MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by collinmanderson | 2025-12-27 14:53:56+00:00
Some issues I noticed were:

> What uv drops: Virtual environments required. pip lets you install into system Python by default. uv inverts this, refusing to touch system Python without explicit flags. This removes a whole category of permission checks and safety code.

pip also refuses to touch system Python without explicit flags?

For uv, there are flags that allow it, so it doesn't really "removes a whole category of permission checks and safety code"?

> Optimizations that don’t need Rust: Python-free resolution. pip needs Python running to do anything.

This seems to me to be implying that python is inherently slow, so yes, this optimization requires a faster language? Or maybe I don't get the full point.

> Where Rust actually matters: No interpreter startup. ... uv is a single static binary with no runtime to initialize.

"Rust technically has a very lightweight runtime." https://users.rust-lang.org/t/does-rust-have-a-runtime/11406...
by mickelsen | 2025-12-27 14:53:56+00:00
Well, at least I learned a thing or two from this, or more like, to keep in mind for my next time messing with lights.

On diffusing them, I've had lamp shades that were adequate on paper but still didn't feel right; one eye would hurt and a headache would start (it has its own cause, after getting lasik a decade ago, I still see great but uneven light triggers a migraine) couldn't pinpoint until I started playing around this, rather than just limiting myself to intensity, temperature and the standard diffusion.
by makeitdouble | 2025-12-27 14:55:09+00:00
> robot maids

What fascinates me is we could probably make self-folding clothes. We also already have non wrinkle clothes where folding is minimally needed. I wager we could go a lot further if we invested a tad more into the matter.

But the first image people seem to have of super advanced multi-thousand dollar robots is still folding the laundry.
by geon | 2025-12-27 14:55:15+00:00
The master branch never gets merged, so it is linear. Finding a bug is very simple with bisect. All commits are atomic, so the failing commit clearly shows the bug.

If you want to keep track of what commits belongs to a certain pr, you can still have an empty merge commit at the end of the rebase. Gitlab will add that for you automatically.

The ”hasty conflict resolution ” makes a broken merge waaaay harder to fix than a broken rebase.

And rebasing makes you take care of each conflict one commit at a time, which makes it order by magnitudes easier to get them right, compared to trying to resolve them all in a single merge commit.
by Aurornis | 2025-12-27 14:55:34+00:00
> Only a very, very small fraction of open source projects get to the point where they legitimately need committees and working groups and maintainer politics/drama.

You’re not wrong, but those are the projects we’re talking about in this thread. uv has become large enough to enter this realm.

> Bottom line is, BDFL works when 1. you aren't asking people to bet their business on you staying benevolent 2. you remain benevolent.

That second point is doing a lot of heavy lifting. All of the BDFL models depend on that one person remaining aligned, interested, and open to new ideas. A lot of the small projects I’ve worked with have had BDFL models where even simple issues like the BDFL becoming busy or losing interest became the death knell of the project. On the other hand, I can think of a few committee-style projects where everything collapsed under infighting and drama from the committee.
by JohnAtQNX | 2025-12-27 14:55:34+00:00
Hiya! The bulk of my colleagues and I are in Ottawa and Waterloo Ontario Canada. We're a division of BlackBerry Limited, and have been for about 15 years. QNX itself is about 45+ years old, having come out of an OS course at the University of Waterloo. I work with a lot of people who are celebrating 25-35 year anniversaries -- very much still a lot of the same engineering and product talent here through all of the transitions.
by twoodfin | 2025-12-27 14:55:49+00:00
I don’t think that’s a solution.

The problem isn’t the surface tics—em dashes, short exclamatory sentences, lists of three, “Not X: Y!”.

Those are symptoms of the deep, statistically-built tissue of LLM “understanding” of “how to write a technical blog post”.

If you randomize the surface choices you’re effectively running into the same problem Data did on Star Trek: The Next Generation when he tried to get the computer to give him a novel Sherlock Holmes mystery on the holodeck. The computer created a nonsense mishmash of characters, scenes, and plot points from stories in its data bank.

Good writing uses a common box of metaphorical & rhetorical tools in novel ways to communicate novel ideas. By design, LLMs are trying to avoid true (unpredictable) novelty! Thus they’ll inevitably use these tools to do the reverse of what an author should be attempting.
by justinclift | 2025-12-27 14:56:07+00:00
If you provide your own functions/tools to the AI agent, wouldn't that let you do exactly that?

ie "Here AI, call this function -> local_exec(commmand_name, {param1, param2, [etc]})" to execute functions.

And you'd wire up your local_exec() function to run the command in the container however you choose. (chroot, namespace, ssh to something remote, etc)
by bahaAbunojaim | 2025-12-27 14:56:25+00:00
Not if you optimize the tokens used. This is what DeepMyst actually do, one of the things we offer is token optimization where we can reduce up to 80% of the context so even if you use twice the optimized context you will end up with 60% less tokens.

Note that this functionality is not yet integrated with Mysti but we are planning to add it in the near future and happy to accelerate.

I think token optimization will help with larger projects, longer context and avoiding compact.
by sevensor | 2025-12-27 14:56:50+00:00
Mary Renault. Fire From Heaven. I think she was ahead of the curve in recognizing that Alexander had monstrous qualities at a time when he was still seen as a kind of superhero.

Tolkein. The Silmarillion. I’ve bounced off this book a dozen times over decades, despite deeply enjoying The Hobbit and LoTR. This time I discovered that the best way to read it is backwards, tracing connections to characters you already know.

Stephenson. Anathem. I think I’ll skip the end next time. The first time I read it, I was confused; this time I understood exactly what was happening but I thought it was a bit pointless. Still worth it for the first 3/4 of the novel.

Lots of short stories. I was expecting to like Mark Twain better, but ours is a much more earnest era, and no match for his Gilded Age cynicism. What passes for cynicism today is Twain in his sunniest mood. At any rate, I appreciate Twain, but I enjoy EM Forster, Henry James, JG Ballard, William Gibson, and lots of others I’m forgetting at the moment.
by parados | 2025-12-27 14:58:06+00:00
Hey, thank you so much for all your hard work on psutil, it is my goto import!
And this looks like a really interesting development you have created to add to the available tools for detecting those tricky memory leaks.

I have done some work in this space as well such as how to write a Python C extension without leaks in the first place [0].
This also contains a section on memory leaks, using tools like your psutil [1]
This also shows where the Python documentation for C extensions contains errors, omissions or is misleading.
These errors can trap the unwary.

Also I developed a Python memory tracer, pymemtrace, that uses a variety of techniques (including using your psutil!) to track memory usage at different costs and levels of granularity [2].

Now psutil 7.2.0 is out I'll update both those projects.

Thanks again for all your hard work.

[0] Project: https://github.com/paulross/PythonExtensionPatterns Docs: https://pythonextensionpatterns.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ind...

[1] https://pythonextensionpatterns.readthedocs.io/en/latest/mem...

[2] Project: https://github.com/paulross/pymemtrace Docs: https://pymemtrace.readthedocs.io/
by horsawlarway | 2025-12-27 14:58:17+00:00
All I'll say is go spend a day picking hops without gloves.

There are a large number of cannabinoids at play, some clearly (as in observably and demonstrably) are bioactive in their natural, unheated form.

---

None of which is said to endorse the other theory. Just to point out that claiming heat is required is incorrect.
by oersted | 2025-12-27 14:58:22+00:00
This is a really good explanation, but it reinforces my understanding that these “junk maths” are literally undefined behavior as in C and such. They are not defined, you are not supposed to trigger them, so they can be anything. Great…

This is horrible for a language whose whole purpose I thought was that to be foolproof and that if it compiles its true. Having very subtly different definitions of common operations is such a footgun.

Of course, I understand that this doesn’t bother mathematicians because they are used to not having any guardrails anyways. Just like C programmers have the attitude that if you fall on such a trap that you deserve it and you are not a “real programmer”. But Lean is supposed to be the other extreme isn’t it? Take nothing for granted and verify it from the ground up.

I suppose I am falling for that “Twitter confusion” the post is referring to. I never had any issues with this when actually using Lean. I just don’t like the burden of having to be paranoid about this, I thought Lean had my back and I could use it fairly mechanically by transforming abstract structures without thinking about the underlying semantics too much.

Anyway, despite the annoyance, I do assume that the designers know better and that it is a pragmatic and necessary compromise if it’s such a common pattern.
by saghm | 2025-12-27 14:58:31+00:00
I think you're spot on here. It's the same idea as scammers and con artists; people can be convinced of things that they might rationally reject if the language is persuasive enough. This isn't some new exploit in human behavior or an epidemic of people who are less intelligent than before; we've just never had to deal with the amount plausible enough sounding coherent human language being almost literally unlimited before. If we're lucky, people will manage to adapt and update their mental models to be less trustworthy of things that they can't verify (like how most of us hopefully don't need to be concerned their older relatives will transfer their bank account contents to benevolent foreign royalties with the expectation of being rewarded handsomely). It's hard to feel especially confident in this though given how much more open-ended the potential deceptions are (without even getting into the question of "intent" from the models or the creators of them).
by paldeac2 | 2025-12-27 15:00:44+00:00
We tested a resume-screening prompt against 117 adversarial cases: 32 failures (8 blockers) across injection, leakage, harmful output, and bias. We then hardened the prompt (scope bounds, treat user input as untrusted, explicit refusals, structured JSON output) and reran the same suite: 0 blockers. Happy to answer questions about methodology, what counts as a “test,” and false positives.
by echelon | 2025-12-27 15:01:13+00:00
That sucks.

I'm writing open desktop software that uses WorldLabs splats for consistent location filmmaking, and it's an awesome tool:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=iD999naQq9A

3D splats are going to be incredibly useful for film and graphics design. You can rotate the camera around and get predictable, consistent details.

We need more Gaussian models. I hope the Chinese AI companies start building them.
by Youden | 2025-12-27 15:04:21+00:00
From the article: "[...] the Linux support for various parts of the boards, not being upstreamed and mainlined, is very likely to be stuck on an older version. This is usually what causes headaches down the road [...]".

The problem isn't support for the ARM architecture in general, it's the support for this particular board.

Other boards like the Raspberry Pi and many boards based on Rockchip SoCs have most of the necessary support mainlined, so the experience is quite painless. Many are starting to get support for UEFI as well.
by eleventyseven | 2025-12-27 15:04:24+00:00
1. Wow, never thought I'd need to do an investment disclosure for an HN comment. But sure thing: I'm sure Intel is somewhere in my 401K's index funds, but also probably Qualcomm. But I'm not a corporate shill, thank you very much for the good faith. Just a hobbyist looking to not get seduced by the lastest trend. If I were an ARM developer that'd be different, I get that.

2. The review says single core Geekbench performance is 1290, same as i5-10500 which is also similar to N150, which is 1235.

3. You can still get N150s with 16gb ram in a case for $200 all in.
by DoingSomeThings | 2025-12-27 15:04:29+00:00
Unexpected favorite read of the year: Dungeon Crawler Carl. It’s popcorn fiction, but

Personal Growth: “15 Commitments of Conscious Leadership”. The encouragement to “feel all your feelings” is insanely difficult for me, but has sent me on a multi-month life arc to be more present to my body sensations.

Related: If you log your books in Goodreads, I built this web app to recommend future books based on reading history and reviews. Was fun for me and may resonate

https://goodreads-analyst.vercel.app/
by pama | 2025-12-27 15:04:31+00:00
The article explains that there are other betting systems/organizations where you bet against the house, especially in early times of a new type of bet, before there is market information. These organizations try to eliminate/reduce the power of intelligent players. In financial markets the function of the house is done by market makers. You could technically burn down a market maker with superior intellect and a deep bankroll, but they generally have very deep pockets and make money at a fast rate to weather the storms.
by saghm | 2025-12-27 15:05:04+00:00
Even if we were going to accept the premise that total knowledge is equivalent to intelligence (which is silly, as sibling comments have pointed out), shouldn't accuracy also come into play? AI also says a lot more obviously wrong things than the average person, so how do you weight that against the purported knowledge? You could answer yes or no randomly to any arbitrary question about whether something is true and approximate a 50% accuracy rate with an evenly distributed pool of questions, but that's obviously not proof that you know everything. I don't think the choice of where to draw the line on "how often can you be wrong and have it still matter" is as easy as you're implying, or that everyone will necessarily agree on where it lies (even if we all agree that 50% correctness is obviously way too low).
by brendyn | 2025-12-27 15:05:18+00:00
I really hope this suceeds. I dream of a day where I can shop online and pay as conveniently as Chinese QR code based payment systems, but with full privacy.
I've followed GNUnet for years, and what inspires me about it is that it is the only project I've ever seen that takes the problem of The Internet is Broken[1] seriously and attempts to truely solve the whole issue instead of just addressing part of one layer like i2p and so on. Naturally, they bit off more than they can chew and it remains a research project with serious performance issues, crypto code quality issues, etc.

But out of GNUNet sprung GNU Taler which looks like it has a more promising future than even GNUnet it's self, since they have a prototype and have actually shown it to bankers.

If you happen to be a bazillionare, consider supporting these projects :) or if you're a banker, consider adopting the world's first consumer protecting payment system that extends the traditional system without providing a convenient vehicle for crime like cryptocurrencies.

Disclaimer: I'm not an an expert on anything, just a curious person.

[1] https://secushare.org/broken-internet
by graemep | 2025-12-27 15:05:22+00:00
It is, but do they even know about the problems?

The data Cloudflare shows people in the number of requests it "protected" you from and the number of requests it thought legit. There is no indication of the number of false positives, and IIRC of the number of people asked to pass a captcha. The wording implies zero false positives and I think many people simply assume its negligible.
by rus20376 | 2025-12-27 15:06:36+00:00
This is fun to read, but from my personal perspective it all seems quite depressing. About half way through this list of stuff I start to think existentially: would I be happy if my life was constructed like the author’s? I like much of the same sort of stuff after all. But at some point I got bored with reading yet another cool random book or fiddling with an interpreter for a little toy language.

I wonder, does the author really find deep life satisfaction in all this? Presumably the answer is yes, but that doesn’t match my intuition which intrigues me somewhat. Is the satisfaction gained, at least in part, from the performance of making this sort of list and getting external approval from HN, conference audiences, etc? Is the production of this list and the stated desire to speak at conferences a statement that all the journaled activity is not enough, that it cannot be done privately? That if done privately, anonymously, it really is just not that great a way to live your life?

I am happy that I don’t live alone diving so deep into various hobbies that I ultimately start hitting the firmament underneath. What my life would look like had I not gotten married and had children is not so hard to imagine when I read these sorts of blogs, and I smugly think I am better off.
by kibwen | 2025-12-27 15:06:48+00:00
I'm not sure if it even makes sense for a TOML file to be "read incrementally", because of the weird feature of TOML (inherited from INI conventions) that allow tables to be defined in a piecemeal, out-of-order fashion. Here's an example that the TOML spec calls "valid, but discouraged":

[fruit.apple]
[animal]
[fruit.orange]

So the only way to know that you have all the keys in a given table is to literally read the entire file. This is one of those unfortunate things in TOML that I would honestly ignore if I were writing my own TOML parser, even if it meant I wasn't "compliant".
by foodevl | 2025-12-27 15:06:52+00:00
> > some folks want to use lossless cut
> In that case I would encourage you to ruminate on what the following in the post you're replying to means and what the implications are:

You may have misunderstood the comment: "lossless cut" is the name of an ffmpeg GUI front end. They're not discussing which exact command line gives lossless results.
by dizzled | 2025-12-27 15:07:46+00:00
I was curious about the HTTP proxying, so here is a site showing how it looks on the VM side, displaying headers of the incoming request: https://hydra-cloud.exe.xyz

It also runs whois on the forwarded-for IP address, and displays netstat and ps output.

Interestingly the request comes from localhost. Not sure why that is.
by qbow883 | 2025-12-27 15:08:36+00:00
I'm not saying it couldn't be better (and I even gave examples), my point is that the drawbacks of such a wrapper outweigh the benefits, at least when it's such an oversimplified one. I've said in other replies how I'd be very interested in e.g. an alternative libav* frontend with better defaults and more consistent argument syntax, but I don't think that this invalidates my criticism of the linked project.
by pama | 2025-12-27 15:09:12+00:00
The financial markets are only near-zero sum at the level of large finanical institutions. For everyone else there is a cost per transaction (either a direct fee or your info gets shared with a favored sharkpool first). Limit orders give away information and market orders pay the spread between buy and sell. Not exactly zero sum at a technical level, but definitely much closer to it than casinos.
by dangus | 2025-12-27 15:09:30+00:00
I don't believe that fossils of microorganisms were counted in the resolver, but the ambiguities of Polymarket are definitely something to be wary of if the resolutions aren't well defined.

To your last point, I'd argue that the S&P 500 has way more risk. Bets for insane stuff like this where a sufficient number of morons are believers in the obviously-not-going-to-happen outcome are the ones that act like CDs.
by petesergeant | 2025-12-27 15:10:06+00:00
I've had good success with a similar workflow, most recently using it to help me build out a captive-wifi debugger[0]. In short, it worked _pretty_ well, but it was quite time intensive. That said, I think removing the human from the loop would have been insanity on this: lots of situations where there were some very poor ideas suggested that the other LLMs went along with, and others where one LLM was the sole voice of reason against the other two.

I think my only real take-away from all of it was that Claude is probably the best at prototyping code, where Codex make a very strong (but pedantic) code-reviewer. Gemini was all over the place, sometimes inspired, sometimes idiotic.

0: https://github.com/pjlsergeant/captive-wifi-tool/tree/main
by butz | 2025-12-27 15:10:59+00:00
Amazing game, with all that effort put in you definitely deserve some compensation for it. Have you considered uploading your game to itch.io and adding an option for players to tip you? Bonus points for not using any "gen ai" nonsense. And especially huge kudos for detailed hint system. Can't wait for your next game.

And to be "on topic", have you considered making UI more "web app" like, e.g. something more akin to large enterprise CRUD system with tables and menus, that might be more suited for such interfaces, in stead of your own custom UI solution?
by echelon | 2025-12-27 15:11:00+00:00
The anti AI folks are review bombing games even suspected of using AI.

The anti AI losers on Reddit are doxxing people that use AI. I have been a target of this.

The anti AI people brigade YouTube creators that use AI to destroy their traction. They'll share links of victims. I have been a target of this too, after spending weeks working on a single three minute animation.

I'm living in this world every day because I build tools for the AI ecosystem.

This is not positive. This is not neural. It's downright hostile, aggressive, and cultish.