MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by kergonath | 2026-01-25 11:30:28+00:00
Reading the preamble of the treaty is enough because it explains the mindset behind the European project. The Schuman declaration is also short and very clear on the subject. Even though it’s not a treaty or regulation, it’s a clear demonstration that the people at the time saw much further than just the economy. The core message is political integration to prevent Europe from tearing itself apart every 50 years.
by ChrisMarshallNY | 2026-01-25 11:31:16+00:00
Sounds like the Watergate Scandal. The crime was one thing, but it was the cover-up that caused the most damage.

Once something enters The Canon, it becomes “untouchable,” and no one wants to question it. Fairly classic human nature.

> "The most erroneous stories are those we think we know best -and therefore never scrutinize or question."

-Stephen Jay Gould
by arter45 | 2026-01-25 11:31:33+00:00
Time matters.

Imagine the power grid fails in an entire city for 48 hours. How many apartments or shops have backup power for 48 hours? What about hospitals or cellphone towers or traffic lights?

How long before someone cannot make a 911 call or hits another car at night or dies in intensive care because the machines don’t work anymore? What about all the food in a refrigerator, or CCTV cameras, or POS payments or a thousand other things? And if sometimes physically fails, how long before a technician (who was himself relying on that power grid) is able to reach the place, carrying whatever spare part they have, and fix the thing?

Or, take a dam. I’m no dam expert, but how long does it take before a flood happens? And when water starts flooding the streets, how long before people can’t get out of their homes, cars are swept away, and so on? How long before standing water starts carrying diseases?
by throwup238 | 2026-01-25 11:31:40+00:00
My heuristic is: if you have to ask, you're probably not the right person for the job.

What your describing sounds like the wantrepreneur process and it usually doesn't end well because you will likely have no existing experience in the business domain you are targeting, unless your target market happens to be developer tooling*.

Most successful startups are made by people who already know the problem they are trying to solve because they've experienced it first hand. They have the industry contacts to quickly find early customers and their search for "product-market fit" is usually about whether clients will pay enough to make the startup worthwhile rather than "do clients even want what I'm building."

Ideas are a dime a dozen. Competent engineers are a dime a dozen (relatively). Distribution is what builds startups and that requires industry experience and contacts, or a cofounder that can carry the domain side of the business (in which case they will be the ones filtering ideas).

* I'm assuming you're an engineer. Otherwise you're an idea guy without a clue on how to create viable ideas.
by blackdwarf | 2026-01-25 11:31:46+00:00
Building an AI that chats is easy. Building an AI that calls is painfully hard.

If you have ever tried to build a production-ready voice agent, you know the struggle: fighting with SIP signaling, debugging audio buffers, and wrestling with 2-second latency.

We got tired of the plumbing. So we built SIPHON.
by armchairhacker | 2026-01-25 11:32:26+00:00
Something like this isn’t possible

fn foo(f: impl for<T: ToString> Fn(T)) {
f(“Hello World”);
f(3.14);
}

fn main() {
f(|x| println!("{}", x.to_string());
}

The workaround:

trait FnToString {
fn call(&self, x: impl ToString);
}

fn foo(f: impl FnToString) {
f.call("Hello World");
f.call(3.14);
}

struct AnFnToString;
impl FnToString for AnFnToString {
fn call(&self, x: impl ToString) {
println!("{}", x.to_string());
}
}

fn main() {
foo(AnFnToString);
}
by ben_w | 2026-01-25 11:33:27+00:00
The reason everyone used carpet bombing in WW2 was the inability to aim competently. This even persisted after WW2, leading to some tests of air-to-air nuclear weapons just to give the missiles a decent chance to actually disable the target they were fired at.

The counter-strategies that the British used to defend against German strikes included "switch off all the lights at night so they don't know where they are" and "order newspapers to lie about which part of the city was damaged in order that spies reading British newspapers and reporting back to HQ said missiles fell short/went too far, causing HQ to incorrectly compensate on the next strike". I don't know if the reverse was true, despite now living in Berlin.

Everyone's supply chains were also much shallower, and equipment much cruder and therefore easier to make (though also less efficient). Half of London or Berlin losing electricity makes a much smaller difference when far less was electrified in the first place, e.g. loss of electricity for a heat pump doesn't matter so much when the terraces and apartment blocks have internal fireplaces and regular coal deliveries.

Also re Vietnam, it took until 1997 to return to the per-person energy use it had in 1970: https://ourworldindata.org/profile/energy/vietnam

And until 1993 to reach the not-adjusted-for-population level.

And the electricity graphs don't even go back far enough to see what that war was like, that's all energy.
by atombender | 2026-01-25 11:35:49+00:00
Aren't you confusing two things? When Nixon suspended Bretton Woods, he wasn't refusing to repatriate gold, he was reneging on the promise that dollars could be converted into gold (one of the reasons being that it no longer had enough physical gold to redeem).

So countries like France held dollars and could no longer get them converted to gold. From my reading, before 1971, all the requests to convert dollars by France, Switzerland, and the UK were all honoured, contributing to the crisis. I don't believe anyone were refused conversion until 1971. And even then, everyone still had their dollars. All they lost was the ability to redeem for gold according to the fixed Bretton Woods price. Dollars could still be used to buy gold at market value.

But this article is talking about repatriating gold owned by other governments but physically held in vaults by the US. A bunch of countries (including Germany) have already repatriated vast amount that were housed by the US, and those requests have never been refused. The Federal Reserve is said to even keeps the bars owned by other countries physically separate, rather than commingled.
by sgjohnson | 2026-01-25 11:36:21+00:00
> For the Telekom case, we would need a different legislation, for example make paid peering agreements between providers illegal or at least regulated, which would then be an incentive to be generally well-connected (free mutual peering is usually considered a win-win scenario unless you are Deutsche Telekom and can use your market power to bully other market participants into another form of rent extraction). And that means that lawmakers and the public need to understand first the specific problem we are fighting.

Realistically not going to happen, as the effort would need to be global. Like, Cogent STILL refuses to transit-free IPv6 peer with HE. https://bgp.tools/kb/partitions.

T1s are very happy where they are, and it's an exclusive club. Any attempts to tame this behavior from DTAG will also face backlash from basically all the other T1s.
by einpoklum | 2026-01-25 11:36:37+00:00
Those of us who use Android phones now - and install FOSS apps form F-Droid or just any apps from elsewhere other than the church of Google - might be thinking: "Oh, I need to work out how I'll have decent app access after this happens."

But what we should really be thinking is: "Oh, I need to _donate_ to projects which aim to patch Android-based phones to remove these restrictions; or to projects which aim to replace (most/all of) Android completely".

We need to speak with our wallets in addition to just ranting about Google.
by Elfener | 2026-01-25 11:38:15+00:00
ISPs are the worst.

Currently I use Telekom's 5G for my home internet connection in Hungary as Telekom is the only company who has a cable in my street, but they refused to sell me wired internet due to the hole they use to take their underground cable up to the houses being already over capacity (it turns out this "hole" serves like the entire street with cables being run across everyone's attic...).

I previously used yettel/telenor's 4G (basically as fast as Telekom's 5G because their 5G is a scam, although Yettel's 5G is even more scammy, it is slower than their 4G) but they broke their routers, I had comical packet loss and they refused to fix it (technically, when you pay for a cellular connection, the required uptime in the contract is zero). They also started CGNAT-ing in order to supposedly "improve security" (wtf..) just before I switched (this now means that their "internet-focused" plans have just CGNAT-ed IPv4, while their "non-internet focused" cellular plans have CGNAT-ed IPv4 AND IPv6 (makes sense).

In any case, I now use Telekom's 5G with CGNAT-ed IPv4, just a single /64 IPv6 and forced separation (it is illegal to have a stable internet connection, they disconnect you just before reaching 24h of uptime).
by armchairhacker | 2026-01-25 11:39:38+00:00
`Fn`, `FnMut`, and `FnOnce` can also implement and not implement `Sync` (also `Send`, `Clone`, `Copy`, lifetime bounds, and I think `use<...>` applies to `impl Fn...` return types).

EDIT: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46750011 also mentioned `AsyncFn`, `AsyncFnMut`, and `AsyncFnOnce`.
by SideburnsOfDoom | 2026-01-25 11:41:37+00:00
> For this to happen the EVs depreciation needs to drastically improve compared to ICE.

Define "improve" ?

One way for "ICE cars completely become a thing of the past" is for there to be lots of cheap, reliable, second-hand EVs. If you can buy a good used EV for less then yes, a barrier to quitting ICE cars has been removed.

That's an improvement. The car doesn't have to be an asset, it could be more like a utility.

EV depreciation seems to be driven by

1) rapidly advancing state of the art, which should eventually stabilise and

2) Fears of battery lifespan, which in current vehicles is largely unfounded

https://www.wired.com/story/electric-cars-could-last-much-lo...

https://insideevs.com/news/763231/ev-battery-degradation-lif...
by aroman | 2026-01-25 11:41:40+00:00
I feel fairly confident that Miyazaki would hate this :(

This decontextualization is the antithesis of the creative studio culture he worked so hard to cultivate. The Ghibli Museum in Japan goes into this “embodied creativity” idea in great detail, and seeing this just makes me sad. I’m sure it’s a cool and technically interesting project, nice showcase for Cloudflare stack, etc. I just wish it didn’t have to be Ghibli...
by Terr_ | 2026-01-25 11:42:02+00:00
> It was the second highest voter turnout in US history.

My dude, you are grasping at straws, and in the process you have seized upon a statistic that, while technically true, is also utterly-effing-meaningless.

Let's compare it to other years:

1936 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1940 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1944 SECOND HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1948 SECOND HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1952 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1956 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1960 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1964 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1968 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1972 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1976 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1980 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1984 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1988 SECOND HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1992 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
1996 SECOND HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
2000 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
2004 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
2008 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
2012 SECOND HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
2016 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
2020 FIRST HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!
2024 SECOND HIGHEST TURNOUT IN HISTORY!!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_United_States...
by f1shy | 2026-01-25 11:42:04+00:00
Maybe that is the point. The contradiction about what you expect, and reality. Like in Italy is expected to go and find out this or that is messy. But Germany has a strong image of responsibility, seriousness, efficiency, etc. And when you see closer, is not.

Also, what I'm not sure, I'm trying to find out, if there was a change in the last 1 or 2 decades, or was always like that. Like now, except for things like you here a siren and cars open like Moises opened the water, in many other things, seems to be not more organized that any other country. Hell, sometimes compared with Bangladesh seems to be lagging behind (point example: birth certificates)
by foldr | 2026-01-25 11:43:29+00:00
>multiword chunks challenge the traditional separation between lexicon and grammar associated with generativist accounts

This is just silly (the paper, not your comment). Do these folks really think they're the first people to think of associating meanings with multi-word units? Every conceivable idea about what the primes of linguistic meaning might be has been explored in the existing literature. You might be able to find new evidence supporting one of these ideas over another, but you are not going to come up with a fundamentally new idea in that domain.

As another commentor has pointed out, many of the sequences of words they identify correspond rather obviously to chunks of structure with gaps in certain argument positions. No-one would be surprised to find that 'trees with gaps to be filled in' are the sort of thing that might be involved in online processing of language.

On top of that, the authors seem to think that any evidence for the importance of linear sequencing is somehow evidence against the existence of hierarchical structure. But rather obviously, sentences have both a linear sequence of words and a hierarchical structure. No-one has ever suggested that only the latter is relevant to how a sentence is processed. Any linguist could give you examples of grammatical processes governed primarily by linear sequence rather than structure (e.g. various forms of contraction and cliticization).
by progbits | 2026-01-25 11:43:30+00:00
Usually yes, but it depends:
https://pierrekim.github.io/blog/2016-11-01-gpon-ftth-networ...

Also the authentication might rely on weak secrets. I know my ISP provided FTTH router has a six letter password and a guessable username (derived from my last name), and I can't change either.

Though the research is quite old now. Couldn't find anything recent specifically for DT.
by vercaemert | 2026-01-25 11:43:38+00:00
Personally, I'm fascinated by the opening for protocol languages to become relevant.

The previous generations of AI (AI in the academic sense) like JASON, when combined with a protocol language like BSPL, seems like the easiest way to organize agent armies in ways that "guarantee" specific outcomes.

The example above is very cool, but I'm not sure how flexible it would be (and there's the obvious cost concern). But, then again, I may be going far down the overengineering route.
by jwr | 2026-01-25 11:43:49+00:00
> EV have much higher emissions of micro plastics and pfas (or variations thereof) due to increased tier degradation

I find those claims highly suspect: I own an EV and haven't had to change the tires more often than I did on a gasoline-powered car. My EV bought in 2021 still runs on original tires and they're fine (although I do change from winter to summer tires, so that's 2 sets technically).

I suspect black PR, and there is always a grain of truth in black PR: emissions are indeed likely to be higher. Probably not "much higher" and probably not in a way that really matters.
by kotaKat | 2026-01-25 11:45:37+00:00
The hilarious part in all of this is watching Epic Games sue Google over how bad the "high friction" flow was for them to sideload their hefty bundle of Google Play violations and win the rights to be back in the Play Store.

It's OK now that Epic can have a one-click download for Fortnite to shove all the friction back into the sideloading experience.
by yayachiken | 2026-01-25 11:46:28+00:00
Regulating peering within the EU would already be a win.

The providers are then free to either move out of the EU market, or let their non-EU traffic flow via the (then likely larger) unrestricted pipes at DECIX and AMSIX. If they think that routing everything via EU is cheaper instead of just peering better in the other parts of the world to deliver traffic locally, then be it, that is their own economic freedom to decide so.

But they will realistically not do that. Also, SDNs will likely never go back to serving content in Europe from e.g. the US. Good connectivity is just generally the economically better option.

That being said, T1 companies like Deutsche Telekom who also serve a large consumer base via broadband and mobile and not just other large business networks are probably more vulnerable to such legislation than an exclusive transit provider.
by necovek | 2026-01-25 11:46:39+00:00
My point was exactly not to do that (which is really an unsuccesfull replication), but instead to find the actual, live correlation between the same input rigourously documented and justified, and new "positive" conclusion.

As I said, harder from a research perspective, but if you can show, for instance, that sustainable companies are less profitable with a better study, you have basically contradicted the original one.
by Chris_Newton | 2026-01-25 11:47:35+00:00
Microsoft has seemingly been in a slow but steady decline for 10 years now.

Has it really, though? Or has it just shifted its corporate priorities away from its traditional stalwarts of Windows and Office, but in doing so caused disruption to users that had bet on the eternal stability of Microsoft’s product line? I don’t like the current direction of Windows any more than the next guy, and personally I’ve made other choices in recent years, but as a general principle, I’m not sure how reasonable it is to expect a business to continue offering the same product or service indefinitely if market forces are pushing it elsewhere.

IMHO, a deeper problem here is that we collectively allowed a near-monopoly culture to develop around desktop operating systems and basic business software. Instead of having a healthy degree of competition between providers and using standardisation to ensure interoperability and portability of our data, we’ve ended up in a “too big to fail” situation where many users have all their eggs in one basket and that basket has a rapidly growing hole in the bottom and looks like it’s going to fail anyway.

There are also reasonable arguments to be made about length of support for products already sold, forced obsolescence and ratcheting “upgrades”, where possibly the actions of some providers in the market are exploitative in ways we should not allow, and therefore regulating to prevent the undesirable behaviours might be in the public interest.

Ultimately, I think a combination of restricting customer-hostile practices while also encouraging a healthy degree of competition and interoperability in important markets would be best for the users and fair to the developers. Sadly, right now, we have neither of those things, and that’s how we get Windows 11, the mobile device duopoly, numerous examples of products or services being locked down against their users’ interests, online services that people increasingly rely on for fundamental aspects of their normal lives and yet have little real obligation to those people in return, and assorted other ills of the 21st century tech landscape.
by mystifyingpoi | 2026-01-25 11:47:36+00:00
I will be downvoted, but I'm not fooling myself. I don't care. As long as uBlock and yt-dlp still work, I'll use them. If Google breaks them, I'll resort to some automated screengrabbing + maybe some AI automation to click "skip" in a virtual machine or something.

People will use all sorts of excuses, like the ads are about gambling, or contain viruses, or are detrimental to mental health, or whatever. No, don't use these excuses. You just don't want ads, and it is still possible to not see them. That's respectable.
by rini17 | 2026-01-25 11:49:15+00:00
Nice. But when I asked it for simple initramfs busybox init script (the usual tools are pure indecipherable bloat) it hallucinated practically on every line. And obviously setting up a VM for it to debug the boot process would be a hassle.

Why my software needs are all like that? Sigh. At least ffmpeg command lines it gets right most of the time.
by hex4def6 | 2026-01-25 11:50:47+00:00
I'm failing to see the smoking gun here.

There are two ways you could interpret "counterfeit".

1. Fake IC (identifies as FTDI 232 IC), fake cable (FTDI logo on it)

2. Real IC, fake cable (eg, I buy the FTDI IC and make the cable, and sell it as an "official" FTDI cable).

(1) is I assume what they mean in this instance., but you could argue (2) is also possible. However, they make no mention of the packaging both calling them "FTDI" cables. Instead, I assume they're going off what they report to the OS as.

FTDI have been around for decades, and the offhand "old cable we had kicking around" could easily mean its 15+ years old. That might easily explain the chip size difference. In this case, FTDI did make TSSOP 28-pin chips for a long time. They're now obsolete, superseded by SSOP package variants (like in the "Real" picture). Put another way, this is like comparing an i5-10400 to a Pentium II that I found in my storage closet and declaring the Pentium II fake.

The actual fake chips visually look identical to the real ones. Obviously, otherwise they wouldn't get mixed into the supply chain.

The only real conclusion they can realistically make from these x-rays are that they're not the same cable (but even then, I don't know if FTDI real cables have silently upgraded the internals while retaining the same SKU).
by mnahkies | 2026-01-25 11:51:01+00:00
Something that struck me earlier this week was when profiling certain workloads, I'd really like a flame graph that included wall time waiting on IO, be it a database call, filesystem or other RPC.

For example, our integration test suite on a particular service has become quite slow, but it's not particularly clear where the time is going. I suspect a decent amount of time is being spent talking to postgres, but I'd like a low touch way to profile this
by snowmobile | 2026-01-25 11:51:09+00:00
I think you're intentionally being obtuse. If an app does E2EE well, then the servers should have no control over the encryption. Otherwise it's not end-to-end, by definition. Regarding the "private non-interoperable system", the whole point of TFA is that EU made them open it up. See https://engineering.fb.com/2024/03/06/security/whatsapp-mess... Your last "point" is irrelevant because I never claimed anything about the similarity between encryption models. Have you ever heard of a "simile"?
by seec | 2026-01-25 11:51:17+00:00
The only reason we have that is because fintech is eating the meal of traditional banks.
They came up with ways to transfer with just a card (which benefits Visa and Mastercard, US companies) and do inter-account instant transfers for free.

SEPA normalization took forever, and even now instant transfers are still very often paid past the limit in your card bundle (probably around 3 if you don't have an expensive card).

Brussels rarely works for the little people; they just support whatever the big players at the moment want, unless they are foreign and can come up with a reason to tax them.

It is delusional to think politicians in Brussels care about the little guys; it is always about maintaining or gaining power, otherwise they wouldn't come up with absurd regulations that hit the small players much harder than any of the big ones.