MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by brigandish | 2025-12-05 00:14:05+00:00
> This theory mixes up the distinct concepts of the government, as a trusted entity (where applicable), issuing identity document for the use of its citizens (including in person-to-person or person-to-private-company scenarios), and that of the government requiring its citizens to identify themselves to it on demand.

I don't agree that there is any such mix up, you'd need to point to the actual mix up.

> Sure, its slightly harder to have a government issue credentials to everybody and not have them abuse the possibilities that come with it, but if a society can pull it of, there are vast benefits in many areas of life.

There are lots of things that may benefit the group at the expense of individuals, but that is exactly why any group that values individual liberty should be opposed to it.

> On top of that, the flip side of people regularly not carrying any identification documents seems to be a police force much more eager to arrest people on the spot to figure out their identity.

The police in the UK aren't allowed to arrest people simply for not providing ID, and they are sued and lose when they do. I used to enjoy watching the Crimebodge account on Youtube where there are plenty of such scenarios. It's especially fun watching teenagers who know the law frustrate authoritarian rozzers.

So no, the way to lower the risk of the police arresting people for not having ID is to make not having ID a normal thing and increase the rights the individual has against persecution by the police.
by incompatible | 2025-12-05 00:14:38+00:00
I don't know Zig. The article says "Many people seem confused about why Zig should exist if Rust does already." But I'd ask instead why does Zig exist when C does already? It's just a "better" C? But has the drawback that makes C problematic for development, manual memory management? I think you are better off using a language with a garbage collector, unless your usage really needs manual management, and then you can pick between C, Rust, and Zig (and C++ and a few hundred others, probably.)
by lambdas | 2025-12-05 00:14:48+00:00
Yeah, that’s not right. I’m not sure about painstakingly… it said it couldn’t make out the notation, and spat out what it thought it could read, and you never checked it - nor read the articles for context, just assumed it was to do directly with further AI work.

It picked up on the polynomial, then what it thought was a scheme/sheaf being defined is actually the finite field with six elements. It also misread “Thue” as “the”.

If you had corrected what it read from the board, then gave it the context that he was a number theorist now working for a company trying to get AI to work through proofs, then you may have got the correct answer that this appears to be them crafting problems on polynomial reduction to test how the LLM reasons about proof.
by alchemist1e9 | 2025-12-05 00:14:58+00:00
I have a hunch Grok model cutoff is not accurate and somehow it has updated weights though they still call it the same Grok model as the params and size are unchanged but they are incrementally training it in the background. Of course I don’t know this but it’s what I would do in their situation since ongoing incremental training could he a neat trick to improve their ongoing results against competitors, even if marginal. I also wouldn’t trust the models to honestly disclose their decision process either.

That said. This is a fascinating area of research and I do think LLM driven fundamental investing and trading has a future.
by Nevermark | 2025-12-05 00:15:12+00:00
Flat design was always atrocious, in that it utterly fails to take advantage of our visualization systems extremely effective autonomous recognition and interpretation of any 3D cue at all.

Not meaning we need things to look gratuitously 3D. But that small amounts of 3D effect, edges, shadows and highlighting, greatly reduce the effort of "seeing" what is where and what it means.

And of course, the trend to simply use text for text, buttons, links, ... without very high standards and consistency of differentiation, is truly horrible design.
by 9rx | 2025-12-05 00:15:16+00:00
But no context, so in the real world you need to write:

try: f = open('foo.txt', 'w') except Exception as e: raise NecessaryContext("important information") from e

Else your callers are in for a nightmare of a time trying to figure out why an exception was thrown and what to do with it. Worse, you risk leaking implementation details that the caller comes to depend on which will also make your own life miserable in the future.
by Terr_ | 2025-12-05 00:15:23+00:00
I'm sure I'm not the only one who thought "why not vacuum", so I went and found the creator's reasoning [0] for why it's not a priority:

> [I]nside the dome the air quickly ends up rotating at the same rate as the rest of the mechanism. It's reaching its design speed with the motor at less than half duty cycle. Even if it were practical to make the whole thing airtight, it doesn't solve a problem that I currently have. The sound it makes doesn't come from inside the dome but from the motor in the base.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcAEqbYwixU&lc=UgygtRUb6XZyu...
by sergiotapia | 2025-12-05 00:16:38+00:00
Django needs a marketing push. I opened the website and immediately it smells like a 2011 web framework. Like CakePHP. Like Zend. Like Kohana.

The site makes the project feel extremely dated, which of course I have no idea how true that is, I've never used Django! Just my 2c from an outsider.

I compare it to Phoenix and Rails. (again, talking PURELY marketing here dudes!)

https://www.phoenixframework.org/

https://rubyonrails.org/
by Terr_ | 2025-12-05 00:16:38+00:00
[Self-reply with side-topic] Assuming a rectangular display rotating in standard air... what glass enclosure would be best?

My intuition says "change the sphere to a cylinder", because then we can minimize how much air could be passing around the sides and top of the display-rectangle, potentially curling around and causing turbulence and noise.

However, that introduces a new issue of visibility: Big flat surfaces have different glare/reflection problems than a spheroid does. It may become harder for the user to see clearly, whether from external glare or from internal reflections in a dark room. What if the top face of the glass cylinder was very slightly curved outwards, to avoid the worst-case scenario where you just can't look down into the device from certain angles? Depending on the refractive index of the glass, it could just be a thicker top, so that it doesn't create dead-space on the inside.
by djfergus | 2025-12-05 00:16:47+00:00
It's a 1.7 trillion token free model. Why wouldn't you try it?

I've been testing free models for coding hobby projects after I burnt through way too many expensive tokens on Replit and Claude. Grok wasn't great, kept getting into loops for me. I had better results using KAT coder on opencode (also free).
by antisthenes | 2025-12-05 00:17:37+00:00
Wow.

Great to know we're basically raising an entire generation without any integrity.

Can't wait to be in a nursing home where all the staff are trying to meta-game for lowest amount of responsibility rather than caring for the elderly.

And believe me, I'm the last person to disparage the truly disabled or those down on their luck. But 38% in a developed country is just straight up insane. Not to mention that if you have a "disability" that is treatable with medication, should you still be accommodated?
by al_borland | 2025-12-05 00:17:43+00:00
I remember that happening with The Omni Group. They make software for Apple platforms, like OmniFocus. They came out with a sync service, which users had to pay for. Over time they realized it didn’t cost them very much to run, so now it’s free. Of course, they aren’t running a pure subscription business, they make their money selling software.

I think what happens more often is a company will leave the price the same for a long time. While economies of scale may widen their margins, they will use those to protect against future price hikes, as those tend to be supremely unpopular. As inflation makes everything more expensive, the subscription gets effectively cheaper by remaining the same price for 10 years, or whatever it may be. For example, Amazon left Prime the same price for the first 11 years, so as time went on it became a better deal comparatively. Now they seem to raise the price pretty regularly, so that ship has sailed for Amazon.
by nu11ptr | 2025-12-05 00:18:25+00:00
> might as well have used C, the dollar cost is the same.

When your unsafe area is small, you put a LOT of thought/testing into those small blocks. You write SAFETY comments explaining WHY it is safe (as you start with the assumption there will be dragons there). You get lots of eyeballs on them, you use automated tools like miri to test them. So no, not even in the same stratosphere as "might as well have used C". Your probability of success vastly higher. A good Rust programmer uses unsafe judiciously, where as a C programmer barely blinks as they need ensure every single snippet of their code is safe, which in a large program, is an impossible task.

As an aside, having written a lot of C, the ecosystem and modern constructs available in Rust make writing large scale programs much easier, and that isn't even considering the memory safety aspect I discuss above.
by walletdrainer | 2025-12-05 00:18:26+00:00
What nonsense? Do you genuinely believe that there are loads of people driving big American pickups in EU inner cities?

I think “a couple of hundred” is an absolutely reasonable estimate. Even in big cities like London or Paris you’re not going to find more than a couple (counting all the Mercedes G 6x6s too)

The people driving these cars exist mostly outside of inner cities.

If you disagree, you can do so like an adult instead of spewing out completely unnecessary and unjustified insults.
by evanjrowley | 2025-12-05 00:18:30+00:00
Specifically in the case of elementary schools:

There are also signs of a new approach to influencing elementary and high schools: just buy them. This is where the Spring Education Group, a for-profit company buying up private schools across the United States, comes into the picture. Primavera Holdings in Hong Kong owns the Spring Education Group and previously owned the Princeton Review and Tutor.com. Primavera also has associations with ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok. Primavera Holdings made a rare appearance in the headlines when it purchased Tutor.com, which contracts with the U.S. military and many schools across the country to provide test prep and homework help. In a letter to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin in 2024, Sen. Tom Cotton (R., Ark.) wrote, “While providing educational services, Tutor.com collects personal data on users, such as location, internet protocol addresses, and contents of the tutoring sessions. As Chinese national security laws require companies to release confidential business and customer data to the Chinese government, we are paying to expose our military and their children’s private information to the Chinese Communist Party.” Tutor.com denied that any students’ data would be shared with China, and today the Tutor.com website says that it is “U.S.-owned and operated” (How and if Primavera sold or divested from Tutor.com remains unclear).
by Chiron1991 | 2025-12-05 00:19:58+00:00
You said "that Django still lacks". Django no longer lacks CSP and background tasks.

Regarding my edit, you need to differentiate between different types of jobs. Sending an email is okay to do in process. Other (mostly async) Python web frameworks have implemented this, so the Django team probably felt compelled to offer the same. Processing a user-uploaded file is much more expensive and shouldn't be done in the web process. If enough users upload files you're starving your workers for CPU.
by Teever | 2025-12-05 00:20:18+00:00
That's a tricky one that I find myself pondering a lot as a contractor.

I've ultimately decided that if it's something I'm required to learn for this specific task then I'm billing for the time spent doing that. But if it's something that I figure I should know as a person being hired to do a task in this particular domain then I won't bill for it.

To me it's the difference between hiring a mechanic to 'rebuild an engine' and 'rebuild a rare X764-DB-23 model of an exotic engine.'

It's reasonable to expect a mechanic to know how to rebuild an engine but it isn't necessarily reasonable to expect a mechanic to know how to rebuild that particular engine and therefore it's reasonable for that mechanic to charge you for their time spent learning the nuances and details of that particular engine by reading the manual, watching youtube tear down videos, or searching /r/mechanic/ on Reddit for commentary about that specific video.

It's important to strike a balance between these kinds of things as a contractor. You don't want to undervalue your time and you don't want to charge unreasonable rates.
by roncesvalles | 2025-12-05 00:20:31+00:00
The Deal died when Microsoft got on the layoff bandwagon in Q1 2023 for no good reason and became very aggressive with perf after that. If Microsoft is just as toxic and unstable as Meta, why not just work at Meta for double the money?

Funnily, Apple also has an unspoken "deal" (pay a bit low but treat really well) and they stuck to it even through the layoff era.
by 453yuh46 | 2025-12-05 00:20:32+00:00
No. #2 is bad analogy and the way you are describing is misunderstanding of what ASD means as spectrum. It is not RGB, but more like list from tens of different diagnoses - probably ranging to 20 or 30 in number, so more than 4, that colors are offering and that also means more dimensions, but could include more, that some people manage to get as some kind of collection - some people have collected nearly 20 of those to illustrate the problem, that people diagnosed with ASD are similar but at the same time different in their own way. Another issue is because of ASD you do not get to collect other Autistic-related diagnoses, that would narrow your condition.

On top of that, if you have ASD diagnosis, you definitely have other issues that describe your condition more, especially mental issues. Also, some of them are going to change - some can go away, because environment changes or simply because your understanding of issues have changed. A lot of the struggles are because diagnosed people even after diagnoses do not understand what exactly they have to deal with.

The issue is how these conditions are diagnosed - there are some similarities with LGBTQ+ that initially was labeled as a disease. And there is cautious fluidity in labeling because of that as well, because ASD is not completely understood, as we are really in the very beginning on mapping both of our brain functions and DNA - what those genes are responsible for. Also, the number increase of ASD might have other factors involved in the way how we as modern people are using our brains by dealing with all that information that humans previously did not need to do and most probably ASD is species wide change that we are causing as our behaviour has changed, especially when our unwritten beaviour rules are breaking down. When we have to compare this to how species are described, humans alone would be consisting of different species - the only difference why we are not different species is because of mixing.
by stanislavb | 2025-12-05 00:21:31+00:00
Have you tried Ruby on Rails. That's my experience with Rails. Everytime I've tried something else (for web dev), I just felt too spoiled with Ruby & Rails and went back. This includes Django and Phoenix (Elixir).

Edit: The only thing that Rails lacks is a decent Admin UI included as part of Rails. I know that there are some external gems that can be used, yet that's something that should be part of the framework in my opinion.
by nephihaha | 2025-12-05 00:22:27+00:00
They have had high emigration rates since the early 1990s. A large contingent left over thirty years ago, so those people haven't produced all the twenty and thirty something children that would be having their own children right now. Ongoing corruption, economic stagnation and this war haven't helped.

FWIW, parts of Lithuania have had massive population depletion as well due to people leaving.
by estimator7292 | 2025-12-05 00:22:43+00:00
No, it's greed right now. They are fundamentally incapable of considering consequences beyond the immediate term.

If the kind of foresight and consideration you suggest were possible, companies wouldn't be on this self-cannibalizing path of exploiting customers right now for every red cent you can squeeze out of them. Long term thinking would very clearly tell you that abusing your customers and burning all the goodwill the company built over a hundred years is idiotic beyond comparison. If you think about anything at all other than tomorrow's bottom line you'd realize that the single best way to make a stable long-term business is to treat your customers with respect and build trust and loyalty.

But this behavior is completely absent in today's economy. Past and future don't matter. Getting more money right now is the only thing they're capable of seeing.
by dystopiandevel | 2025-12-05 00:22:57+00:00
Also having explicit error handling is useful because it makes transparent the possibility of not getting the value (which is common in pure functional languages). With that said I have a Go project outside of work and it is very verbose. I decided to use it for performance as a new version of the project that mostly used bash scripts and was getting away too cryptic. The logic is easier to follow and more robust in the business domain but way more lines of code.
by tomhow | 2025-12-05 00:23:14+00:00
Please don't fulminate or post shallow dismissals on HN.

It's valid to argue that laws should be legible and reasonably straightforward to comply with, and to point out that society as a whole doesn't benefit if only already-dominant global megacorps can afford to comply with laws (or bear the cost of non-compliance).

Let's make the effort to discuss the topic in a curious, conversational way, rather than with this belligerent tone. The guidelines make it clear we're looking for a higher standard of discourse than this. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
by cak | 2025-12-05 00:23:56+00:00
Sorry for the delay, I missed this! Great question. The guess cache is local by default, but you can set ELF_CACHE_DIR to point it at a shared folder like iCloud, Dropbox, Google Drive, or anything that syncs across your machines. That will keep your guess history unified so you do not risk resubmitting a too low or too high answer. Happy puzzle solving!
by deathanatos | 2025-12-05 00:24:07+00:00
> I’m not the first person to pick on this particular Github comment, but it perfectly illustrates the conceptual density of Rust:

But you only need about 5% of the concepts in that comment to be productive in Rust. I don't think I've ever needed to know about #[fundamental] in about 12 years or so of Rust…

> In both Go and Rust, allocating an object on the heap is as easy as returning a pointer to a struct from a function. The allocation is implicit. In Zig, you allocate every byte yourself, explicitly. […] you have to call alloc() on a specific kind of allocator,

> In Go and Rust and so many other languages, you tend to allocate little bits of memory at a time for each object in your object graph. Your program has thousands of little hidden malloc()s and free()s, and therefore thousands of different lifetimes.

Rust can also do arena allocations, and there is an allocator concept in Rust, too. There's just a default allocator, too.

And usually a heap allocation is explicit, such as with Box::new, but that of course might be wrapped behind some other type or function. (E.g., String, Vec both alloc, too.)

> In Rust, creating a mutable global variable is so hard that there are long forum discussions on how to do it.

The linked thread is specifically about creating a specific kind of mutable global, and has extra, special requirements unique to the thread. The stock "I need a global" for what I'd call a "default situation" can be as "simple" as,

static FOO: Mutex<T> = Mutex::new(…);

Since mutable globals are inherently memory unsafe, you need the mutex.

(Obviously, there's usually an XY problem in such questions, too, when someone wants a global…)

To the safety stuff, I'd add that Rust not only champions memory safety, but the type system is such that I can use it to add safety guarantees to the code I write. E.g., String can guarantee that it always represents a Unicode string, and it doesn't really need special support from the language to do that.
by crazygringo | 2025-12-05 00:24:14+00:00
There is nothing new about this. Elites have been shaping mass preferences with newspapers for centuries, and television for many decades. Countries have been shaping mass preferences through textbooks and educational curricula too.

If anything, LLM's seem more resistant to propaganda than any other tool created by man so far, except maybe the encylopedia. (Though obviously this depends on training.)

The good news is that LLM's compete commercially with each other, and if any start to intentionally give an ideological or other slant to their output, this will be noticed and reported, and a lot of people may stop using that LLM.

This is why the invention of "objective" newspaper reporting -- with corroborating sources, reporting comments on different sides of an issue, etc. -- was done for commercial reasons, not civic ones. It was a way to sell more papers, as you could trust their reporting more than the reporting from partisan rags.
by parliament32 | 2025-12-05 00:24:31+00:00
Well yes, but it's a matter of perspective I think. Is it the amount that the recipe author used? Maybe, maybe not. But is it the amount you used the last dozen times you used this recipe? Of course, as long as your chart hasn't changed.

To be clear, I'm not disagreeing with your general premise, everything would be much easier if all recipes used weights for powder-like-ingredients. But recipes that actually have weights listed are few and far between, I find.
by gyomu | 2025-12-05 00:26:14+00:00
As an old school interface/interaction designer, I see this as a direct consequence of how the discipline of software design has evolved in the last decade or two.

We’ve went from conceiving of software as tools - constructs that enhance and amplify their user’s skills and capabilities - to magic boxes that should aim to do everything with just one button (and maybe even that is one action too many).

This shift in thinking is visible in how junior designers and product managers are trained and incentivized to think about their work. “Anticipating the user’s intent”, “providing a magical experience”, “making the simplest, most beautiful and intuitive product” - all things that are so routine parlance now that they sound trite, but that would make any software designer from the 80s/90s catatonic because of how orthogonal they are to good tool design.

To caricature a bit, the industry went from being run by people designing heavy machinery to people designing Disneyland rides. Disneyland rides are great and have their place, but you probably don’t want your tractor to be designed like one.