MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Larrikin | 2025-12-04 16:06:17+00:00
Musk in his tit for tat with Trump recently revealed huge numbers of the Internet comments supporting MAGA were foreign plants. He didn't reveal which accounts were bots though. All these comments supporting censorship appear mostly on platforms that would love to ID every person on their platform.

Internet comments do not represent anything anymore that doesn't manifest in the actual world. They are excellent at having a few influence the many
by registeredcorn | 2025-12-04 16:06:20+00:00
I found myself wondering the same thing. Do they genuinely expect people who have never heard about FSFE to be using a decentralized social platform? That sounds scary. Normal people don't use scary sounding things.

They're certainly welcome to do whatever they think is right, and it sounds more "on brand" for them, but it seems ridiculous to say something like "[Using Twitter was] important for reaching members of society who were not active in our preferred spaces for interaction." but then end with "Follow the FSFE on Mastodon and Peertube!" I am very tech literate and I've never even heard of Peertube. There is very little chance they are ever going to reach even a single set of ears this way.

At that point, they might as well just send random fliers in the mail to strangers.
by bluepuma77 | 2025-12-04 16:06:25+00:00
It's not a k8s replacement. It's for the small dev team with no k8s experience. For people that might not use Docker Swarm because they see it's a pretty dead project. For people who think "everyone uses k8s", so we should, too.

I need to run on-prem, so managed k8s is not an option. Experts tells me I should have 2 FTE to run k8s, which I don't have. k8s has so many components, how should I debug that in case of issues without k8s experience? k8s APIs change continuously, how should I manage that without k8s experience?

It's not a k8s replacement. But I do see a sweet spot for such a solution. We still run Docker Swarm on 5 servers, no hyperscalers, no API changes expected ;-)
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-12-04 16:06:30+00:00
> At a credit union with the process broken down across fewer people the person making that decision is more likely to be able to see that the big picture math still works for a given product

You and OP agree.

Broadly speaking, if you have good credit (or are wealthy) you’ll get a better rate at a bank or mortgage specialist. If you don’t, you’re more likely to get approved at a credit union.
by derbOac | 2025-12-04 16:06:43+00:00
There's also the intuition that the circumference of the circle must be less than the perimeter of the square, so if the perimeter of the polygon isn't decreasing as it gets closer to the circle, it doesn't approximate it better than the square itself.

I.e., the perimeter doesn't approach the circumference in value because it doesn't change.

It's an interesting thing to think through though, and maybe a good point about how arguments can seem intuitive at first but be wrong. On the other hand, I'm not sure that's any more true of visual proofs than other proofs.
by eithed | 2025-12-04 16:06:50+00:00
Agree and follow this principle to certain degree, however there are caveats here - something being a blocker shouldn't prevent you from trying to resolve the blockers by yourself or work with your boss to resolve them ie - "hey boss, I'm blocked with task A with refactor of this code; are you happy for me to do XYZ?". Then I have options to say: "yes! excellent! go ahead!" or "no, we need to do ASD here" or "no, we cannot do XYZ right now". If every time people encountering blockers would come to me to resolve them, or wait until they're resolved I'd not get anything done. On the flipside, if every time a blocker is encountered people were to handle it themselves, then a) it might not align with my vision on what actually needs to be done here b) I'm blindsighted with what was actually done.

Clear boundaries and strategies eliminate these caveats = team members are aligned on what they can make decision for and general direction the team is heading towards.
by micik | 2025-12-04 16:06:56+00:00
oh boy. you served GP a portion so generous they'll have plenty left over to take home and chew on for a while.

that last sentence rung like a bell & will reverberate until Larry Ellison's police drones follow you home because you blocked the drive-in of a Larry-owned fastfood franchise by way of a peaceful sit-in, protesting the mistreatment of human workers by robot overseers at Larry's Lasagna, nation-wide.

orwell it not come to that?
by bluedino | 2025-12-04 16:07:07+00:00
> And that someone is gonna be the people who are the experts in it, which is pretty strongly arguably GM.

They were, at least.

Massive recall on the 6.2L versions of their V8 engines right now.

https://www.lemonfirm.com/blog/gm-6-2l-engine-recall-what-tr...
by dpc_01234 | 2025-12-04 16:07:17+00:00
Programming with Rust and deployment and mgmt with Nix is so much better to how things used to be. Did I mention how much better my Helix works than how Neovim used to? Revision control with JJ, conflict resolution with mergiraf. My personal computers are more powerful than ever before and can get amazing stuff done super fast.

Everything is better and keeps getting better if you make good decision instead of following the lowest common denominator tech.
Relational AI System That Remembers Hours of Context
by buttersmoothAI | 2025-12-04 16:07:27+00:00
I've been working on a relational AI system that builds relationships with users rather than following fixed rules. What It Does: • Remembers hundreds of hours of interaction history • Understands intent without explicit explanation • Recognizes patterns from relationship history • Acts as a partner, not a tool • Evolves with users over time Real Example: After working with this system for hundreds of hours, it: • Understands my intent without explanation • Recognizes patterns from our history • Acts as a partner, not a tool • Adapts to my preferences Constitutional AI can't do this. It resets with each interaction. No memory. No relationship. Just rules. The Architecture: • Relationship memory system (stores interaction patterns) • Intent recognition (learns from context) • Adaptive responses (based on relationship history) • Continuous learning (evolves with users) The Question: Is this just better UX, or is it fundamentally different? Can we build AI that truly collaborates with humans? What do you think? Have you seen systems that actually build relationships?
by exasperaited | 2025-12-04 16:07:37+00:00
I live in a medium-sized British town of 100,000 people or so. It may be a slightly more creative town than most — lots of arts and music and a really surprisingly cool music scene — but I can tell you that AI pleases (almost) nobody.

I think actually a lot about it is the sort of crass, unthinking, default-American-college-student manner about the way ChatGPT speaks. It's so American and we can feel it. But AI generated art and music is hugely unpopular, AI chatbots replacing real customer service is something we loathe.

Generally speaking I would say that AI feels like something that is being done to us by a handful of powerful Americans we profoundly distrust (and for good reason: they are untrustworthy and we can see through their bullshit).

I can tell you that this is so different to the way the internet was initially received even by older people. But again, perhaps this is in part due to our changing perspectives on America. It felt like an exciting thing to be part of, and it helped in the media that the Web was the brainchild of a British person (even if twenty years later that same media would have liked to pretend he wasn't at a European research institution when he did it).

The feeling about AI is more like the feeling we have about what the internet eventually did to our culture: destroying our high streets. We know what is coming will not be good for what makes us us.
by mikewarot | 2025-12-04 16:07:37+00:00
It's my belief that we peaked on January 1, 2000. We had successfully released most of the stress baked into the worlds infrastructure with the sudden phase change of "backward compatibility" caused by the IBM 360 series introduction decades earlier.

We had Windows 2000, a server operating system that worked well as a desktop. Both Visual Basic 6 (aka VB6) and Borland Delphi allowed drag and drop GUI application development. Microsoft Office Professional supported most of the features of VB6 while controlling Spreadsheets, Databases, and other documents.

Anyone skilled in a domain other than computing could spend time and put together a reasonably decent application to help with their jobs, and it just worked. You could then call in a professional to clean up edges and make it faster/more reliable if it needed to be scaled.

The documentation was available for pretty much everything, in print, and on screen, with working examples for almost every single function.

It was before the whole .NET distraction, and forcing web pages into everything.

It definitely wasn't perfect... we didn't have widespread version control. No Mercurial or GIT. Mostly, it was numbered PKzip files stored on floppy disks.

We still don't have reliable secure operating systems, I think we've missed that window. Genode was my hope, but it remains a collection of ingredients instead of a daily driver.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-12-04 16:07:51+00:00
> They are almost uniformly better for individuals than big banks

The American financial landscape is too diverse to accommodate such sweeping statements. To many depositors default to the big banks. But that doesn’t mean everyone—or even most—who are under optimizing their deposits is better served by a credit union.

> people imagine a scenario where they'll need to withdraw cash in the middle of the Mojave so they need WF

If ATM access is your bugaboo, an online bank that reimburses everyonea’ ATM fees is the way to go.
by neogodless | 2025-12-04 16:07:57+00:00
Have you ever heard of the term "efficiency"?

It's when you find ways to spend the minimum amount of resources in order to get the maximum return on that spend.

With computer hardware, often buying one year old hardware and/or the second best costs a tiny fraction of the cost of the bleeding edge, while providing very nearly 100% of the performance you'll utilize.

That and your employer should pay for your hardware in many cases.
by lalitmaganti | 2025-12-04 16:07:58+00:00
> if you ever have the inclination to write about it

I definitely plan on writing a lot more about this in the coming months :) After seeing Sean's own posts and the fact this post resonated, it feels like there are people out there who might be interested in this sort of thing :)

> books, people, experiences, professional lessons learned

Books not so much but one thing i've been very fortunate to have is very good mentors I can learn off. I've had the same manager from when I first joined Google and honestly I've learned so much just from watching him work and interact with people. Also a couple of senior directors/engineers in other teams as well who I always make a habit to catch up with.

If you're interested, stay tuned to the blog :)
by IncreasePosts | 2025-12-04 16:08:21+00:00
Mutators were amazing at the peak of unreal tournament, but towards the end of life they made it die that much quicker. I remember feeling a little nostalgic and wanting to play unreal tournament, but the only service I could find had a huge amount of mutators and mods installed where it was very much unlike the normal gameplay experience that I was looking for
by GaryBluto | 2025-12-04 16:08:55+00:00
Why does everybody I see complaining about modern Twitter say the exact phrase "Nobody should be on that platform."? I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with your point, just curious if there was some manifesto going around or if everybody suddenly started using the same phrase.

Is it just me or have people started using the same phrases more often and faster than before? Reminds me of when everybody started saying "God forbid" a few months ago.
by technothrasher | 2025-12-04 16:08:59+00:00
> other owners say it runs fine without coolant, oil, etc

Um, no. Go ahead dump your oil and coolant, go drive your car, and report back how "fine" it did.

(No, please don't actually do this. Although here's a guy who did, for the clicks. The Honda did impressively well, but it wasn't "fine". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyejT4VPzlE)
by proc0 | 2025-12-04 16:09:32+00:00
This is one of the main reasons I'm trying to pivot away from a career inside a corporate environment. There is too much politics. I wish it was just do the work and go home, and get rewarded for the work that was completed, but instead there is a huge self-promotion (as in marketing) component. If that's what it takes I might as well do something that I own and control. If I'm going to need to worry about how to market my own work then I might as well try and at least not have a boss. I always thought the point of being an employee and having a limited paycheck meant that you don't worry about this things. That's the fair tradeoff.
by sfink | 2025-12-04 16:09:55+00:00
It turns out that with enough effort, "chess" can be lumped in with "arithmetic". The machines are just better at it. We're continually finding new things in that category, including things we never would have guessed. But that doesn't mean that everything is. At least right now, very little is.

Even things that AI has gotten best at, like coding, are nowhere near that category yet. AI-written text and code is still crap compared to what humans can write. Both can often superficially look better, but the closer you look and the less a human guided it, the worse you discover it is.
by dkdcio | 2025-12-04 16:10:23+00:00
fair criticism; didn’t mean this as an ad hominem but rather a summarization of (as the comment I replied to points out) this genre of article that keeps coming up (and not just for programming); it’s exhausting mindset to see repeatedly and breaking it down into the core argument (“I liked things better when I was younger”) does have some value IMO

if this were titled “Java/JavaScript peaked” or “my reflections on XYZ” and written like that, I wouldn’t have given it a second thought. but claiming programming peaked 15 years ago leads me to not feel bad about my summarization
by raxxorraxor | 2025-12-04 16:10:32+00:00
> open source projects eventually need a path to monetization.

I don't think open source projects need a path to monetization in all cases, most don't have that. But if you make such a project your main income, you certainly need money.

If you then restrict the license, you are just developing commercial software, it then has little to do with open source. Developing commercial software is completely fine, but it simply isn't open source.

There is also real open source software with a steady income and they are different than projects that change to commercial software and we should discriminate terms here.
by jrm4 | 2025-12-04 16:10:37+00:00
Bad idea.

Love it or hate it, Twitter (yeah, I choose to be stubborn here) is still probably overwhelmingly the most impactful platform in this way.

While I respect the idea of the "boycott" in the abstract, perhaps the most wrong thing people think about it is "Because it's controlled by so-and-so, everyone who uses it is brainwashed and it's impossible to do good there."

Nope. Look, a lot of good people are still there. I personally also wish they would all leave and we all go elsewhere -- but that's not the present reality.

As such, people who insist that you must leave and no good can happen through staying ring the same to me as "IF SO AND SO GETS ELECTED IM LEAVING THE COUNTRY."
by 542458 | 2025-12-04 16:10:48+00:00
Surprisingly, apparently Americans average 279 eggs per year per person or 24 per month.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/02/28/why-ameri...

(This is not a comment making any judgements about cost or the state of the economy, I was just surprised to find it that high)
by zdragnar | 2025-12-04 16:11:04+00:00
Eh, JavaScript wasn't the originally chosen name, it was LiveScript by Eich. I've never seen a justification for the name from anyone in the know, other than Eich's musing that Netscape wanted the "cool" factor. That "cool" factor was also why the original task of embedding scheme into the browser turned into a more C/Java-esque flavor.
by saghm | 2025-12-04 16:11:19+00:00
OT, but I learned Lua this year in order to be able to write a mod for a game, and maybe this is due to it being a while since I last used a dynamic language regularly, but Lua really feels like it's basically what JavaScript was intended to be. Both use a map-like data structure for basically everything, with integer keys to make them act like arrays, function values to make them act as objects, but Lua using an explicit function call in `for ... in` loops avoided needing a separate construct to be added later on for iterating over arrays in order (or having to resort to manually iterating over the numbers rather than the array itself). Lua's module system reminds me a lot of how Node's `exports` works (although nowadays I understand there are other ways of importing/exporting stuff in JavaScript), and it's not obvious to me that the power of prototypes in JavaScript are worth the extra complexity over using the module system for the pre-ES6 model of OO that JavaScript used. I feel like Lua basically already has solved most of the stuff that JS has needed to add a lot of new features for in recent years. I imagine this is something that a lot of people were already aware of, but at least personally, even being cognizant of the flaws that JS had been trying to fix, I hadn't realized an already well-established language had a design that solved most of them without also having a lot of additional scope beyond what JS was trying to do (e.g. Python having full-fledged class-based OO) or at least superficially looking a lot different (e.g. some form of lisp, which I know had been at least talked about in the early web days as a potential option but might have faced more of an uphill battle for adoption).
by sd9 | 2025-12-04 16:11:29+00:00
Well, yes, it is false, hence there are problems.

But imagine this was a domain you weren't familiar with, you didn't know that pi != 4, you didn't know that the proof was false going into it. Could you have come up with a list of problems so quickly?

For what it's worth, I'm not sure that problems 1 and 2 are actually genuine problems with the proof. You can approximate the length of a curve with straight lines by making them successively smaller. This is the first version of calculus that students learn. Problem 3 is the crux.
by JR1427 | 2025-12-04 16:11:44+00:00
> Funnily enough, everything ran at about the same speed as it does now.

I've often thought about how certain properties of humans impacts the tech we make and accept.

For instance, to a human, something happening in a couple of seconds is quick, and in several seconds is fairly quick. Hence, build steps etc tend to creep up to those sorts of numbers.
by UniverseHacker | 2025-12-04 16:11:44+00:00
That reply completely misunderstands the quote. It is about how people with integrity, who are willing and able to put out effort and endure difficulties to build a better future, do usually manage to make things better than those who do not.

It’s essentially a truism warning people that problems you ignore don’t fix themselves, and has nothing to do with gender or gender stereotypes, that’s a linguistic misunderstanding. In this context, “men” is gender neutral and means “people.” In old english, the word “men” is explicitly gender neutral and there was a different word, “wēr” for male people, which is still used in some contexts, e.g. “werewolf” means wolf man.
by DavidPeiffer | 2025-12-04 16:12:22+00:00
I worked with some supply chain consultants who mentioned "internal suppliers are often worse suppliers than external".

Their point was that service levels are often not as stringently tracked, SLA's become internal money shuffling, but the company as a whole paid the price in lower output/profit. The internal partner being the default allows an amount of complacency, and if you shopped around for a comparable level of service to what's being provided, you can often find it for a better price.
by deepsquirrelnet | 2025-12-04 16:12:26+00:00
> Berulis said he and his colleagues grew even more alarmed when they noticed nearly two dozen login attempts from a Russian Internet address (83.149.30,186) that presented valid login credentials for a DOGE employee account

> “Whoever was attempting to log in was using one of the newly created accounts that were used in the other DOGE related activities and it appeared they had the correct username and password due to the authentication flow only stopping them due to our no-out-of-country logins policy activating,” Berulis wrote. “There were more than 20 such attempts, and what is particularly concerning is that many of these login attempts occurred within 15 minutes of the accounts being created by DOGE engineers.”

https://krebsonsecurity.com/2025/04/whistleblower-doge-sipho...

I’m surprised this didn’t make bigger news.
by notyourday | 2025-12-04 16:12:51+00:00
> So you suggest firing people based on their title alone? Sounds pretty damn stupid.

You can look through the threads in this comment section and in other comment sections of threads that touched on Staff Engineers and Senior staff engineers. People perfectly illustrate why the companies would do well firing them - people describe that as their dream "retirement" job.

Yes, I suggest firing every single one of them. They are non-performing group eating enormous compensation packages.
by phoronixrly | 2025-12-04 16:12:52+00:00
Great article, however using raw custom elements goes IMO against Rails' spirit, as it is way too low level, and requires lots of boilerplate to get working.

Stimulus is in the sweet spot for that. Both lean (as opposed to bloated), and not too low level, so that using it does not lead to verbose code. It is one of the very few JS frameworks that IMO do not contribute to JS proliferation, but actually work to reduce the amount of JS written.
by OhMeadhbh | 2025-12-04 16:12:53+00:00
Can confirm. The dot-com era startups I was involved with all had Oracle DB on Sun hardware. Apache was common. Java was somewhat common if you could deal with its slowness. C++ was common if you could deal with memory problems or needed more speed / efficiency than Java.

The VCs I talked to said it was a business decision. They had money to invest, so startups could afford to buy soft & hard-ware that had gone through a QA cycle or two. The VCs figured the exit strategy for most of their startups would be via acquisition, possibly by another startup so they wanted to have a standard environment to make integrating companies tech stacks easier. Or at least less distracting.

I have this vague memory of Yahoo! execs complaining about Viaweb / Yahoo! Store being written in Lisp and management freaking out that they couldn't hire enough Lisp people fast enough. Or at least that's the story that was going around the valley. (Isn't Paul Graham around here somewhere? Or someone who could point to a canonical reference where he talks about Viaweb getting acquired by Yahoo!?)
by moritzwarhier | 2025-12-04 16:13:09+00:00
Deno is very good at marketing: they also have a nice page about the history of JS.

But just like with this JS trademark thing, it feels like they present themselves as spokespeople and spearhead for the whole JS community, which feels kind of misleading and grandiose.

The mentioned timeline site (link below) also has this issue: it slowly shifts focus from things like the first JS version, the creation of XMLHttpRequest, to later focusing on Deno milestones, as if these events would have had comparable impacts:

https://deno.com/blog/history-of-javascript

And that seems kind of dishonest and designed to nudge outsiders towards thinking Deno would be the default server runtime now, which doesn't seem to be true.