MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bsoles | 2026-01-22 23:58:29+00:00
> Not sure what you've been sold, but there are no special rules or rigid methods.

I am not intentionally trying to be argumentative, but

- I have seen UX designers refer to a team of developers as "my developers" and I take it negatively.

- I have been into countless design sessions where the UX designers conducted a weird formalized session with cards, sorting, voting with colored stickers, and assigning equal votes to newly hired participants and senior domain experts. They were beyond stupid.
by itstimwhite | 2026-01-22 23:58:58+00:00
ClickUp acquired Codegen and immediately required Codegen users to sign up for ClickUp just to keep using it.

At the same time, they’re deprecating Slack and Linear integrations — the exact pieces that made Codegen useful for agent orchestration across tools.

It’s forced lock-in.

Instead of building a best-in-class AI agent orchestration platform that wins on merit, they’re closing the ecosystem and breaking workflows to funnel users into ClickUp. That’s incredibly anti-competitive behavior.
by syngrog66 | 2026-01-23 00:00:07+00:00
1. dangerously unwise area to apply "AI" given all its known problems, and whats at stake

2. I tried using that site and immediately saw problems and broken behavior. The "Ask AI" feature (sounds pretty key?) literally did nothing. and doing a search for say aspirin yielded results that... had no aspirin! no brainer to bail out fast
by idopmstuff | 2026-01-23 00:00:50+00:00
I own a number of brands that sell on Amazon, and I've always used an app called HighFive that automatically sends the email you've almost certainly seen that asks you to rate something you bought (without it you have to click a button on each order to send it).

It's always been free, but because of a change to the way Amazon charges third party app devs, they were going to start charging next month. Since the whole app is just a couple of API calls and storing a record of which orders you've sent the request to already, Claude Code built it in 5 minutes.

In general, the Amazon Seller UI is a cluster (especially since I have one account for each brand, so I constantly have to switch between them). There are lots of subscription apps to make your Amazon data more useful and accessible, but Claude Code with access to the Amazon APIs pretty much replaces all of them. I spend very little time in the actual Amazon UI now and mostly just ask my trusty assistant for the info that I need.
by adrian_b | 2026-01-23 00:01:54+00:00
Those are glibc headers not Linux kernel headers.

The glibc headers do not necessarily match your current Linux kernel.

You should use the glibc headers when you use the glibc generic syscall wrappers, but otherwise you must not consider them as an authoritative source for syscalls, because they frequently do not contain all the syscalls provided by your current kernel.
by JohnLeitch | 2026-01-23 00:03:01+00:00
What are you even trying to say? I suppose I'll clarify for you: Yes, I'm confident I could have identified the cause of the mysterious packets quickly. No, I'm not going to go through the motions because I have no particular inclination toward the work outside of banter on the internet. And what's more, it would be contrived since the answer has already shared.
by FrostViper8 | 2026-01-23 00:03:03+00:00
I think they are probably buying the most expensive of everything in the shop. I can get everything for about £30-40 in Aldi.

> I mean we really didn't it was a period of great productivity and a massive boost in living standards almost universally.

A huge amount of wealth was also created under Thatcher but also a huge amount of wealth inequality. Blair didn't really change anything initially and continued their policies.

Remember that period ended with the Global Financial Crisis and an large increase of deficit spending.

There is also other problems with the Blair government. There was our involvement in the war in Afghanistan/Iraq, some of the iffy terrorism legislation amongst other things.

So like with a lot of things it was a mixed bag.
by olalonde | 2026-01-23 00:03:07+00:00
You can just clear the context or restart your Claude instance between tasks. e.g.:

> do task 1
...task fails...
> please update Claude.md so you don't make X mistake
> /clear
> do task 2
... task fails ...
> please update Claude.md so you don't make Y mistake
> /clear
etc.

If you want a clean state between tasks you can just commit your Claude.md and `git reset --hard`.

I just don't get why you'd need have to a separate Claude that is solely responsible for updating Claude.md. Maybe they didn't want to bother with git?
by p1necone | 2026-01-23 00:03:36+00:00
> I expected to see measures of the economic productivity generated as a result of artificial intelligence use.

>Instead, what I'm seeing is measures of artificial intelligence use.

Fun fact: this is also how most large companies are measuring their productivity increases from AI usage ;), alongside asking employees to tell them how much faster AI is making them while simultaneously telling them they're expected to go faster with AI.
by iwontberude | 2026-01-23 00:04:13+00:00
LLMs will always be just a little too random or a little too average. There in is the hidden beauty of AI: elevating the trust in peoples diverse experiences.

Humans are amazing machines that reduce insane amounts of complexity in bespoke combinations of neural processors to synthesize ideas and emotions. Even Ilya Sutskever has said that he wasn't and still isn't clear at a formal level why GPT works at all (e.g. interpretability problem), but GPT was not a random discovery, it was based on work that was an amalgamation of Ilya and others careers and biases.
by Ccecil | 2026-01-23 00:04:15+00:00
In my case PETG had issues until I realized that on my machine it needs to go slower.

I can print PLA at 100mm/s with .25mm layers...but PETG I don't go much over 65mm/s give the same line width/layer height.

Since getting things dialed in I switched to primarily printing PETG. Although, I have no issue printing PLA, PETG or ABS when needed.
by reincarnate0x14 | 2026-01-23 00:04:18+00:00
I used to share that opinion but after decades in industrial automation I find myself coming down much more on the "yeah, encryption everywhere" because while many vendors do not provide good tools for debugging, that's really the problem, and we've been covering for them by being able to snoop the traffic.

Having to MITM a connection to snoop it is annoying, but the alternative appears to be still using unencrypted protocols from the 1970s within the limitations of a 6502 to operate life-safety equipment.
by CodeMage | 2026-01-23 00:05:27+00:00
> I've often dreamed of a system where normal users, give money as a promotion for a certain issue to be fixed or even created

It might be good to have such a system as an option, but I wouldn't want it to become an expectation. I've got a couple of side projects that are out on GitHub. They have open source licenses and anyone is welcome to fork them, send bug reports, or pull requests, but I don't want to have any obligation of supporting those projects.
by pixl97 | 2026-01-23 00:05:28+00:00
>Giving a honest answer can just anger people, to the point they sue.

Again, I'm kind of on a 'suck it dear company' attitude. The reason they ban you must align with the terms of service and must be backed up with data that is kept X amount of time.

Simply put, we've seen no shortage of individuals here on HN or other sites like Twitter that need to use social media to resolve whatever occurred because said company randomly banned an account under false pretenses.

This really matters when we are talking about giants like Google, or any other service in a near monopoly position.
by grishka | 2026-01-23 00:06:08+00:00
I test ReactOS every now and then on a crappy 2011-ish laptop I bought from a thrift store a while ago to test one of my projects on Windows and Linux on real hardware.

Last time was about a month ago. It's still easier to list what works than what doesn't, but I like seeing progress. Ethernet works with some random Windows driver. The integrated GPU doesn't, but installing the driver doesn't make it bsod on startup any more, so that's an improvement. I've seen people have more success with discrete GPUs. Sound card doesn't work because it's too new.

The thing with these kinds of projects that target a vast existing library of software is that the progress feels slow for a long time, but at some point there's enough compatibility for people to try to use it for real, and this is when compatibility starts improving rapidly. I feel like ReactOS is close like never before to that point. I really want it to succeed.
by Klonoar | 2026-01-23 00:06:24+00:00
> Fiber is the cause of many of intestinal issues, making constipation and crohn's disease worse.

Big ol' citation needed on that one.

Fiber is more than fine if you actually drink enough water. There are also two types of fiber; some people need one more than the other, or vice-versa.

I know several people with Crohns where fiber has made the biggest difference in controlling it.
by JumpCrisscross | 2026-01-23 00:06:42+00:00
> You definitely havent had bad roommates if you say that

I lived in New York in an illegally-subdivided loft. Yes, I’ve had bad roommates. Yes, it felt overwhelming at first. And yes, I got over it, constraining the problem where possible and addressing it directly where necessary, a suite of skills that were probably instrumental in my start-up later working.
by mort96 | 2026-01-23 00:06:47+00:00
I've concluded that this can't be the reason. It'd only result in an error where the size reported by 'du' is smaller than the apparent size (aka number of bytes reported by 'wc -c') of the file. What we see here is that the size reported by 'du' is almost twice as large as the number of bytes. That can't be the result of dedpulication.

I'll chalk it up to "some APFS weirdness".
by perching_aix | 2026-01-23 00:06:53+00:00
I seem to hit this logic often recently for some reason.

There are two issues with it:

- a primary is not a totality: if "security is the #1 consideration for SSH", that implies there's a #2, maybe even a #3 and so on consideration. So the question that follows becomes tautological: "but if the author doesn't need security, why use ssh?" -> surely for one or more of the #2, #3, etc. considerations, right?

- overabstraction (*): you ended up strawmanning the author. What they had issue with was keystroke timing obfuscation, which is a privacy feature. Timing attacks are (in part) a privacy concern, and privacy is a security concern, yes, but security is not just privacy concern, and privacy concerns are not just about timing attacks; these groups are not equal. For example, they might very well want the transmitted keypresses themselves to remain confidential, or they might very well want to retain cryptographic assurance of their integrity. These are security features they can continue to utilize by sticking with SSH.

All of this is to say, it's not even necessarily them using SSH for a hypothetical #2 or #3 (...etc...) reason, but likely because they still very much want to make use of large chunks of #1, which disabling keypress obfuscation does not actually rid SSH of, only at most weakens it in ways they clearly seem to be okay with.

(*) although if I zoom out enough, this is once again just "a primary is not a totality", just implicitly
by WillAdams | 2026-01-23 00:07:01+00:00
Why not a more reasonable bit of legislation?

Felons, or persons convicted of misdemeanor domestic abuse who are barred by statute from owning or touching firearms are required to have an approval mechanism in place on their 3D printers and other CNC machines where before any part is made, their parole officer must review and then approve it for manufacture. In the absence of such a mechanism, they are not allowed to own such devices.
by logicprog | 2026-01-23 00:07:28+00:00
Thanks for that paper! It looks like a good jumping off point. I am primarily interested in the cybernetics side (feedback loops, etc) but applied to social or economic systems, as well as the intersections with Deleuze and Guattari style process philosophy (looking at how every level of the social system, including individuals, is composed of nodes in a network of flows (of desire/memesis, knowledge, material resources, ideas) that the nodes are both somewhat composed by and also transform/switch/break)
by JohnMakin | 2026-01-23 00:08:02+00:00
> This is provably false.

Where is the proof?

> You're absolutely right that GTO does not guarantee you'll win the maximum against a fish, but neither does exploitative play. In fact, exploitative play can't guarantee you anything, which is probably why old-school pro players are perennially going broke throughout their careers (that and bad bankroll management).

I'm not arguing in favor of one or the other, I am just correcting the misunderstanding. In reality, you should adapt to the conditions at the table and your opponents habits, because "GTO" is only possible against perfect play to begin with, so you're always going to be playing slightly imperfectly. so is everyone, because you cannot know everything. And again, it's almost never the way to win the most money. It's a distinction not a lot of GTO nerds understand. I'm not arguing against it at all - I use GTO solvers to work on stuff a lot.

And I also never claimed exploitative strategies guarantee everything, for the same reason "GTO" doesn't either. It's a game of incomplete information. The skill comes in using incomplete information in making good assumptions - that is almost nothing to do with math. And, there are pros that have been winning for long amounts of time knowing zero about GTO theory.
by mapontosevenths | 2026-01-23 00:08:21+00:00
> I do think they can be used in research but not without careful checking.

Of course you are right. It is the same with all tools, calculators included, if you use them improperly you get poor results.

In this case they're stochastic, which isn't something people are used to happening with computers yet. You have to understand that and learn how to use them or you will get poor results.
by jjk166 | 2026-01-23 00:09:09+00:00
So your argument is don't use an off the shelf tool (5 stages) that gets the job done, build your own tool (10 or 3 or none) every time which likely doesn't offer any advantage over the standard tool?

I don't think you really get either Design Thinking or Systems Thinking.

What you are talking about here is not Systems Thinking, which is a particular approach to understanding complex problems by viewing everything as systems of systems. Design Thinking is a methodology for approaching the design process, which is quite orthogonal to whether or not you employ Systems Thinking. The more general field of trying to understand how we determine whether something is true and what it means for it to be true is the field of epistemology; "epistemological based theory" is a meaningless description, like "philosophical based worldview".
by JaumeGreen | 2026-01-23 00:09:22+00:00
I was explicitly trying to avoid making a personal judgment over the matter on the posts. I do have a negative opinion about it, but that was not of importance.

I don't know for sure how people considered slavery 200 years ago, I haven't studied enough history, but the slavery that is more commonly known as slavery was legal. That implies that at least more people accepted that than nowadays.

Nowadays that kind of slavery is frowned upon on at least on the first world.

Modern day slavery has plenty of aspects, and some of them are not considered bad by some part of the population, or not considered a modern iteration of slavery. Working full time for a job that doesn't pay you enough to survive and needing subsidies, not having enough time or energy to look for something better, is IMHO bad and slavery, while for lots of people it is the result of being a lazy person that needs to work more.

Is that situation bad? According to me, yes. According to some economical gurus, no.

Is that situation objectively bad? That is a question I am not answering, as, for me, there's no objective truth for most things.
by nickysielicki | 2026-01-23 00:09:43+00:00
Totally matches my experience, and it feels bizarre inside-looking-out that nobody else talks about it. Hardware from 2010-2020 was remarkably stable, and CPUs are still as stable as they were, but we've had this large influx of money spent on these chips that fall over if you look at them funny. I think it leads to a lot of people thinking, "we must be doing something wrong", because it's just outside of their mental model that hardware failures can occur at this rate. But that's just the world we live in.

It's a perfect storm: a lot of companies are doing HPC-style distributed computing for the first time, and lack experience in debugging issues that are unique to it. On top of that, the hardware is moving very fast and they're ill equipped to update their software and drivers at the rate required to have a good experience. On top of that, the stakes are higher because your cluster is only as strong as its weakest node, which means a single hardware failure can turn the entire multi-million dollar cluster into a paperweight, which adds more pressure and stress to get it all fixed. Updating your software means taking that same multi-million dollar cluster offline for several hours, which is seen as a cost rather than a good investment of time. And a lot of the experts in HPC-style distributed computing will sell you "supported" software, which is basically just paying for the privilege of using outdated software that lacks the bug fixes that your cards might desperately need. That model made sense in the 2010s, when linux (kernel and userspace) was less stable and you genuinely needed to lock your dependencies and let the bugs work themselves out. But that's the exact opposite of what you want to be doing in 2026.

You put all of this together, and it's difficult to be confident whether the hardware is bad, or going bad, or whether it's only manifesting because they're exposed to bugs, or maybe both. Yikes, it's no fun.
by mapontosevenths | 2026-01-23 00:09:47+00:00
> whether the researcher's calculator was working reliably.

LLM's do not work reliably, that's not their purpose.

If you use them that way it's akin to using a butter knife as a screwdriver. You might get away with it once or twice, but then you slip and stab yourself. Better to go find screwdriver if you need reliable.
by adrian_b | 2026-01-23 00:10:30+00:00
That syscall man page is from glibc and provides information about how you can invoke syscalls through glibc.

It does not have any direct connection with the Linux kernel. Because the Linux kernel promises that the syscall interface is stable, in the normal situation when the kernel is newer or at least of the same age with glibc, all the syscalls that can be invoked through glibc should be supported by the kernel, but the kernel may support extra syscalls.

If you install a kernel that is older than glibc, which may happen in some embedded systems that are compatible only with some old kernels, then it may be that the kernel does not support all the syscalls from the glibc headers.
by mrbadguy | 2026-01-23 00:10:36+00:00
Man you got me on readability. Just yesterday I had to input a random string WiFi password in a printer with only arrow keys to select each character. The password had an upper-case I in it but the moronic designers of the little password label that came with the router selected a font where “I” and “l” are indistinguishable. Took me like ten minutes to get the damn thing connected.

I only got it right because I looked up the password on my Mac, whose keychain app displays them in gloriously readable monospaced font. FFS
by TheAceOfHearts | 2026-01-23 00:10:41+00:00
Yeah, it's not great. I wrote a harness that calculates it as: 3.61s Load Time, 38.78s Gen Time, 18.38s Audio Len, RTF 2.111.

The Tao Te Ching audiobook came in at 62 mins in length and it ran for 102 mins, which gives an RTF of 1.645.

I do get a warning about flash-attn not being installed, which says that it'll slow down inference. I'm not sure if that feature can be supported on the 1080 and I wasn't up for tinkering to try.
by superkuh | 2026-01-23 00:10:55+00:00
Maybe in spec, but the damage is done and persists.

The (USA) Wisconsin Dept. of Natural Resources has nearly all their regulation PDFs as these XFA non-pdfs that I cannot read. So I cannot know the regulations. My emails about this topic (to multiple addresses over many years a dozen times) have gone unanswered.

If Acrobat supports it it doesn't matter what the spec says. Until Adobe drops XFA from Acrobat and forces these extremely silly people to stop, PDF is no longer PDF.
by dave1010uk | 2026-01-23 00:10:57+00:00
Genesis is a theological narrative, which is very different to most things we read these days, especially as a software engineer.

1. The general consensus is that there were more people. This is assumed in Genesis and it (annoyingly!) doesn't bother to explain it, as the audience at the time already assumed it. Also, the authors weren't interested in all the logistics and technicalities that we are today.

2. Cities referenced in Genesis were likely fortified settlements, rather than like modern cities.

The idea that people in Africa could only build simple huts is a myth that came from the colonial era. Africa had large cities, architecture and metallurgy while parts of Europe were still tribal.

If you're keen to learn more, there are some good books that explain this much better than a comment can, such as "How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth" by Fee & Stuart and "Genesis for Normal People" by Pete Enns. I haven't read it but "African Civilizations" by Graham Connah is probably the go-to book on how African cities and technologies were so much further ahead than traditional European/US narratives place them.

The best resource for these kinds of questions is probably "The Bible Project". They have a load of YouTube videos and podcasts that cover these kinds of questions.
by jmye | 2026-01-23 00:11:10+00:00
… So live where you want. I do, and it’s a SFH neighborhood. We don’t all need to live in Kowloon City, just because that’s what you like.

So tired of this strident bullshit (“and SFH zoning should not exist”) from people who can’t seem to figure out other people exist and have thoughts and preferences, too.
by godisdad | 2026-01-23 00:11:21+00:00
Respectfully, neither of these docs strike me as really sufficient to debug live running systems in the critical path for paying users. The first seems to be related to the inner development loop and local the second is again how to attach gdb to debug something in a controlled environment

Crash reporting, telemetry, useful queuing/saturation measures or a Rosetta Stone of “we look at X today in system and app level telemetry, in the <unikernel system> world we look at Y (or don’t need X for reason Z) would be more in the spirit of parity

Systems are often somewhat “hands off” in more change control sensitive environments too, these guides presume full access, line of sight connectivity and a expert operator which are three unsafe assumptions in larger production systems IMO
by xl-brain | 2026-01-23 00:12:27+00:00
I think you missing my point. My point is not that IPv6 cannot be secured, it is that the author's take is controversial because people are skeptical about whether networks ARE being secured when NAT is not present. This skepticism is backed up by the research paper that I quoted and real world experience. IPv6 is deployed in many places incorrectly and without the good defaults. IPv4 NAPT in residential networks acts as a last line of defense because most users have been incapable of turning it off.

I suppose I will distill my thought into the assertion that the author should have prefixed his title with "In capable hands,"...