MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by cogman10 | 2025-12-27 05:18:49+00:00
> "Faster hardware" just didn't affordably exist for them back then.

Not what I said. And I think you are the one that's doing historical revisionism now.

Even in this email from 1983, it starts off with

> since its 68000 microprocessor was effectively 10 times faster than an Apple II

From the 80s through the 00s (which I was alive through and very aware of), computer hardware was frequently doubling in performance. The common wisdom then was to make things fast enough. Anything more was a waste of time because in a year or two hardware would be twice as fast.

The wastefulness of today came directly from that past wisdom. I can guarantee you that ever since I've been conscious around discussions about software there's been people that have bemoaned how sloppy and wasteful software has become. People complained about how bloated Windows XP was vs 98.

Ruby, python, perl, java. All these bloated and slow programming languages got their starts in the 80s and 90s. Exactly because of the wisdom that "it's slow today but hardware tomorrow will make it fast". Heck, even C and lisp are manifestations of this. Consider that people weren't writing all software in assembly during the time period in question. There were clear performance benefits of doing so as compiler at the time were particularly bad.

I've worked with a lot of older devs and they all hold the attitude that performance optimization is a complete waste of time. They've been the hardest ones to break of that notion. Younger devs tend to more intuitively know that performance optimization are important. That's because over the last decade, hardware performance improvements have stagnated.

So yes, absolutely yes. In the past if you could make writing software more ergonomic by sacrificing some memory or performance, that's a tradeoff most of the industry would gladly take. They wrote for today's hardware and sometimes tomorrow's.
by wbadart | 2025-12-27 05:18:51+00:00
https://www.goatcounter.com/help/logfile

> - There will be more bot requests.

> - Some data won’t be available: screen sizes, page titles.

> - It won’t disambiguate to canonical paths from <link rel="canonical">; i.e. /page and /page?x=y will show up as two different paths.
by TheRemyyy | 2025-12-27 05:18:57+00:00
Hi HN, I'm the creator of Velox.

I built this because I wanted the fine-grained reactivity of Solid/Svelte but with a mental model closer to what I was used to in React hooks.

The core idea is ditching the Virtual DOM entirely. The compiler (built as a Vite plugin) transforms the JSX directly into DOM instructions.
- Runtime is < 3kb.
- Updates are O(1) (targeted node updates).
- 800+ downloads on npm in the first 12h (unexpectedly!).

Currently working on stabilizing the ecosystem (router, CLI).
The compiler logic is in `packages/vite-plugin-velox` if you want to roast my code.

Happy to answer any questions about the implementation!
by cyberax | 2025-12-27 05:20:32+00:00
QNX is hard realtime. At one point, its kernel had O(1) guarantees for message passing and process switching. It could have been rewritten without any loops. I'm not sure if that's still true.

It's also really compact. This used to be a great selling point for underpowered car infotainment systems. Some cars had around 1Mb of RAM for their infotainment, yet they were able to run fairly complex media systems.

QNX is also used for non-UI components, just as a good realtime OS.
by jaggederest | 2025-12-27 05:21:35+00:00
#respond_to? is fine, it's really more #is_a? that is a code smell, in my opinion. As long as you're dispatching based on #respond_to? (i.e. "does this respond to each") by calling the method you're checking, when it does respond, you're fine as far as duck typing goes. It's when you check #is_a? and then dispatch based on type where things get weird.

An example I always used to use was something like a method that could take a single item or a collection:

def unpicky(something)
if something.respond_to?(:each)
# unpack using each or recurse to something.each do |item| unpicky(item) end
else
# main body
end
end
by rdtsc | 2025-12-27 05:22:11+00:00
> The fraudulent doctors’ orders generated by DMERx falsely represented that a doctor had examined and treated the Medicare beneficiaries when, in fact, purported telemedicine companies paid doctors to sign the orders without regard to medical necessity

They'll get doctors as well? Hopefully they are part of the co-conspirators group they mentioned they convicted at the start. Criminals are going to be criminal, but it's especially disheartening when doctors engage in this. All those years going to school should be canceled and thrown into the trash immediately if they get convicted of these kinds of crimes. The path of ever being a doctor should be closed for them.
by robdimarco | 2025-12-27 05:22:26+00:00
I read 57 books this year, a mix between fiction and non-fiction

Top 5 fiction

- A Gentleman in Moscow by Amor Towles

- Trust by Hernan Diaz

- City of Thieves by David Benioff

- Lincoln in the Bardo by George Saunders

- Widow Basquiat by by Jennifer Clement

Top 5 non-fiction

- Boom Town by Sam Anderson

- The Second Founding by Eric Foner

- The Club by Jonathan Clegg and Joshua Robinson

- The Mysterious Case of Rudolf Diesel by Douglas Brunt

- The Spy and the Traitor by Ben McIntyre
by burkesquires | 2025-12-27 05:22:29+00:00
I think fraudsters should have to work off the money they stole at prison wages…punishments are supposed to be deterent and prevent people from commingting crime…don’t seal a billion dollars becasue IF you get caught you will have to pay back half is not a deterent…BUT if they have to pay off a billion dollars at 13-52 cents/hour…that is a deterent!
by 578_Observer | 2025-12-27 05:22:36+00:00
Writing from rural Japan.

You are witnessing the "Hyper-inflation of Syntax."
If you measure your worth by LOC (Lines of Code), you are right to be afraid. AI has driven the cost of syntax to near zero.

But here is what I see in my work with old Japanese manufacturers (Shinise):
When "Crafting" becomes cheap, "Responsibility" becomes the premium asset.

AI can write 15k lines of code, but it cannot take *Liability* for a single one.
It cannot go to jail, it cannot lose its reputation, and it cannot feel the weight of a system failure.

Your job is shifting from "Writer" to "Guardian."
Don't compete on volume (Scale). Compete on the ability to take the blame and guarantee the "Why." That is the one thing the algorithm can never optimize away.
by rezonant | 2025-12-27 05:24:20+00:00
I don't think you're really losing the ability to check if an object responds to a message ie a_car.respond_to?(:color) just because theres type annotations. And I assume the type checker doesnt yell if you do a_car.color after that -- or if it does there's surely an equivalent to Typescript's `any` to accomplish it.

And T-Ruby apparently provides interfaces to avoid needing to do this at all (assuming both sides are written in T-Ruby I assume) https://type-ruby.github.io/docs/learn/interfaces/defining-i...

...which is awesome!

As for authoring classes, respond_to_missing?/method_missing should be rare, usually in a situation where its the only way to accomplish something. There's never been a reason to write something like:

class Car
def respond_to_missing?(name, priv)
[:color, :color=].include?(name)
end
def method_missing(name, *args, &block)
if name == :color
@color
elsif name == :color=
@color = args.first
end
end
end

Instead of

class Car
def color; @color; end
def color=(value); @color = value; end
end

Or, more idiomatically

class Car
attr_accessor :color
end

And for that last case, T-Ruby apparently covers it with:

class Car
attr_accessor :color: String
end
by Intralexical | 2025-12-27 05:24:30+00:00
QNX is the backbone of the auto industry, and powers over 200 million cars on the road. For the target demographic, I don't imagine they need to "build trust" any more than IBM or Microsoft need to build trust.

That said, like IBM and Microsoft, they've also been on and off over the years about whether tinkerers, desktop, and other uses are welcome. So they probably could benefit from showing that this time they're opening the ecosystem for the long haul.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/investing/markets/stocks/BB-...
by ksec | 2025-12-27 05:25:05+00:00
I assume you upgrade your Ruby VM? You also upgrade to use YJIT? And you will upgrade to ZJIT?

Not only do you get them for free, you get performance improvement for free. And YJIT is still supported and not depreciated. Not only is Ruby on Rails dont have churn anywhere near the order of magnitude of JS world. It is perhaps one of the stablest and non-moving framework and languages, to the point it is moving slowly and boring compared to even modern PHP and Python.

I dont even work on YJIT or ZJIT but I find this entitlement on OSS, even when you are getting newer upgrade and improvement for free, for all the benefits it provides while having so little downside being called "random tech debt busywork" frankly very rude.
by tstrimple | 2025-12-27 05:25:10+00:00
Tested how? With 100% "unit test" coverage? I can certainly see how a random person on the internet might be highly motivated and actually talented enough to contribute to these sorts of projects. But they don't have the budget and resources that commercial entities have. They don't have the same due diligence requirements. They don't have the same liability. If I use a commercial device unaltered, it's the company's fault if the device fucks up or is defective and causes harm. If I install random internet software on my medical device and it fucks up and causes harm, it's my fault.

I say this as someone who might modify my own medical devices because I'm so fucking jaded over the capitalist march towards enshitification and maximizing profit over human lives. There is simply no way random folks on the internet can test these types of systems to any reliable degree. It requires rigorous testing across hundreds to thousands of test cases. They at best can give you the recipe that works well for them and the few people that have voluntarily tried their version. That doesn't scale and certainly isn't any safer than corporate solutions.
by vlovich123 | 2025-12-27 05:25:25+00:00
It gets mess not just in that way but also someone can have a weird LD_LIBRARY_PATH that starts to have problems. Statically linking drastically simplifies distribution and you’ve had to have distributed 0 software to end users to believe otherwise. The only platform this isn’t the case for is Apple because they natively supported app bundles. I don’t know if flat pack solves the distribution problem because I’ve not seen a whole lot of it in the ecosystem - most people seem to generally still rely on the system package manager and commercial entities don’t seem to really target flat pack.
by oofoe | 2025-12-27 05:26:17+00:00
You may be already aware with this, but if not, Walker actually did write a small Forth (ATLAST -- https://www.fourmilab.ch/atlast/) which was used for (I think) DXFTOOL (a file converter).

It was later used by a small computer graphics studio in Tennessee for a blue/green screen matting utility and a fast roto-paint program.
by adrianwaj | 2025-12-27 05:26:22+00:00
Would be interesting to turn it into a "disappointed" feedback wall and have it message out to accounts that are mentioned.

Maybe you'd have to ask the user once they say something.. "are you referring to xxxx?" to enable the message to go out.

.. because disappointed users don't leave feedback.

https://www.perplexity.ai/search/why-don-t-disappointed-user...

Maybe you can change this?

Then publicly show a record of messages sent. Maybe keep track of returning users that post things. You also might have to make sure a user is human. Allow them to "resolve the disappointment" once satisfied with any changes.

People can also "pile on" to disappointments to make them more important. Eg Being locked out of a Gmail account. So each person can add their own 2 cents to it.

So it could be called Pylon (pile on.)

-- another idea would be to require micropayments to post/pile-on ... see x402.
by jumploops | 2025-12-27 05:27:09+00:00
> Text is the oldest and most stable communication technology

Minor nit: complex language (i.e. Zipf’s law) is the oldest and most stable communication technology.

Before text, we had oral story telling. It allowed us to communicate one generation’s knowledge to the next, and so on.

Arguably this is present elsewhere in the animal kingdom (orcas, elephants, etc.), but human language proves to be the most complex.

Side note: one of my favorite examples is from the Gunditjmara (a group of Aboriginal Australians) who recall a volcanic eruption from 30k+ years ago [0].

Written language (i.e. text) is unique, in that it allows information to pass across multiple generations, without a man-in-the-middle telephone-like game of storytelling.

But both are similar, text requires you to read, in your own voice, the thoughts of another. Storytelling requires you to hear a story, and then communicate it to others.

In either case, the person is required to retell the knowledge, either as an internal monologue or as an external broadcast.

Always bet on language.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budj_Bim
by vee-kay | 2025-12-27 05:27:42+00:00
Fun fact: zero and numerals were not invented by the Arabs. The Arabs learnt the concept & use of mathematical zero, numerals, decimal system, mathematical calculations, etc. from the ancient Hindus/Indians.
And from the Arabs, the Europeans learnt it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu-Arabic_numeral_system

Persian scholar Al Khwarizmi translated and used the Hindu/Indian numerals (including concept of mathematical zero) and "Sulba Sutras" (Hindu/Indian methods of mathematical problem solving) into the text Al-Jabr, which the Europeans translated as "Algebra" (yup, that branch of mathematics that all schoolkids worldwide learn from kindergarten).
by throw1235435 | 2025-12-27 05:29:42+00:00
That's easy. If I don't use it I won't be competitive; however I and probably many others would prefer a world where NO ONE has it as it would be a better overall outcome. For a lack of a better term I would call these "negative innovations". Most of these inventions:

- Require you to use it (hard to opt out due to network effects and/or competitive/survival pressure) AND

- Are overall negative for most of society (with some of the benefit accruing to the few who push it). There are people that benefit but arguably as a whole we are worse off.

These inventions have one thing in common; overall their impact is negative, but it is MORE negative for the people who don't use it and generally they only benefit an in-crowd of people if any (e.g. inventors). Social media for me on many scales is arguably an obvious example of this where the costs exceed the benefits often, nuclear weapons are another.
by derriz | 2025-12-27 05:30:10+00:00
I don’t see the relevance to the topic. I could preface your list with something like “The monkey wrench is not the best tool for the following situations:”. It’s kinda vacuously true in a meaningless way but without expansion adds nothing to a discussion about the relative merits of monkey wrenches versus other similar tools like pliers or vice grips.
by aforwardslash | 2025-12-27 05:30:29+00:00
"dude", I could counter-argue that many modern art is "ripping off" Turner's work, but since you know so much about the art world, I'm assuming you know what I'm saying.

Filters for "Van Gogh" or "Impressionist" or "watercolor" have existed for decades now; are they ripping of previous work without paying for it?

When does a specific trace becomes "intellectual property" to be ripped off? Does Mondrian holds the rights on colored squares?

If you don't understand that every living or read artist was "inspired" (modified) by what he saw and experienced, I don't know what to tell you; you come off as one of those people that seem to think that "art" is inspiration; There's a somewhat well known composer in my country that used to say "inspiration is for amateurs".

Having that posture is, in itself, a position of utter and complete ignorance. If you don't understand how you need to absorb something before you transcend it, and how the things you absorbed will define your own transcendence, you know nothing about the creative process and their inner workings; Sure, if a machine does it, and if it uses well-known iteration processes, one can argue if it is art, an artistic manifestation or - better yet - if it has intellectual rights that can be "ripped off"; But beating on the chest and claiming stealing, like somehow a musician never played any melodies composed by someone else or a painter never used the technique or subject decomposition as their peers or their ancestors is, frankly, naive.
by Group_B | 2025-12-27 05:31:51+00:00
No it's true. Companies like Insulet and Dexcom could send out lawsuits to all the open source projects out there that involved REing. Dexcom's glucose share API was REed years ago, and Dexcom hasn't even tried updating or stopping the use of unofficial APIs. All I'm saying is that the companies really don't care at all.
by s1artibartfast | 2025-12-27 05:31:52+00:00
Extended time is your own proposal, and one you successfully defeated. This is generally called a strawman.

Instead, I propose that the type of tied is informationally and qualitatively distinct. The exhaustion of the weight of the world, internal struggle, amidst a dismal hellscape is different than "really tired".

Great writing can build depth of quality and understanding with the authors intent.

LOTR could be summarized with a sentence. The content is in the detail.
by Morganwa-15 | 2025-12-27 05:32:21+00:00
Wenzhou Siding Medical Technology Co., Ltd. stands out as a prominent player in the wet wipes industry, offering a diverse range of products that cater to both consumer and industrial markets. With a commitment to quality, innovation, and customer satisfaction, Siding has established itself as a reliable manufacturer and supplier. This article explores the company's strengths, product offerings, and its reputation in the market.https://info.wzsding.com/wenzhou-siding-a-leader-in-wet-wipe...
by saghm | 2025-12-27 05:33:53+00:00
I don't think it's quite that simple. The reason they had such a large install size in the first place was due to concern about the load times for players using HDDs instead of SSDs; duplicating the data was intended to be a way to avoid making some players load into levels much more slowly than others (which in an online multiplayer game would potentially have repercussions for other players as well). The link you give mentions that this was based on flawed data (although it's somewhat light on those details), but that's means the actual cause was a combination of a technical mistake and the presence of care for user experience, just not the experience of the majority at the expense of the smaller but not insignificant minority. There's certainly room for argument about whether this was the correct judgement call to make or that they should have been better at recognizing their data was flawed, but it doesn't really seem like it fits the trends of devs not giving a shit about user experience. If making perfect judgement calls and never having flawed data is the bar for proving you care about users, we might as well just give up on the idea that any companies will ever reach it.
by billforsternz | 2025-12-27 05:33:54+00:00
I was troubled by my own comment. How exactly did Bosch handle this? I went back and checked and in fact the rejection email came from their email server, it was an "access denied" type email that I originally misinterpreted as a "you don't have access" type message leaving me annoyed but really I took away and remembered a wrong impression. Looking more carefully, the message doesn't mean anything subtle, it just means the email address (oss-request@bshg.com for the record) doesn't exist. Which is bad, but not nearly as bad as I portrayed it above. Apologies (for the record) to Bosch.
by stevenjgarner | 2025-12-27 05:33:58+00:00
Yes! K’NEX [1] is based on spatial geometry. You connect plastic rods of different lengths into star-shaped connectors. This creates a "skeleton" or wireframe structure. It is much better than LEGO for building large-scale, open-air structures like roller coasters, Ferris wheels, and bridges. It is superior for kinetic builds. Interestingly, K’NEX has released "K’NEX Bricks" in the past that are compatible with LEGO studs, and some modern K’NEX sets include brick-compatible parts.

[1] https://www.basicfun.com/knex/
by ilvez | 2025-12-27 05:34:06+00:00
My top book this year was Joe Abercrombie "The Devils".

Also highlights were:

- Brandon Sanderson "Wind and Truth" & "Yumi and the Nightmare Painter"

- Indrek Hargla most of "Apothecary Melchior" series (didn't read all yet :)

- Jim Butcher "Brief Cases"

- James Islington "The Strength of the Few"

Rest of the stuff:

- I. Hargla "Süvahavva" series

- John Gwynne "Ruin" & "Wrath"

- nobody103 "Mother of Learning" I, II, III

- Daniel T. Jackson "Gatebound"

- Brandon Sanderson "Frugal Wizard's Handbook for Surviving Medieval England"

Re-reads (mostly on audio for dozing off, but then got hooked .. again):

- James S.A. Corey "Caliban's War" & "Cibola Burn"

- George RR Martin "Game of Thrones"

- Robin Hobb "Assassin's Apprentice"
by kccqzy | 2025-12-27 05:35:26+00:00
Shallow clones themselves aren’t the issue. It’s that updating shallow clones requires the server to spend a bunch of CPU time and GitHub simply isn’t willing to provide that for free.

The solution is simple: using a shallow clone means that the use case doesn’t care about the history at all, so download a tarball of the repo for the initial download and then later rsync the repo. Git can remain the source of truth for all history, but that history doesn’t have to be exposed.
by renewiltord | 2025-12-27 05:36:09+00:00
I see. I see. I got tripped up by 'LLM' since I got the GPUs for diffusion models. Anyway, the whole thing sounds like the old days when I had Ubuntu Dapper Drake running flawlessly on my laptop and everyone was telling me Linux wasn't ready: it's an artifact of the hardware and some people have great support and others don't. Glad you do.
by godelski | 2025-12-27 05:37:41+00:00
Working in any science should also make this argument clearer. Data as text is hard to read and communicate. Even explanations of results. But graphs? Those are worth a thousand words. They communicate so much so fast. There's also a lot of skill to doing this accurately and well, just as one can say about writing. A whole subfield of computer graphics is dedicated to data visualization because it's so useful. Including things like colors. Things people often ignore because it feels so natural and obvious but actually isn't.

I think it's naïve to claim there's a singular best method to communicate. Text is great, especially since it is asynchronous. But even the OP works off of bad assumptions that are made about verbal language being natural and not being taught. But there's a simple fact, when near another person we strongly prefer to speak than write. And when we can mix modes we like to. There's an art to all this and I think wanting to have a singular mode is more a desire of simplicity than a desire to be optimal
by aforwardslash | 2025-12-27 05:38:32+00:00
That is a somewhat broad claim that needs decomposing. I would agree that Chinese EV industry is quite more advanced in terms of manufacturing processes and cost optimization, but that is not "technically" more advanced per se, its just a reflection of a culture. Maybe the salt batteries will be a breakthrough, but at least for me it has been difficult finding reliable data on it; Other than that, afaik (and from a layman perspective) there isn't anything inherently superior in chinese EV vehicles from a technological perspective, when compared to western counterparts. Cheaper, yes. But thats about it.