MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by trimethylpurine | 2025-12-16 16:40:20+00:00
Recently, friends and family in other countries have asked about health care in the US and I've been very surprised by what they imagine is going on here.

Let's compare notes? If I go to a hospital (emergency) for any reason, I will be seen within an hour at worst. If I'm bleeding or something I'll be seen immediately. A clinic for surgery might be same day or up to a couple of weeks, depends on severity. More specialized surgery could be 5-6 weeks. American average monthly cost for health insurance is around $600 for a family. Individuals without a family are around $450 so they kind of get screwed. The expenditures for health care, including the $600/mo are tax deductible. This number can go as high as $1200 in places like New York where income is significantly higher as is cost of living.

Overall, averaging co-payment and deductible with accidents, you should expect to spend around $3,000 / yr on average per person in total for health care as part of a family in the US. This number varies greatly by age, and both income and health care in the US is socialized so your wages determine your healthcare liability. (Make more money? Get less social services.)

This should cover everyone, but you have issues where poor people don't file taxes, and don't file for health care. Those people will still be seen in an emergency room.

Conversely, my friends and family in other countries with "free" healthcare pay roughly the same total for their medical portion of tax liability as I pay for health care in total. But their wait times are astronomically greater when it comes to receiving care.

I've often helped financially because their wait time for something like shoulder surgery might be 10 to 12 months or even longer, but the same doctor will see them in a week if it's paid privately. So I've worked out payment plans where I contribute $1k/mo for their "add-on" private care so that they can be seen in a reasonable amount of time. That's in addition to what they already paid in medical tax.

Maybe that helps to understand. From my perspective, in a lot of countries you are told that you have free healthcare, but in fact you're paying for it in taxes, and then someone in the US will still have to pay for it when you actually need it anyway. Double payment. Hope you've got friends. (Maybe that's not true for everyone, I'm just going by what I've seen and paid for myself for my own family.)

I personally think that Europe and other countries don't have better health care, it's much worse. I've lived in several countries for 1-2 months to years in each and I've never seen health care remotely on the level that I see in the US. I would venture to guess it's the best in the world.

If it's hard to understand how people live in a modern high tech country without healthcare, it's because they don't. It's just about which rich person is paying for it. Health care is very expensive, and that's true around the world. And around the world, if you don't file/register for health care, your outcomes are generally much worse. The US is no different in that regard.
by tolerance | 2025-12-16 16:40:20+00:00
> Your introductory paragraph comes across very much like "people who want to change the status quo are political and people who want to maintain it are not"; which is clearly nonsense. "how things are is how they should be" is as much of an ideology, just a less conspicuous one given the existing norms.

With respect, I’m curious how you read all of that out of what they said...and whether it actually proves their remarks correct.
by SatvikBeri | 2025-12-16 16:40:26+00:00
To be clear, the fastest theoretically possible C++ is probably faster than the fastest theoretically possible Julia. But the fastest C++ that Senior Data Engineer candidates would write in ~2 hours was slower than the fastest Julia (though still pretty fast! The benchmark for this problem was 10ms, and the fastest C++ answer was 3 ms, and the top two Julia answers were 2.3ms and .21ms)

The pipeline was pretty heavily focused on mathematical calculations – something like, given a large set of trading signals, calculate a bunch of stats for those signals. All the best Julia and C++ answers used SIMD.
by bko | 2025-12-16 16:40:26+00:00
> The general public doesn’t have enough information to make informed decisions when it comes to healthcare. This alone completely removes the usual market forces from providing any benefit when it comes to healthcare.

Why is it always "the general public" and not "I". Do you have enough information about decisions? Can I take away some of your rights? No, of course not. Everyone else is dumb except me.

I'm sorry but I refuse to believe some unelected, anonymous bureaucrat has my best interests in mind or can even know me anything about me such that I want to allow them to make health decisions for me.
by rapier1 | 2025-12-16 16:40:31+00:00
The bottleneck in SSH is entirely on the receiving side. So as long at the receiver is using HPN-SSH you will see some performance improvements if the BDP of the path exceeds 2MB. Note: because of changes made to OpenSSH in 8.8 the maximum buffer with OpenSSH as the sender is 16MB. In an HPN to HPN connection that maximum receive buffer is 128MB.
by dpkirchner | 2025-12-16 16:40:58+00:00
It has to be us vs against us because that's what law is all about -- outlawing certain actions.

It's one thing to believe as you do, it's quite another to push for legislation that would (in your example) deny childless couples societal advantages, whatever that actually means.

If you're not in favor of a-or-b arguments the answer is to allow a and b, eh?
by t-3 | 2025-12-16 16:41:08+00:00
I appreciate the aesthetic of flat bezels, but I find cases more annoying than bezels so I go for bezels to avoid needing to buy a new reader every 6 months to a year. My flat-bezeled Onyx Boox and Pocketbook readers have proven much more fragile than my fully-bezeled Kobos and old Kindle.
by mghackerlady | 2025-12-16 16:41:21+00:00
They aren't arguing against technology, they're saying that a person didn't really make anything. With photoshop, those are tools that can aid in art. With AI, there isn't any creative process beyond thinking up a concept and having it appear. We don't call people who commission art artists, because they asked someone else to use their creativity to realise an idea. Even there, the artist still put in creative effort into the composition, the elements, the things you study in art appreciation classes. Art isn't just aesthetically pleasing things, it has meaning and effort put into it
by BloondAndDoom | 2025-12-16 16:41:33+00:00
No doubt, but if your Starcraft experience against AI was "somehow" exactly same with AI, gave you the same joy, and you cannot even say whether it was AI or other players, does that matter? I get this is kind of Truman Show-ish scenario, but does it really matter? If the end results are same, does it still matter? If it does, why? I get the emotional aspect of it, but in practice you wouldn't even know. Now is AI at that point for any of these, possibly not. We can tell AI right now in many interactions and art forms, because it's hollow, and it's just "perfectly mediocre".

It's kind of the sci-fi cliche, can you have feelings for an AI robot? If you can what does that mean.
by lionkor | 2025-12-16 16:41:34+00:00
> I disagree with strongly on multiple levels

Fair enough, but what are those disagreements? I was fully in the camp of not liking it, just because it was shoved down every projects throat. I used it, it turns out its fantastic once you get used to the syntax, and it replaced almost all other languages for me.

I just want to know if there are any actual pain points beyond syntax preference.

Edit: I partially agree with the compiler argument, but it's open source, and one of the main reasons the language is so fantastic IS the compiler, so I can stomach installing rustc and cargo.
by nodenoise | 2025-12-16 16:42:05+00:00
"Marshall McLuhan once said, 'There is absolutely no inevitability as long as there is a willingness to contemplate what is happening.' The handwaving rhetoric that I’ve called a Borg Complex is resolutely opposed to just such contemplation when it comes to technology and its consequences. We need more thinking, not less, and Borg Complex rhetoric is typically deployed to stop rather than advance discussion. What’s more, Borg Complex rhetoric also amounts to a refusal of responsibility. We cannot, after all, be held responsible for what is inevitable. Naming and identifying Borg Complex rhetoric matters only insofar as it promotes careful thinking and responsible action."

This is great, thanks for the link.
by chaseadam17 | 2025-12-16 16:42:05+00:00
We are the levees in your metaphor and we have agency. The problem is not that one founder does something before another and gains an advantage. The problem is the millions of people who buy or use the harmful thing they create - and that we all have control over. If we continue down this path we'll end up at free will vs determinism and I choose to believe the future is not inevitable.
by Mithriil | 2025-12-16 16:42:09+00:00
> "Mastery, even partial, is one of the few genuine avenues toward agency."

Philosophical claims have been made around this point. See, for example, "The Moral Obligation to Be Intelligent", an essay by John Erskine.

So many problems would be solved if a fraction of people would be more inclined to understand what's in front of them.
by lunar_mycroft | 2025-12-16 16:42:50+00:00
If the JSON protocol in question supports arbitrary behaviors and styles, then you still have an injection problem even over JSON. If it doesn't support them you don't need to support those in an HTML protocol either, and you can solve the injection problem the way we already do: sanitizing the HTML to remove all/some (depending on your specific requirements) script tags, event listeners, etc.
by registeredcorn | 2025-12-16 16:43:07+00:00
I have a blog, but I don't really blog that much.

For example, at the moment I have 43 drafts, and about 10 published posts.

I basically use my blog more as a way to store up potential future ideas. I grab threads that catch my interest. In that thread, I would have written up some long rant-y comment and realize a few things:

1) No one will ever read this.

2) Why am I giving this site free content?

3) I can use this for my blog. I should save it for later.

So, I grab all of the info that sparked the comment and throw it into my drafts. The hope is that if I have some downtime later on, I'll work on some of the drafted ideas I have stored.

Besides that, I also use my blog as a way to document the various things I've learned, discovered, or setup for my home lab. Having some online documentation of that information (that can also serve as a dual role of showing that I am technically knowledgeable) can help me down the road, when I re-forget all of that information.
by DoctorOetker | 2025-12-16 16:43:16+00:00
Assuming merely attitude control, sure only radiative cooling is available, but its very easy to design for arbitrary cooling rates assuming any given operating temperature:

Budget the solar panel area as a function of the maximum computational load.

The rest of the satellite must be within the shade of the solar panel, so it basically only sees cold space, so we need a convex body shape, to insure that every surface of the satellite (ignoring the solar panels) is radiatively cooling over its full hemisphere.

So pretend the sun is "below", the solar panels are facing down, then select an extra point above the solar panel base to form a pyramid. The area of the slanted top sides of the pyramid are the cooling surfaces, no matter how close or far above the solar panels we place this apex point, the sides will never see the sun because they are shielded by the solar panel base. Given a target operating temperature, each unit surface area (emissivity 1) will radiate at a specific rate, and we can choose the total cooling rate by making the pyramid arbitrarily long and sharp, thus increasing the cooling area. We can set the satellite temperature to be arbitrarily low.

Forget the armchair "autodidact" computer nerds for a minute
by rapier1 | 2025-12-16 16:43:49+00:00
The parallel ciphers are built using OpenSSL primitives. We aren't reimplementing the cipher itself in anyway. Since counter ciphers use an atomically increasing counter you can precompute the blocks in advance. Which is what we do - we have a cache of ketstream data that is precomputed and we pull the correct block off as needed - this gets around the need to have the application compute the blocks serially which can be a bottleneck at higher throughput rates.

The main performance improvement is from the buffer normalization. This can provide, on the right path, a 100x improvement in throughput performance without any compromise in security.
by treetalker | 2025-12-16 16:44:55+00:00
I understand what you and creata are saying, and I don't necessarily disagree. What I mean is that everyone (judges and lawyers alike) could easily work off their own copy and refer to, say, paragraph numbers when necessary.

For instance, I would like 12-pt with ~1.2 line spacing, something akin to Tufte — so I have a nice wide margin to make notes and summaries.
by dust-jacket | 2025-12-16 16:45:10+00:00
IDK, I think this is too negative a take. It's easy to blame those in charge for not realising that your problem was the important one but ... how many problems were they being presented with?

Sure, in this instance, they prioritised the wrong problems. But perhaps the case wasn't made clearly enough to make it apparent why this was as big a deal as it was.
by pityJuke | 2025-12-16 16:45:18+00:00
My current struggle is getting people to engage with my RFCs: that is, leaving comments. I certainly know they're not perfect, and I'd much rather know that before going into a meeting where we discuss the RFC. Especially so I can do any asynchronous research, or just spend some damned time thinking about it.

That being said, this is improving in my team. And I think the stakeholders above me appreciate it.
by neilv | 2025-12-16 16:45:19+00:00
It would help to stop saying "brightest minds of our generation", like we stopped saying "smartest guys in the room".

They are not the brightest, just the ones who sold out others and grabbed the money, with ethics and morals not being sufficient personal barriers.

Calling them the brightest just feeds their belief that they merit the money, and they don't have to ask the real reason they have so much money.
by losvedir | 2025-12-16 16:45:20+00:00
I dunno. Public Defenders (and defense attorneys in general, but PDs don't get oodles of cash) have to work with some pretty reprehensible people sometimes.

I used to live in Bahrain while my wife worked in oil and gas, and a lot of her colleagues had some... pretty different... views from us but we still got along. Hell, the country itself has a pretty significant Sunni / Shia divide, with employees being one or the other and they managed to work with each other just fine.

I think in general people should be able to work with others that they have significant differences in opinion with. Now, in tech, we've been privileged to be in a seller's (of labor) market, where we can exercise some selectivity in where we work, so it's certainly a headwind in hiring if the CEO is undesirable (for whatever reason), but plenty of people still will for the cause or the pay or whatever. You just have to balance whether the hiring problems the CEO may or may not cause are worth whatever else they bring to the table.
by woodruffw | 2025-12-16 16:45:39+00:00
The checks here seem pretty minimal[1]. I'd recommend taking a look at fickling (FD: former employer) for a more general approach to pickle decompilation/analysis[2].

[1]: https://github.com/Lab700xOrg/aisbom/blob/main/aisbom/safety...

[2]: https://github.com/trailofbits/fickling
Ask HN: Is Claude Code good enough already?
by calflegal | 2025-12-16 16:45:46+00:00
I've started to have a sneaking suspicion that claude code has already reached a key level of what I will call 'quite amazing'. When Google released Gemini 3 and Antigravity, I tried them out. They're good, great even. But, as a software dev, I'm back to trusty Claude Code. I really like it. More than anything, I really hope it can stay where it's at with performance and price and become profitable so that I'm allowed to keep it!

I don't particularly care about SWE bench or how much higher the next model scores on it. Perhaps that's not very futurist of me.

How do you feel about this?
by ramesh31 | 2025-12-16 16:45:47+00:00
>If you think eastern philosophical traditions have resulted in comparatively less consumerist desire in Asia, you’re in for a disappointment.

I'm actually saying that Western philosophy won, even in eastern cultures today. Eastern thought worked well for penniless peasant societies that could never hope to improve their condition, and likewise pre-enlightenment Western thought was very much the same. But it evolved, and we got Rosseau and Nietzche and others who unveiled the true driving force of modern man. We all want, and if we can satisfy those wants, we will.
by Retric | 2025-12-16 16:45:59+00:00
> Do you have enough information about decisions?

Me personally, No.

I don’t have enough information to make informed decisions here and you don’t either. Off the top of your head, how well educated is your dentist? You after all made an informed decision picking them. So how well did their background compare to others in your area. What where your concerns about their dental programs weaknesses and how was that offset by… Except no let me guess that never entered your mind did it.
by worksonmine | 2025-12-16 16:46:07+00:00
> Could I have used :term and manually set splits each time?

That's when you know you want to create a keybinding, here's a suggestion that opens a split below the current window with 10% height and starts a terminal: `nnoremap <leader>ft :belowright 10 split | terminal<CR>`

But is a terminal really what you want or do you just want to run a command? Maybe just `:!command` is enough 9/10 times that you reach for <leader>ft? In that case a common binding is `nnoremap ! :!` which puts you in that mode with a single key.

> get used to using macros as a replacement for multicursor

This exact example was how I realized the vim way is better than my assumptions. I used to install a multicursor plugin and bind to Ctrl+d because that's what I knew. When I learned macros and s/old/new it became irrelevant.

You seem to already know a lot of the possibilities that you can learn, I didn't and discoverability in vim isn't great. So I just forced myself to search for whatever I didn't know how to achieve and many times ended up learning something extremely powerful.

Today I have all sorts of useful little functions, <leader>m is make, or gcc if no Makefile exists. And now I've extended it to generate mermaid charts in markdown files and open them in my imageviewer and so on.

That's the true power of vim to me, adding standard tools from the system in keybindings and just getting it to do things MY WAY, not how I was taught it should work. It follows the unix philosophy and batteries included is by definition not part of that mentality.
by joecool1029 | 2025-12-16 16:46:20+00:00
I remember the last time I really cared to look into this was in the 2000’s, I had these wdtv embedded boxes that had a super anemic cpu that doing local copies with scp was slow as hell from the cipher overhead. I believe at the time it was possible to disable ciphers in scp but it was still slower than smbfs. NFS was to be avoided as wifi was shit then and losing connection meant risking system locking up. This of course was local LAN so I did not really care about encryption.

But I don’t miss having those limitations.
by BoppreH | 2025-12-16 16:46:27+00:00
Hot take, but I blame 90% of these problems on the internet's overreliance on funding from advertisement. It all flows from there:

1. To display ads is to sacrifice user experience. This is a slippery slope and both developers and users get used to it, which affects even ad-free services. Things like "yes/maybe later" become normal.

2. Ads are only displayed when the user visits the service directly. Therefore we cannot have open APIs, federation, alternative clients, or user customization.

3. The advertisement infrastructure is expensive. This has to be paid with more ads. Like the rocket equation, this eventually plateaus, but by then the software is bloated and cannot be funded traditionally anymore, so any dips are fatal. Constant churn.

4. Well targeted ads are marginally more profitable, therefore all user information is valuable. Cue an entire era of tracking, privacy violations, and psychological manipulation.

5. Advertiser don't want to be associated with anything remotely controversial, so the circle of acceptable content shrinks every year. The fringes become worse and worse.

6. The system only works with a very large number of users. It becomes socially expected to participate, and at the same time, no customer support is provided when things go wrong.

I'm fairly sure ads are our generation's asbestos or leaded gasoline, and would be disappointed if they are not largely banned in the future.
by 1970-01-01 | 2025-12-16 16:46:40+00:00
Ads are inevitable assuming a capitalistic fueled Internet continues. If you can remember the early WWW, you know ads weren't there, but e-commerce existed in a rudimentary fashion. You couldn't buy anything by clicking a mouse, but you could go and download a catalog or some shareware with a phone number during installation for the sales team to give you a license key.
by Ritewut | 2025-12-16 16:46:48+00:00
Tech artist here so I hit a middle ground.

> I understand artists etc. Talking about AI in a negative sense, because they don’t really get it completely, or just it’s against their self interest which means they find bad arguments to support their own interest subconsciously

>But somehow if a person “influenced” by people, ideas, art in less efficient way almost we applaud that because what else, invent the wheel again forever?

I understand AI perfectly fine, thanks. I just reject the illegal vacuuming up of everyones' art for corporations while things like sampling in music remain illegal. This idea that everything must be efficient comes from the bowels of Silicon Valley and should die.

> However tech people who thinks AI is bad, or not inevitable is really hard to understand. It’s almost like Bill Gates saying “we are not interested in internet”. This is pretty much being against the internet, industrialization, print press or mobile phones. The idea that AI is anything less than paradigm shifting, or even revolutionary is weird to me. I can only say being against this is either it’s self-interest or not able to grasp it.

Again, the problem is less the tech itself and the corporations who have control of it. Yes, I'm against corporations gobbling up everyones' data for ads and AI surveillance. I think you might be the one who doesn't understand that not everything is roses and their might be more weeds in the garden than flowers.
by whywhywhywhy | 2025-12-16 16:47:40+00:00
That's not sucking at blocking thats YouTube intentionally adding a delay to make it seem like their experience is degraded when it isn't. If you turn the slider up to full it only happens very rarely.

I'm sure this will all change eventually though and YouTube has a loophole planned so ad blocking on manifest 2.0 is impossible.