MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mmooss | 2026-01-26 04:25:29+00:00
I think that's a very interesting, thoughtful response.

> You can’t really separate the content from its medium, its contex, and its audience

Yes, I completely agree.

> the audience wants to feel smart, and believes that they are “too smart to be marketed to”. Here they are scrolling through an attention market looking for interesting information that they need to be convinced to click, read through, share, and engage with. Why was the link shared and content created to being with, and how did it structure itself to fit its content/audience, and why does a particular structure/messaging work while others don't?

> The word for all of that is Marketing.

I think that overemphasizes the significance of a 'market'. 'Market' is used as a metaphor for many things, such as 'attention market', but also implies commercial, transactional, profit-oriented relationships, which don't seem like such strong motivations here (though I can't speak for the author). And to me your claims seem assume that the author's primary goal is more attention - they are in an 'attention market', they do all these things with intent to drive more page views.

They could have many other motivations. As a general concept, people love to share what they know, sort of like the drive to make FOSS. Maybe the author just loves to learn things and the blog posts provide an excuse; I've fallen into similar hobbies - without regret. Maybe they feel validated, or it relieves stress, or it's an escape from a job they hate, etc. There are so many possibilities in addition to commerce, attention, or profit.

I do agree that the HN "audience wants to feel smart, and believes that they are “too smart to be marketed to”." Those are the easiest people to persuade.
by fc417fc802 | 2026-01-26 04:25:38+00:00
> We cant have nice things because bad people abused it :(.

You've fallen for their propaganda. It's a bit off topic from the Oneplus headline but as far as bootloaders go we can't have nice things because the vendors and app developers want control over end users. The android security model is explicit that the user, vendor, and app developer are each party to the process and can veto anything. That's fundamentally incompatible with my worldview and I explicitly think it should be legislated out of existence.

The user is the only legitimate party to what happens on a privately owned device. App developers are to be viewed as potential adversaries that might attempt to take advantage of you. To the extent that you are forced to trust the vendor they have the equivalent of a fiduciary duty to you - they are ethically bound to see your best interests carried out to the best of their ability.
by jacquesm | 2026-01-26 04:26:32+00:00
I think in part this is because it would require them to admit that they've been had, which is even worse than to have to admit you're a terrible person. Being terrible is one thing, most people can handle that. Being so utterly dumb that you've been carrying water against your own country and effectively are in every sense of the word a useful idiot is a thing most people would shy away from.

Psychology is weird. As soon as something becomes a part of your identity you start living as though it is really you that is attacked, rather than the thing you stand for, no matter what it is, no matter whether it is positive or negative. The response is invariable to dig in.

Religion, atheism, vegetarianism, fascism, libertarian, democrat or republican, fan of Arsenal or rather the opposite and so on. They all tap into some kind of deep tribal sense of belonging and people will go to extreme lengths to defend their tribe at the expense of themselves. There probably is a direct evolutionary link here as well.
by jmward01 | 2026-01-26 04:27:59+00:00
I am personally just a lurker. Windows used to be my only OS for a -very- long time (DOS 2.x, yes 2, was my first MS OS). Now I click on these just to see how far it has fallen. It is like that friend you drifted away from and now you look at their FB posts now and again to watch as they get crazier and crazier.
by jacquesm | 2026-01-26 04:28:14+00:00
Well, they might as well be if you can't reason with them. There are some prime examples right here on HN who defy the imagination in terms of how far they will go to defend the indefensible, to come out swinging to make sure you realize that they will go to any length to stand for their 'principles'. And they probably believe the reverse is true as well, they see the rest of us as the ones that are terribly wrong, misguided and the subject of propaganda.
by nsoonhui | 2026-01-26 04:28:22+00:00
Last Thursday windows 11 forced this update on my Acer machine. It caused me BSOD: inaccessible boot device, so I had to reformat my machine to get Windows running again.

So I am now very wary of this Out of Band Update[0], especially when it's not mentioned whether the latest update solve my issue or not. I don't know the same problem is still there, or whether this update makes the problem any better or worse.

0: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46750358
by digitalPhonix | 2026-01-26 04:29:34+00:00
> But it did look like an F-14

It absolutely did not. The RCS of an F-14 v/s an Airbus A300 is an order of magnitude different (probably 2 or 3 orders).

> There really was an F-14, just on the ground at an Iranian airbase

There was, but that’s a red herring for the root cause. Each ship’s radar independently and correctly identified and tracked the Airbus separate from the Mode 2 targets, but when communicating the track information between ships, the tracks were mixed up.

Source: The US Navy’s own account: https://www.history.navy.mil/content/history/nhhc/about-us/l...

> There was a combat camera team aboard the Vincennes, and the footage depicts considerable confusion and even ill-discipline amongst the crew (cheering, shouting, football game atmosphere) that contributed to one of the most tragic events in U.S. Navy history
by carlosft | 2026-01-26 04:30:05+00:00
There is a lot of room between unfettered immigration and having a roving band of apparently unaccountable agents violating 1st, 4th, and 6th amendment rights while also gunning down unarmed citizens in the streets.

We could try mandating e-verify with increasing penalties before we start asking people for papers and kicking down doors.
by jesterson | 2026-01-26 04:31:29+00:00
> I was reacting to that by saying that we should not pretend that the motivation here is "applying the law". It is not the case and it never was. (and also that "applying the law" does imply a balance between false positive and false negative, but that suddenly, trying to avoid the false negative is strangely not applying the law)

What is the motivation here then? In your opinion?

And speaking of false positives, could you explain what you mean by that?
by njarboe | 2026-01-26 04:31:57+00:00
“Venice built a maritime empire from a city that couldn’t feed itself; so who fed it—and why didn’t its enemies simply starve it out?”

I love ancient history and would read a good book about the Venetian empire, but the sentence answers the final question. Venice was a maritime empire (it's capital on an island), that's why its enemies could not starve it out. All in on finding out who fed it.
by cthalupa | 2026-01-26 04:32:25+00:00
No.

There are not non-citizens on voter rolls. They want the rolls to get data on voters.

When you ask yourself why the ultra-politicized DOJ (which isn't even the DHS...) from an administration that has explicitly called liberals the enemy is asking for voter rolls, it becomes pretty understandable why people might come to the conclusion that it is to suppress the people that have already explicitly been identified as targets.
by dominicm | 2026-01-26 04:32:51+00:00
While not directly mentioned in this article, guix pack[1] allows you to distribute your software in multiple formats, including Docker images.

The general philosophy of Guix is to have a single definition for how to build your software and use it for the entire dev to production pipeline.

[1]: https://guix.gnu.org/manual/1.5.0/en/html_node/Invoking-guix...
by jacquesm | 2026-01-26 04:33:19+00:00
Interesting. In dutch we use 'solderen' vs 'lassen', in German they use 'schweizen' and 'loten'.

English has a third term like that as well called 'brazing', then there is silver solder (a high temperature version of soldering), in dutch we'd call that 'hardsolderen', whereas what the English call brazing we call oxy-acetyleen lassen (which is more of a process name by virtue of naming the ingredients).

Soldadura autogeno and Soldadura en el arco (sp?) are what I think the modifiers used in Spanish to indicate brazing and (arc) welding.
by Eridrus | 2026-01-26 04:33:51+00:00
I don't really know what sorts of scale you've worked on, but software operating costs growing roughly linearly is pretty normal.

You need to process X% more requests, you need X% more machines.

You need to store X% more data, you need to buy that much more disk, etc.

Many things scale worse than linearly too.

If your SaaS product doesn't do very much, sure, the costs might be cheap, but plenty of SaaS products just do a lot, processing lots of data for customers.

Datadog it a canonical example of an excellent software business, but even still, they have real infra costs because there's just a lot of data to process.
by fc417fc802 | 2026-01-26 04:33:57+00:00
What sort of hypothetical harm are you imagining here? Suppose the information leaks were a serious issue to me - what are my options? Switch to Apple? I doubt most consumers are going to consider something like postmarketos.

The carriers in the US were caught selling e911 location data to pretty much whoever was willing to pay. Did that hurt them? Not as far as I can tell, largely because there is no alternative and (bizarrely) such behavior isn't considered by our current legislation to be a criminal act. Consumers are forced to accept that they are simply along for the ride.
by gdiamos | 2026-01-26 04:37:32+00:00
It sounds like lack of security is the biggest feature and risk of this clawd thing.

I also tried using Siri to tell me the weather forcast while I was driving to the park. It asked me to auth into my phone. Then it asked me to approve location access. I guess it was secure but I never figured out what the weather forecast was.

Thankfully it didn't rain on my picnic. Some of the parents there asked me if their investors should be interested in clawd.
by jacquesm | 2026-01-26 04:37:44+00:00
In one of his videos he claims he's 'not a software guy' and then proceeds to put together a piece of control software that is more flexible and far better laid out than whatever is out there in common usage.

He's right in many ways, unfortunately I really need all those other features as well, but I think there is something to be said for ripping the inner control loops (rate, level, stabilization) out of say Arducopter and replacing it with this stuff on a separate micro controller. It's much easier to divorce stability and primary flight characteristics from things like high level mission planning and such and it isn't rare at all for such things to get in each others way in the usual suspects (Betaflight, INAV, Arducopter and various derivatives of these three).
by VerifiedReports | 2026-01-26 04:39:07+00:00
Thanks for the anecdote backing up my longstanding suspicion on that.

This is also why using E-mail addresses as user IDs is monumentally stupid: People will think that they need to use their E-mail password, too. So now any entity with this ID policy becomes a gatekeeper not only to their own site or service, but the user's E-mail account.

One poor security regime or disgruntled employee at one obscure Web site can now enable identity theft on a grand scale, by exposing E-mail addresses and passwords.

There's a reason that banks and brokerages don't employ this ignorant policy. It's disappointing that Apple set such a poor example by implementing it. Then they had to run around trying to mitigate the harm with 2FA and other measures, after high-profile "hacking" attacks on journalists and celebs.
by bigbadfeline | 2026-01-26 04:39:27+00:00
> But I don't see why you explain the situation because of the "all or none" of the left

I'm not sure about the person whose comment you addressed but, from experience, I can think of these reasons:

1. A Democratic supporter naturally assumes the Democratic party is the smarter one and holds them to a higher standard.

2. Most of us independents have written the GOP off as a total loss sometime after last January. I suspect, many Dem supporters had arrived at the same conclusion a tad earlier. In other words, what's the point of beating a dead horse?

3. follows from the previous two - there is a sense of real urgency as to make the Dem party do something meaningful, so by pointing the criticism only to them we deprive them from their favorite excuse - that the other party is even worse - they've been hysterically eager to use that excuse for many decades.

Otherwise, both parties are very selective about what they do or don't compromise on, but in either case, the public rarely gets something other than the short end of the stick.
by instagraham | 2026-01-26 04:39:56+00:00
In some sense, it is a part of one's identity, for one can't easily separate the worldview from the person. But we enter a strange era when your identity is challenged and remoulded by a non-human entity.

People have always derived a tribal sense of belonging from a set of worldviews, but these views are now perpetuated by robots. These anti-immigration or anti-brown or post-renaissance worldviews are lived by very few people of flesh and blood - it's a set of interlinked concepts and ideals in an imaginary post-truth world.

But it lives more in silicon than in some Aryan ideal. And if you had to draw a line from this silicon to reality, you'd still end up in Crimea or in Pokrovsk, watching a 21st-century battle with echoes of WWI. It is about land and power and politics, like it always has been. But the person fighting "woke" in a comment section over a made-up story about a made-up Disney film doesn't know it.

I'm in India, so the second-order effects of all this are even more surreal here. You get Christians cheering the rise of a Hindutva nationalist government because it's "anti-woke" (only to get heckled and beaten up during Christmas) and Trump supporters doing religious ceremonies for the man for the same reason (only to get the nation's entire suite of exports tariffed), and you see cabs with giant Russia Today ads on their sides in the streets (but the discounted oil we buy from Russia has not dropped prices at the pump by even a rupee). Our lived reality has very little in common with these digital culture wars.

Sorry for the tangent.
by QuiEgo | 2026-01-26 04:39:59+00:00
> That's fundamentally incompatible with my worldview and I explicitly think it should be legislated out of existence.

The model that makes sense to me personally is that private companies should be legislated to be absolutely clear about what they are selling you. If a company wants to make a locked down device, that should be their right. If you don't want to buy it, that's your absolute right too.

As a consumer, you should be given the information you need to make the choices that are aligned with your values.

If a company says "I'm selling you a device you can root", and people buy the device because it has that advertised, they should be on the hook to uphold that promise. The nasty thing on this thread is the potential rug pull by Oneplus, especially as they have kind of marketed themselves as the alternative to companies that lock their devices down.
by Paddywack | 2026-01-26 04:41:46+00:00
This reminded me of a friend of my dad’s from South Africa - Don (Donald) Devine, who bought into a the Lighthouse Depot years ago and rode the (then) lighthouse fad.

It was amazing seeing this successful large scale businessman turning his attention to a family business and growing that.

RIP to Don, my dad, and as I’ve just discovered, the business…
by VerifiedReports | 2026-01-26 04:42:36+00:00
Pff, Apple can't even keep your contacts intact if you go abroad.

I traveled to Australia and got a local SIM. Suddenly every incoming call was from an unknown caller, even though every one was in my address book. Apple is too stupid to handle international calling in the 2020s. I mean... WTF?

Then again, this is the same company that "helpfully" changes all your calendar appointment times when you travel to a different time zone... with NO WAY TO PREVENT IT. So if you go east, you're going to miss any events you set up in advance... including flights home.
by fc417fc802 | 2026-01-26 04:43:22+00:00
Arguably yes. By preventing entire classes of attack real users are never exposed to certain risks in the first place. If it were possible it would be abused at some rate (even if that rate were low).

It's not that trusted computing is inherently bad. I actually think it's a very good thing. The problem is that the manufacturer maintains control of the keys when they sell you a device.

Imagine selling someone a house that had smart locks but not turning over control of the locks to the new "owner". And every time the "owner" wants to add a new guest to the lock you insist on "reviewing" the guest before agreeing to add him. You insist that this is important for "security" because otherwise the "owner" might throw a party or invite a drug dealer over or something else you don't approve of. But don't worry, you are protecting the "owner" from malicious third parties hiding in plain sight. You run thorough background checks on all applicants after all!
by nik282000 | 2026-01-26 04:43:26+00:00
Exposure time is less important than exposure type. Phones and tablets encourage mindless consumption and discourage creativity and interaction by the limiting apps and input methods.

<old man> I spent every available minute on a desktop from age 7 to 17 but that time was split between games that require 100% of your attention, and message boards where you need to backread a thread for context. </old man>

Activities that require full attention and active participation make you feel better than scrolling for an hour, whether it's an challenging game, a longform discussion, or reading a book.
by jacquesm | 2026-01-26 04:43:27+00:00
I will do what it takes to defend my country and the countries of others that are attacked, from within or without. And take into account that I'm really a pacifist at heart, absolutely abhor war and do not believe in the kind of idiocy that war stands for. Even so, there are limits to what I'll let happen before I will reluctantly become an active participant.

You are all over this thread spouting your crap, I highly doubt that anything at all will change your mind. But you sound scared of protests, and you seem to believe that the attackers are the defenders and the other way around. One day the attackers will come for you, and by then there will be nobody left to defend you.
by digiown | 2026-01-26 04:43:55+00:00
I really don't think you can gain much realistic freedom going without the blob. The powers that be will never let you have a freely modifiable radio transceiver.

The blob is better viewed as a part of the hardware in this case. What's most likely to happen to get rid of the blob is to just put it on the non-modifiable parts of the device. Viewed in this way, the blob is at least something you can practically inspect, unlike the firmware on the chip itself.

See also the discussion on CPU microcode:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-gnu/2018-04/msg00002...
by jy-tan | 2026-01-26 04:47:03+00:00
Yes, Fence is designed for exactly this, the built-in `code` template already allowlists npm and PyPI registries:

```
fence -t code pip install requests
fence -t code npm install express
```

This restricts writes to workspace + cache dirs, blocks reading credentials, limits network to allowlisted domains, and blocks dangerous commands (`rm -rf`, `npm publish`, etc).
by AceyMan | 2026-01-26 04:49:36+00:00
It's surprising how dumb management has gotten in the Almighty Chase for A Quarterly¹ Profit.

Remember, "it is very difficult to get a man to understand a thing when his job depends on his not understanding it." [editor:and that goes doubly for MBAs]
—Upton Sinclair

¹—added adjective
by ModernMech | 2026-01-26 04:52:26+00:00
It's nice but also endlessly frustrating and very very late, because what he regards as overuse of the term is really just people who were applying the term correctly for the past 10 years as people like the author refused to call a spade a spade. If the nascent fascist were discarded, people would have stopped saying it so much.

The problem for people like the author is that other more astute individuals [1] correctly diagnosed the issue over a decade ago. All it took was for her to have grown up in Poland and to be a clinical psychologist who knows how to spot malignant narcissism. The rest fell into place because human nature is so... predictable.

So while it's welcome for the author to finally catch up to the rest of us, it's a little late at this point. Also If people like the author had listened to more sensible people when they had started using the F word instead of dismissing them as hyperbolic, then we wouldn't be here.

Also this bit:

> Although Trump is term-limited, we must not expect that he and his MAGA loyalists will voluntarily turn over the White House to a Democrat in 2029, regardless of what the voters say—and the second insurrection will be far better organized than the first.

shows the author is still a step behind. The correct framing is that the first insurrection succeeded. It continued after Jan 6 for 4 years, as Trump waged an information war contending he was the true winner of the election, and also a war on the judiciary to evade accountability. In that battle he evaded all accountability, nullified the impeachment clause of the Constitution, and also gained "Presidential Immunity" from his appointees on SCOTUS. He also nullified Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits anyone who has previously taken an oath to support the Constitution from holding state or federal office if they have "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" against the US. Trump caused an insurrection, and yet somehow he was allowed to run and hold office again.

So the first insurrection was successful, the perpetrators got away with it, and they assumed total power over the government they attacked after evading judicial accountability and waging an information war on the population.

Anyway, next time there won't be a need for an insurrection, because the only reason there was one in 2021 was because plans A through G failed -- they couldn't get votes in Georgia, they couldn't overturn any state, they didn't win any court cases, they couldn't get people to go along with their "alternate electors" theory, and they couldn't get Pence to go along with the scheme. So they caused an insurrection as a last ditch effort to delay certification.

In 2029 every Republican will go along with plan A. They've already purged everyone who did the right thing in 2021 from the party. So they won't need an insurrection because any Democrat that wins in Georgia will just be erased, as they've made sure to take state control over county election boards after county election boards there went against Trump's wishes in 2020.

[1] https://medium.com/@Elamika