MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by gsck | 2025-12-22 16:31:10+00:00
Cannot wait for another version of Lua to sit unused basically everywhere.

Truly is a shame, everything seems to have settled on 5.1 for the most part without ever being updated, or any intention of it being updated. Some really nice features post 5.1

I understand each version of Lua introduces breaking changes in the language, which isn't great as the language becomes fragmented (Or not really, once again 5.1 is pretty ubiquitous)
by patmorgan23 | 2025-12-22 16:31:13+00:00
From the nanog thread it seemed like the IP allocations for the IPv6 transition space (4.10) was the only space using this manual Excel process. That's probably how they initially started managing these allocations with the intention to build it into their automated systems but hadn't gotten around to it. And it sounds like they're prioritizing that work now, and have implemented an additional lay of checks in the mean time.

This is a really big egg on face moment for ARIN, but it sounds like they are responding appropriately.
by gregw2 | 2025-12-22 16:31:51+00:00
Python won because Google picked it over perl in the early 2000s, declaring that it was more uniform in having one preferred way to do things rather than allowing (in contrast to Perl) programmers having a zillion ways to do things.

Larry Wall, creator of Perl, coined the phrase, "make the easy things easy, and the hard things possible". But the things perl made easy were not always things that the market needed. Perl was very distrustful of enterprise disciplines and the perl culture "let a thousand flowers bloom" mentality (which they/we called "There's more than one way to do it"/(TMTOWTDI)) was not actually useful for organizations maintaining larger code bases/systems with large groups of mixed skill level people.

Python threaded that needle of centralizing a right way to do things (not just whitespaces) more effectively.

I also observed Scala suffering from similarly disfunctional "TMTOWTDI" dynamic in organizations I belonged to; different people had wildly different styles of solving even basic problems and it really made code hard to maintain even in smaller organizations where people came and went and new people were onboarded frequently.

Plus data science use cases saved Python's web/scripting lifespan in a way slightly analogous to AI/CUDA extending NVidia's 3D graphics-centric roots. (Although the python data science ecosystem nowdays does have some TMTOWTDI weaknesses that remind me of perl/cpan's choices of web development frameworks of the mid-2000s!)
by YJfcboaDaJRDw | 2025-12-22 16:32:12+00:00
Certainly but US policy changes every 4 years and China has a gigantic one child policy issue which just can't be changed. I think it will with China somewhat similar how it was back in the day with the udssr where economists were predicting its economy would outgrow the economy of the USA by 1994 and then 1991 or so it died. Could imagine something similar might be awaiting china
by ar_lan | 2025-12-22 16:32:14+00:00
This was epic, and reminded me of the magic of programming when I first found a video game maker at a wee 11 years old.

Writing code to make music feels so natural to me (a musically inept, but proficient coder) and this breaks down so many barriers.

I wonder how Cursor fares with Strudel so far.
by tt24 | 2025-12-22 16:32:46+00:00
I’m sorry to disappoint you but the EU is unable to create any usable alternatives to US tech chiefly due to lack of SWE talent (among other things). Anyone remotely competent sees the 40k senior SWE salaries offered by European tech companies and immediately crawls through glass just to work at a mid-tier company in the Northern California area of the United States.
by metalman | 2025-12-22 16:33:11+00:00
there is an advantage to not bieng the biggest in a fight, in that you know when you are bleeding and need to retreat and regroup.
where the US is so big that time and time it keeps backing much smaller countrys into corners and forcing an extitential conflict where by the time they figure out the other guy is just going to fight to the death, AND has friends, and the US can never proffit.
Now the US is threatening, Greenland, again,while desperatly trying to conjure a reason to invade south america
ALL of it as a bluff to buy time for the always almost quantum AI supremecy that will deliver ever greater technological power, forever.
or maybe is too much ket and coke
by gammarator | 2025-12-22 16:33:30+00:00
The sentence is accurate, your comment is not. The administration unilaterally canceled existing grants and halted and showed granting of funds appropriated by Congress, so the money was not used as allocated. If Congress allocated $1B for medical research and the administration only releases funds for $500M, it’s ignoring the law.

For example,
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01396-2

As to “exercising control,” American science has been great because scientists judge which projects are the strongest. That’s being replaced by judgement by political appointees who are not experts: https://www.science.org/content/article/nsf-pares-down-grant...
by jmclnx | 2025-12-22 16:33:49+00:00
Yes, a "reboot" is needed. A bit of history from what I remember:

Nixon's plan would have passed except for Ted Kennedy, he stopped it in its tracks. Then when the Clintons came in something flipped, the GOP was all against what Hillary was trying to push. I forgot what it was but I think it was some kind of single payer.

So under Obama, the democrats took the Massachusetts plan created by Romney (GOP), which I believe the Heritage Foundation even endorsed, thus created the ACA.

So here we are. Now I think we are in a sad place where for-profit healthcare is entrenched, bribing both side of the aisle to keep their profits high.
by Aurornis | 2025-12-22 16:33:52+00:00
> and it's pretty easy for Claude Code at least to ignore the prompts, commands, Markdown files, README, architecture docs, etc.

I would agree with that!

I've been experimenting with having Claude re-write those documents itself. It can take simple directives and turn them into hierarchical Markdown lists that have multiple bullet points. It's annoying and overly verbose for humans to read, but the repetition and structure seems to help the LLM.

I also interrupt it and tell it to refer back to CLAUDE.md if it gets too off track.

Like I said, though, I'm not really an LLM power user. I'd be interested to hear tips from others with more time on these tools.
by btown | 2025-12-22 16:33:52+00:00
With great love to your comment, this has the same vibes as the infamous 2007 Dropbox comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224

I'd also argue that the context for an agent message is not the commit/release for the codebase on which it was run, but often a commit/release that is yet to be set up. So there's a bit of apples-to-oranges in terms of release tagging for the log/trace.

It's a really interesting problem to solve, because you could in theory try to retroactively find which LLM session, potentially from days prior, matches a commit that just hit a central repository. You could automatically connect the LLM session to the PR that incorporated the resulting code.

Though, might this discourage developers from openly iterating with their LLM agent, if there's a panopticon around their whole back-and-forth with the agent?

Someone can, and should, create a plug-and-play system here with the right permission model that empowers everyone, including the Programmer-Archaeologists (to borrow shamelessly from Vernor Vinge) who are brought in to "un-vibe the vibe code" and benefit from understanding the context and evolution.

But I don't think that "just dump it in clickhouse" is a viable solution for most folks out there, even if they have the infrastructure and experience with OTel stacks.
by throw0101c | 2025-12-22 16:33:54+00:00
> It's incumbent on these organizations, which want to be seen as purveyors of truth, to make sure their readers end up with the proper understanding.

It's incumbent that readers/viewers actually want to properly understand the world: Fox News broadcasts the stuff that it does because people want to it, and their ratings / market share is evidence of it.

* https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/20...

* https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/msn...

* https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2025/06/10/the-politi...

If Fox doesn't supply what their audience demands (e.g., saying "Trump won the election") they'll go someplace else:

* http://archive.is/https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2020/...

There are three ways to make a living:
1) Lie to people who want to be lied to, and you’ll get rich.
2) Tell the truth to those who want the truth, and you’ll make a living.
3) Tell the truth to those who want to be lied to, and you’ll go broke.

* https://jasonzweig.com/three-ways-to-get-paid/
by gogasca | 2025-12-22 16:33:56+00:00
I started my data analysis journey using Perl and then Python. Perl had also a variety of libraries, online classes from O'Reilly's, samples online, CGI support, I moved to Python when installing some dependencies became troublesome and Perl versioning was not compatible between each other don't recall the details, since then been using Python extensibly since 2.7
by ninth_ant | 2025-12-22 16:34:13+00:00
Perl was my introduction to web programming in the 90s, and then I moved onto python and php.

Perl’s alien syntax and how there were multiple competing “best practices” put off newcomers and made it difficult to code review.

Perl also stagnated for quite some time due to the efforts to move to Perl 6, though python likewise stalled later it already had better traction at that point.

However I’d argue that Perl lost to PHP at least as much as it lost to python. PHP was revolutionary at the time for how easy and straightforward it was to do simple web programming which was one of the big use cases for Perl.

By the early 2010s there wasn't much of any use case that made sense to choose Perl. Sysadmin scripting was clearer to review and maintain in python and golang, web applications moved to php and frameworks written in languages that didn’t have the downsides of Perl.
by dmix | 2025-12-22 16:34:23+00:00
Canada Post is losing money on parcel delivery, not just regular mail. They are pretty awful as a service (for anything serious at least) and are constantly going on strike, so everyone is flocking to private competition. I've had 3 different packages end up in a purgatory in 2 different strikes and now I use Fedex instead.

Which is funny because parcel delivery has only grown over the last decade while Canada Post loses more and more money, while their union workers are demanding pay raises and job security.
by theptip | 2025-12-22 16:34:40+00:00
A really interesting point that keeps coming up in discussions about LLMs is “what trade-offs need to be re-evaluated”

> I also believe that observability is up for grabs again. We now have both the need and opportunity to take advantage of it on a whole new level. Most people were not in a position where they could build their own eBPF programs, but LLMs can

One of my big predictions for ‘26 is the industry following through with this line of reasoning. It’s now possible to quickly code up OSS projects of much higher utility and depth.

LLMs are already great at Unix tools; a small api and codebase that does something interesting.

I think we’ll see an explosion of small tools (and Skills wrapping their use) for more sophisticated roles like DevOps, and meta-Skills for how to build your own skill bundles for your internal systems and architecture.

And perhaps more ambitiously, I think services like Datadog will need to change their APIs or risk being disrupted; in the short term nobody is going to be able to move fast enough inside a walled garden to keep up with the velocity the Claude + Unix tools will provide.

UI tooling is nice, but it’s not optimized for agents.
by lordkrandel | 2025-12-22 16:34:43+00:00
Your definition of good doesn't apply to me. The more "productive ways" are to me, actually non-factive. Like, contemplation, art for art sake, playing, meditating. And this comes from reduced time spent on producing material things. So going faster and doing more to me is a dis-value. Life is not measured with negative entropy. Life is not measured, not quantitative.
by scapbi | 2025-12-22 16:34:44+00:00
I know about corruption; anyone who lives in a third-world country understands it. However, as an engineer who built the technical solution, I feel hopeless. Even though my team has strong technical skills and worked extremely hard, with very little sleep for six months, to create something for the greater good, situations like this still happen. In fact, they are becoming worse and more frequent.

As an engineer, I hope that I can gain more knowledge, connect with more people, and do more to help those who have no one to protect them.
by kashyapc | 2025-12-22 16:34:59+00:00
I know what you mean, it's the uncanny valley. But we don't need to "pretend" that it is a machine. It is a goddamned machine. Surely, only two unclouded brain cells can help us reach this conclusion?!

Yuval Noah Harari's "simple" idea comes to mind (I often disagree with his thinking, as he tends to make bold and sweeping statements on topics well out of his expertise area). It sounds a bit New Age-y, but maybe it's useful in the context of LLMs:

"How can you tell if something is real? Simple: If it suffers, it is real. If it can't suffer, it is not real."

An LLM can't suffer. So no need to get one's knickers in a twist with mental gymnastics.
by adgjlsfhk1 | 2025-12-22 16:35:05+00:00
The really important thing is that logical qbit error decreases exponentially with error correction amount. As such, for the ~1000 qbit regime needed for factoring, the amount of error correction ends up being essentially a constant factor (~1000x physical to logical). As long as you can build enough "decent" quality physical qbits and connect them, you can get near perfect logical qbits.
by comex | 2025-12-22 16:35:12+00:00
Just be glad that there remains a concrete benefit to not atrophying your mind and deeply understanding your code. For now. In the long run, I suspect the behemoth will become just as capable at debugging and dealing with complexity as humans. At that point, human involvement in the actual code will be pointless, and the only remaining human skill needed will be properly directing the agents – the skill those people are learning right now.

(I don’t relish this future at all, myself, but I’m starting to think it really will happen soon.)
by bluecalm | 2025-12-22 16:35:43+00:00
They can't do it having access to the code but somehow people without access to the code [1] can still hack the solution and actually not only move it but also personalize it, change its size, use small/big icons or, my personal preference, hide it so it never appears by moving the mouse alone (only if you ask for it pressing Windows key).

[1] - https://windhawk.net/
by listenfaster | 2025-12-22 16:35:44+00:00
Very creative guy operating this site (look at this! https://timthompson.com/spacepalette/) though it looks like it’s been idle the past 4 years or so? The live-coding community around tidal cycles will point you to a the fruit of missing projects like tidal-cycles and strudel. A strong inviting community: https://club.tidalcycles.org/
by lesuorac | 2025-12-22 16:36:04+00:00
> Lieutenant General Arnold Bunch outlined the Air Force’s logic at a House Armed Services Subcommittee meeting. L3, he said, is the only company that can do the job. “They have all the tooling, they have all the existing knowledge, and they have the modeling and all the information to do that work,” he said.

Sure, but the CEO isn't the only guy who can run the company. Throw enough of them in prison for espionage and the next one will ensure the company is compliant.

Too big to fail only applies to the company, not management.
by shkkmo | 2025-12-22 16:36:26+00:00
> Usually HN univocally complains about Apple‘s dominant App Store.

There is a strong population on HN that dislikes walled gardens. In my experience there are also plenty of people who disagree. There's also a large population that doesn't like EU tech regulations.

The ratio between different parts of the HN population can change significantly depending of stuff like time of day and headline draw. I don't find it particularly surprising, it isn't like HN is a monolith with internally consistent views across the entire population.
by immibis | 2025-12-22 16:36:55+00:00
Simple code means just doing the thing. It's often misinterpreted to mean code made of lots of small pieces (spaghetti with meatballs code) but this is simply not the case. Often, avoiding abstractions leads to simpler code.

At my job we're disqualifying candidates who don't use enough unnecessary classes. I didn't use them, but they proceeded with my interview because I happened to use some other tricks that showed good knowledge of C++. I think the candidate who just wrote the code to solve the task was the best solution, but I'm not in charge of hiring.

Without revealing the actual interview task, let's pretend it was to write a program that lowpass filters a .wav file. The answer we're apparently looking for is to read the input into a vector, FFT it, zero out the second half, unFFT it, and write the output file. And you must have a class called FFT, one called File, FrequencyDomainFile, and InverseFFT. Because that's simple logical organization of code, right? Meanwhile, the actual simple way to do it is to open the input and output files, copy the header, and proceed through the file one sample at a time doing a convolution on a ring buffer. This latter way involves less code, less computation, less memory, and is all-around better. If you think the ring buffer is too risky, you can still do a convolution over the whole file loaded into memory, and still come out ahead of the FFT solution.

But if you do it this way, we think you didn't use enough abstraction so we reject you. Which is insane. Some time after I got this job, I found out I would have also been rejected if not for a few thoughtful comments, which were apparently some of the very few signals that "this guy knows what he's doing and has chosen not to write classes" rather than "this guy doesn't know how classes work."
by SahAssar | 2025-12-22 16:37:47+00:00
If it's the IT managed computer login then you couldn't use a password manager for it, right?

I think this is more the realm of using windows hello or apple touchid (AFAIK no good, simple, standard built-in way exists for linux distros) to get the first OS login and then you can use your password manager when you are logged into the OS.
by vivin | 2025-12-22 16:38:04+00:00
You can't get away from the engineering part of software engineering even if you are using LLMs. I have been using Claude Opus 4.5, and it's the best out of the models I have tried. I find that I can get Claude to work well if I already know the steps I need to do beforehand, and I can get it to do all of the boring stuff. So it's a series of very focused and directed one-shot prompts that it largely gets correct, because I'm not giving it a huge task, or something open-ended.

Knowing how you would implement the solution beforehand is a huge help, because then you can just tell the LLM to do the boring/tedious bits.
by jscd | 2025-12-22 16:38:06+00:00
This is not providing the same functionality as a "traditional VPN," in the sense that it does not do anything to your traffic going to the wider internet. With popular VPN services, they are an encrypted tunnel for all your internet traffic (some use the same protocol, WireGuard), but at the end of the tunnel they decrypt the message and send it to whatever website you requested, which is exactly what can cause those privacy issues you describe.

In this case, though, it creates an encrypted tunnel _only between your own devices_. This allows you to connect to all your devices, home desktop, phone, laptop, as if they were on the same network, allowing you to do fairly sensitive things like remote desktop without having to expose your machine to the public internet or deal with firewall rules in the same way.

Assuming this project is legitimate, then the only traffic this service would even touch would be those between your own devices, nothing related to public internet requests. And, on top of that, the requests should be encrypted the entire way, inaccessible to any devices other than the ones sending and receiving the requests.

There are many caveats and asterisks I could add, but I think that's a fairly straightforward summary.
by scapbi | 2025-12-22 16:38:19+00:00
Thank you very much for your kind words. What I am thinking about most right now is, first, encouraging my mother and helping her through this difficult situation. Beyond my responsibility to my family, I also feel a responsibility related to the system I built. I want to connect with people who have much more knowledge than I do and see whether we can do something meaningful for third-world countries. That has always been my lifelong dream.
by jaredklewis | 2025-12-22 16:38:29+00:00
Ok, but can you give me an example of even ONE specific commenter who has made inconsistent comments on this topic in different threads?

“HN” is lots of different people with lots of different opinions. Different threads select for different commentators. This is not unusual (nor has it been the other thousand times people have commented on the inconsistency of HN).
by marcosdumay | 2025-12-22 16:39:03+00:00
For very ancient people, it's the longest/shortest day.

After you notice that, if you want more precision, it's the day the Sun rises and sets most on the North/South. It's also the day things cast the largest shadow at noon. You will need some special device to get very precise on the sun raising position (like a pair of stones or something with a hole), and you won't be able to get precision on the shadow thing.

For more modern people, starting about only half a dozen millennia ago, it's the hour the Sun stops moving North/South within the stars and starts moving the other way around. You will need to look at it and take notes many times, and average things out to get any precision. Even more because you can't see the Sun and the stars at the same time, so you have to model them.
by goku12 | 2025-12-22 16:39:34+00:00
> A new foudation needs to be laid, banning global corporations from participating. If not, after a few years, due to their power, money and influence, they will have taken over

No amount of ban or rules will prevent those corporations from carrying out a coup on any foundation or even the society itself. They have enough power, money and influence to find loopholes around them and exploit them.

The only way to stop them is to be eternally vigilant, actively recognize their sleazy tactics and push back together as a determined team. That can be achieved only by a smart population whose basic instincts cannot be easily predicted and manipulated by those corporations.

Take the example of the web. When the bigtech hijacked it and went on their bloat-up rampage, the rest of the community should have just forked the standards, cut out the excess fat and extended it with sane, light and orthogonal designs. Instead, we foolishly let chrome extend their monopoly in web development, market share and future designs of the web.

But the rot extends much deeper. Modern educational system teaches us just enough values and advanced knowledge to be the obedient and productive slaves to these corporations, but never enough to question their motives. It misleads us into believing that we and the world economy owe them our survival. It glorifies personal achievements and hyper-individualism to the extend that we suffer major emotional trauma as a result. Yet, are we even compensated appropriately in return for prioritizing our careers? They programmed us to sacrifice our happiness and relationships to enrich some remorseless and obscenely wealthy strangers.