The language from the report is the following:

6.18. In each of these cases the motive of the app developer/ lobbyist/

journalist may be more sinister than first appears, so permitting an officer to examine whether the individual is a witting or unwitting agent of a foreign state might be described as necessary in the right circumstances. Serious responsibility is placed on police to use the power wisely.

The report doesn't make any recommendations or suggest any changes to the law, it seems to consider that it is good that this could be considered Section 3 "hostile activity". This later part about Schedule 3 investigations also makes this clear:

The Joint Committee on Human Rights was of the view that there was an even greater risk of arbitrary use of Schedule 3 than of Schedule 7, owing to the broader and more ambiguous definition of “hostile activity” (than of terrorism). I would develop the point further: • For Schedule 7, the examining officer must at least have in mind the possibility that the examined person is morally blameworthy. That arises from the statutory question: whether the individual is a person “…is or has been concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism” • By contrast, under Schedule 3 a lawful examination may take place, with all the intrusion and inconvenience attached, of an individual for whom the question of moral fault does not arise at all. 6.22. Having said this, I am not yet able to draw any practical conclusions from this conceptual distinction. Firstly, most examinations are likely to be directed at the issue of witting or witting participation, which incidentally puts a premium on human as well as digital interrogation. Secondly, the possibility that an examinee is in fact entirely innocent also arises under Schedule 7. I will therefore keep under review whether this needs to be reflected in the Code of Practice, but make no recommendation at this stage.
by everdrive | 2025-12-18 19:27:19+00:00
Banning books in a school is much more performative these days than in times past. Kids these days can pirate the books, find them at a store, order them from Amazon, etc. In the old days the concern might have been that kids would get access to the wrong ideas -- and crucially, you might actually be able to prevent that sort of access.

Now, it seems to be be more about representation: "Do we want to say our school supports the ideas in this book?"

I'm not defending book banning, but people seem to treat book banning as if it's still the 1950s, and schools are really censoring information in any sort of meanginful way. Instead, all the schools are doing is taking a stand and saying "this book does not represent us."

Mind you, I still think this is bad, but I'm a bit baffled why people treat this topic the way they do.
by dang | 2025-12-18 19:27:25+00:00
Ok, let's use that. Thanks!

This, btw, is exactly what we look for when doing a title replacement:

> verbatim from the article and much better describes the event being reported

That's what I usually call "representative language from the article" (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...). The idea is not to invent new wordings, but rather to find the place where the article 'confesses' what it is really about.
by Capricorn2481 | 2025-12-18 19:27:32+00:00
> If your goal is the economic return that making a game will (hopefully!) provide, this is understandable

I don't know why the conversation always devolves into this. How it goes is "John cares about quality, everyone else only cares about money"

Choosing to prioritize art, story, and gameplay over raw execution speed does not mean you only care about money. It means you care about having a good game. That doesn't mean you can't do both, but if you have a time restriction, it's a completely reasonable trade off to make. Especially if your users won't even notice.

I would rather devs make games for people playing them, not for web devs who have Electron baggage.
by fuzztester | 2025-12-18 19:27:38+00:00
Somewhat, but not exactly the reverse, is Tall poppy syndrome:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome

I had read it about AU and JP and had read about the Jante thing, but the article says it is there in some other countries too. Probably exists everywhere in some form.

I wonder if people here have experienced anything like that. My guess is yes.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-12-18 19:27:47+00:00
> it might be in response to israeli authorities having made clear that they're suspecting it was done by Iran

Israeli security is going to suspect everything is done by Iran because that is their threat model (and geopolitical incentive). If you asked enough security people in Seoul, they'd suspect North Korea. (Emphasis on suspicion. They wouldn't say it's likely Pyongyang if they're honest and competent.)

That's the nature of training focus on an enemy: you're constantly looking for and invalidating connections. Emphasis on active invalidation, which is the opposite of the scientific method, which starts with null hypotheses.

But scouting requires empirical feedback. If you have no way to invalidate your hypotheses, you end up in mind junk territory. Suspicions turn into assumptions turn into ground truths which fuel further suspicions. With each turn, they become increasingly baseless because that's what complex, unmoored processes do.

Reacting to a random shooting by looking to what Israel is saying about it is a signal that one has gone mind junk. (Not irretrievably. We all catch ourselves in idiot territory from time to time. I've criticized OP, so I'll put out an example: I initially suspected Iran was behind the Bondi Beach shootings because I thought high-powered rifles were illegal in Australia, that gangs wouldn't shoot up a synagogue, and I recalled Canberra expelling Iran's diplomatic mission because of something to do with bombing synagogues. Evidence showed that hypothesis to be flatly false. That not only means I need to reverse my hypothesis, but also be suspicious of future times I jump to conclusions around state-sponsored terrorism versus self-indoctrinated domestic terrrorism or more-banal criminality.)
by dkdcio | 2025-12-18 19:27:48+00:00
you conveniently ignored the most important part of my comment :)

> Such as?

changelog is here: https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/blob/main/CHANGELO...

glhf

btw you started this thread with pure vibes, no evidence:

> I can confirm GPT 5.2 is better than Gemini and Claude. GPT 5.2 Codex is probably even better.

I’m saying you’re wrong. N=2, 1 against 1, one of us is making a much less bold claim
by 9dev | 2025-12-18 19:27:55+00:00
I always wonder how people make qualitative statements like this. There are so many variables! Is it my prompt? The task? The specific model version? A good or bad branch out of the non-deterministic solution space?

Like, do you run a proper experiment where you hand the same task to multiple models several times and compare the results? Not snark by the way, I’m asking in earnest how you pick one model over another.
by buescher | 2025-12-18 19:28:09+00:00
It's one thing if you make a youtube video starting from already knowing how to make modern fish sauces, and what they're supposed to taste like, and quite another level of horror if you don't. My recollection of the letter or paper or whatever it was was that the person who wrote it was not at all pleased with the result.

There are folks that will insist that we don't know at all what Roman garum really tasted like or everything involved in its preparation, and they're not exactly wrong since Colatura di Alici can only be traced back to the middle ages, but it's also oddly obtuse. I think it was probably like modern fish sauces but Roman garum could have been as different from Colatura and Asian fish sauce as those are from Worcestershire.
by CamperBob2 | 2025-12-18 19:28:30+00:00
It completely neglects the actual history of the field of computing, even just the 20th century, where the field was filled with women.

Something interesting that I think a lot of younger people don't appreciate: back in the day, unless your name was Hemingway, it was considered unmanly to touch a keyboard. Anything that involved a typewriter or anything else with a keyboard was distaff by definition, just so much secretarial work. Maybe a journalist's job, if you were feeling generous.

Sounds stupid as hell, and it was, but that's a big reason why women played an outsized part in the growth of computing. First as the 'calculators' in WWII, then as Baudot terminals started to take over, as keyboard operators.

Don't make the mistake of assuming they were all Grace Hoppers or Margaret Hamiltons or Adele Goldbergs, because that simply wasn't the case. Many of them might have been, though, in a less stereotype-driven world.
by BryantD | 2025-12-18 19:28:36+00:00
Depends on how big the chilling effect is, no? For example, if a school librarian notices that a colleague in another district loses their job or worse, gets personal threats because of a specific book, they might well remove a book from shelves before it's challenged.

That is not a rebuttal to your point -- I don't have a guess on whether or not the chilling effect is significant. I'm just noting there are follow-on effects to be considered.
by m00x | 2025-12-18 19:29:09+00:00
It doesn't seem like it's directly book ban, and more of a selection of books that are deemed inappropriate for kids according to the school which Pen disagrees with.

Popular banned books like Lolita, mein kampf are not here, but they are also not in U.S. schools. There are also no books listed here that schools definitely (for good reason) do not have, like COVID denialism, cult books, etc.

I'm happy to be proven wrong in the comments though, this is just from my cursory look at how they define it.
by yjftsjthsd-h | 2025-12-18 19:29:22+00:00
> Why would a server use a different init system than a desktop or embedded device?

The server and desktop have a lot more disk+RAM+CPU than the embedded device, to the point that running systemd on the low end of "just enough to run Linux" would be a pain.

Outside embedded, though, it probably works uniformly enough.
by raw_anon_1111 | 2025-12-18 19:29:30+00:00
An MBA. I dropped out of graduate school almost 25 years ago. My heart wasn’t in it.

I still plan on working for another 15 years [1]. I have been working in cloud consulting for 5 years and I’m a staff consultant now. It’s half management style “what you should do” consulting and half leafing implementations or doing it all myself for smaller projects. I specialize in app dev + cloud.

The mid to end gane is fractional CTO I think or more management style consulting outside of just “application modernization”

[1] don’t cry for me. I work remotely and we travel a lot and do long term stints away from home “digital nomadding”. Work isn’t stressful.