MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by GrowingSideways | 2026-01-19 21:06:29+00:00
> Sure, but now I need to be fluent in prompt-lang and the underlying programming language if you want me to be confident in the output (and you probably do, right?)

Using a formal language makes the problem space unambiguous. That is just as much a benefit as it is a barrier to entry. Once you learn this formal language, the ability to read code and see the surface area of the problem is absolutely empowering. Using english to express this is an exercise in frustration (or, occasionally, genius—but genius is not necessary with the formal language).

Programs are not poetry!
by dijit | 2026-01-19 21:06:41+00:00
I'm having a productive discussion by not letting vague claims slide.

"Unfairly biased most of the time" and "unjust more often than just" are the same claim when discussing legal outcomes. If the system is systematically biased, it produces unjust outcomes. Don't play word games.

And yes, people absolutely have made that claim. The assertion that 98% plea bargain rates represent coercion rather than efficient processing is precisely claiming the system gets it wrong most of the time. The hypothetical about innocent breadwinners forced to plead guilty isn't describing an edge case, it's being presented as how plea bargains function.

If you want to argue the system has some biases that need addressing, fine. That's not what's being argued here. The argument is that plea bargains are inherently coercive and that maintaining innocence should exempt you from parole requirements. That's claiming the system is fundamentally broken, not merely imperfect.

Pick one: is the system broken or just imperfect? Because I'm arguing it's the latter and you lot keep trying to prove the former whilst pretending you're not.
by crazygringo | 2026-01-19 21:06:46+00:00
Yeah, I've always used lens wipes after an Apple employee recommended them to me, said it was what they used in-store (at least at the time):

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01NCOUY05?th=1

Apparently they're 39.5% isopropyl alcohol. 1 wipe is basically enough to clean 1 laptop screen before it all evaporates. Been using them for over a decade now on my MacBook Airs.
by DaSHacka | 2026-01-19 21:07:10+00:00
So you're openly admitting you're a domestic terrorist who seeks to murder those you disagree with?

Bizarre. Not only against the rules of HN, but bordering on illegal as well.

Turns out you don't actually care about Trump "destroying democracy" or "ICE acting like Nazis", it's that you want to BE the Nazis and the one in power so you can kill, censor, and surveil those you disagree with.

Oh well, we have the Second Amendment for a reason. Should weirdo freaks like yourself attempt to do even half the things you've delusionally threatened to the United States and her people, they may find it difficult when they're stuck six feet under. Never thought I'd have to defend my country from hostile National Socialist takeover alongside my fellow countrymen, just as my grandfather did generations ago. Poetic, in a sense.
by vlovich123 | 2026-01-19 21:07:29+00:00
Whether you use raw threads or not in no way changes that thread safety is completely independent of that; eg a work stealing queue of a fixed thread pool still can have issues. And high performance code often needs you to implement certain constructs which means someone has to implement them and be sure they’re safe.

Also I’ve worked on a lot of different codebases, from iOS at Apple to Android at Meta, from machine learning to VR video streaming. Claiming that people aren’t using raw threads in C++ a) isn’t borne out by the evidence b) is ignoring the challenges of writing thread safe code that has nothing to do with manually creating a thread. Hell, my team hit a libc++ bug in std::conditional_var.
by pear01 | 2026-01-19 21:09:06+00:00
Demanding a password introduces more error and more room for evasion than a finger, which as I said is about the same as getting the phone in the first place. You are right that in some, maybe even most cases, it may not make a difference. But when time is of the essence, additional obstacles are often simply avoided.

You also might ask who is sticking you up. For example, I believe there is fourth amendment literature re government officials that have gotten away with using an arrested persons biometrics to unlock a phone, in a manner in which compelling the release of a password would be illegal. Put another way, I can simply grab your finger or put your phone in front of your face, whereas beating you until you surrender your password is a lot harder to accomplish without creating additional consequences.
Ask HN: Why is opening a new window in OS26 Safari so slow this week?
by zahirbmirza | 2026-01-19 21:09:25+00:00
Something unusual has happened. I can no longer instantly open a new safari window (I use new windows, not tables, I dislike tabs, don't judge...)

Anyway, back to the unusual. To get an instantly opening window I have to open a New General Window (command, option, shift, 2). Pressing command N opens a new personal window, which takes 2 seconds on an M4 Max. This is madness. I don't ever remember configuring a personal browsing window and I can't change the default behaviour.

What is going on behind the scenes and are Apple engineers using some kind of work around to this infuriating behaviour?

nb. I will not change my behaviour to using tabs.
by watwut | 2026-01-19 21:09:50+00:00
> One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty.

I would not say this one, because I simply strongly disagree. Simple as that. No, nazi opposition did not needes to let yourself be tortured in camp to be valid. Nor communist one.

As a demand, it is absurd on its face. Yeah, you should weight the level of risk and loss. And you dont need to aim for self harm when opposing something bad.
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 | 2026-01-19 21:11:12+00:00
"One such implementation that broke is the getaddrinfo function in glibc, which is commonly used on Linux for DNS resolution. When looking at its getanswer_r implementation, we can indeed see it expects to find the CNAME records before any answers:"

Wherever possible I compile with gethostbyname instead of getaddrinfo. I use musl instead of glibc

Nothing against IPv6 but I do not use it on the computers and networks I control
by YeGoblynQueenne | 2026-01-19 21:11:22+00:00
Just a note that many creators integrate the advertisement of their sponsors into their content presentation and not all of that can be stopped by ad blockers (most, in fact, can't). Those creators also tend to have a Patreon or similar so their content can be supported directly. And I'd wager that's a much better model for the creators than relying on ads they don't even select themselves and that possibly clash with their content. This also makes it much more clear to users that the creators directly benefit from those integrated ads, so those kinds of ads are probably much better tolerated.
by labrador | 2026-01-19 21:11:30+00:00
My daughter was about the age of King's daughter when I first read this letter. It had a deep and profound effect and strengthened my commitment to racial and gender equality:

when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society; when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six year old daughter why she can't go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see ominous clouds of inferiority beginning to form in her little mental sky, and see her beginning to distort her personality by developing an unconscious bitterness toward white people; when you have to concoct an answer for a five year old son who is asking: "Daddy, why do white people treat colored people so mean?"
by palata | 2026-01-19 21:12:18+00:00
> The default OS is not de-googled Android though, but regular Android. You have to buy the /e/OS variant

For some definition of de-google, though. /e/OS is based on LineageOS which is based on AOSP which is developed by Google. And microg contacts the Google servers, doesn't it? My understanding is that it's just an open source implementation of the Play Services.
by zahlman | 2026-01-19 21:12:26+00:00
> His strategy worked because it existed alongside MANY other voices, IMO the most underrated of which is Malcolm X, that rejected this "gradualism" outright and refused endless delay.

I have read very many people claim this and exactly zero reasons provided by them why I should believe it is true.

It seems to me like basic common nature that if you see proponents of a cause behaving in a manner you find objectionable, that will naturally bias you against the cause. And I have, repeatedly, across a period of many years, observed myself to become less sympathetic to multiple causes specifically because I can see that their proponents use violence in spreading their message.

I've tried very many times to explain the above to actual proponents of causes behaving in manners I found objectionable (but only on the Internet, for fear of physical safety) and the responses have all been either incoherent or just verbally abusive.

> making it credible that there is a world where those "peaceful" people do not accept complicity or "no" for an answer.

This would only make sense if social change required action specifically from people in power, who in turn must necessarily act against their best interest to effect it.

If that were true, there would be no real motivation to try nonviolence at all, except perhaps to try to conserve the resources used to do violence.

> You cannot have nonviolence unless violence is a credible threat from a game-theory perspective

First, no, that makes no sense. If that were true, formal debate would never occur and nobody would ever actually try to convince anyone of anything in good faith. The premise is flawed from the beginning; you cannot apply game theory here because you cannot even establish that clearly defined "players" exist. Nor is there a well-defined "payoff matrix", at all. The point of nonviolent protest is to make the protested party reconsider what is actually at stake.

Second, in practice, violence is never actually reserved as a credible threat in these actions; it happens concurrently with attempts at nonviolence and agitators give no credible reason why it should stop if their demands are met. In fact, it very often comes across that the apparent demands are only a starting point and that ceding to them will only embolden the violent.
by akoboldfrying | 2026-01-19 21:12:37+00:00
I think you'll find that most of the retained curves are short, because these are the ones that are able to provide local detail. Maybe you could improve the detail level by choosing the 4 control points to be nearby most of the time?

I made a similar thing a few years ago using randomly placed translucent circles of random sizes and fixed opacity level (about 20% as I recall). Initially the circles had unknown colours; after placing them all, for each of the R, G and B channels, I used a linear programming solver to solve exactly for the intensities in that channel that would minimise an overall error (I had to use the L1 distance, since the more usual squared error couldn't be expressed in the solver). This produced some quite nice images, that were also fun to animate :)
by testing22321 | 2026-01-19 21:13:05+00:00
Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

> - Challenging China on Trade & Industrial Policy

And how’s that working out? China is booming right now, the US is spiralling towards massive recession.

> NATO Burden-Sharing Pressure (forced EU to take defense spending commitment seriously and increase defense budgets)

Trump increased the war budget. He’s spending more money, not less. This is not helping the us.

> Criminal Justice Reform (reduced mandatory minimums for nonviolent offenses, expanded rehab and early-release programs)

Can you link to a source where he has actually done that, not just said he would.

> Operation Warp Speed

At the same time as advocating not taking vaccines

> Energy Independence Focus

What? He’s stealing oil from Venezuela, and cancelling solar and wind project. The us energy is fucked.

> Deregulation Emphasis, especially for small business

Again, can you link to actual steps taken, or just talk.

> Abraham Accords

Gimme a break. Full on genocide right now, and he keeps claiming he negotiated peace.
by jy-tan | 2026-01-19 21:13:07+00:00
Thanks! Great question, we have a Transforms system that lets you define redaction rules (redact, mask, replace, or drop) using matchers with JSONPath support. Transforms are applied at capture time, so sensitive data never leaves your service boundary.

Full docs here: https://docs.usetusk.ai/api-tests/pii-redaction/basic-concep...

Would love to hear what patterns you've found work well at Toran!
by cosmic_cheese | 2026-01-19 21:13:09+00:00
Depends a lot on the screen and environment in my experience.

A glossy Apple Studio Display or iMac (both of which have a decent antiglare treatment despite being glossy) in an office setting for example isn’t too bad.

On the other hand, your average touchscreen laptop (which are always almost-mirrors with no hint of treatment, for some reason) with screen angled up slightly and overhead fluorescent tube lighting or a skylight on the other hand? Borderline useless if the screen isn’t bright enough to outshine the strong glare covering 40-60%+ of the screen.
by throw0101d | 2026-01-19 21:13:13+00:00
From the video:

> [Chenoweth and Stephan] have gone out of their way to correct people who treat it like a cheat code, and to caution against overreading any success of non-violent oppostion.

The rebuttal is against those arguing that 3.5% is a "magic number", that treat(ed) it like an 'absolute', when we're actually dealing with probabilities and likelihoods and odds.

The formulators of the "3.5% rule" do not treat it as an absolute, and neither do I: my GP post talks about "odds" and likelihoods.
by smackeyacky | 2026-01-19 21:13:37+00:00
One thing copilot seems to be good at for me is python. Other, older languages like VB.NET I found it struggled with.

I did find (weirdly) that it improved when running on WSL rather than windows.

However I did get it to code a script for downloading SharePoint files and even got it to reduce the dependencies down to built-ins which was a massive time saver
by browningstreet | 2026-01-19 21:13:46+00:00
I've struggled with this mightily, and the best I've found is reading uncomfortably more often, in shorter increments, in coffee shops. It's an effort, but it's one I can stick with because there's a secondary upside. Mixing coffee benefits, a bit of people watching, and my book/kindle is a routine I've kept up with.

Also, library books.. I don't end up reading all of them, but I do skim and read sections of more books when I bring a couple of library books along.
by vacuity | 2026-01-19 21:14:03+00:00
> The kernel and memory manager: probably yes, the device drivers: not necessarily, the language runtimes for managed languages: not necessarily.

The parts that touch hardware (or similarly bare kernel interfaces) must be so. Sure, you could split device driver implementations and so on, but somewhere there's a meaningful lower level of software within the system.

> Because any other solution will quickly run into chicken-and-the-egg style problems.

No. The kernel must provide for context switching. It would be like migrating threads IPC, but one-way. No threads, no scheduler, no dedicated data transfer. In other words, the bare minimum necessary to make a sensible abstraction around switching processes.

seL4, according to its developers, is not absolutely a microkernel. I believe the rationale mainly points to the in-kernel scheduler, but seL4's IPC interacts with the scheduler and is noticeably more elaborate than a mere context switch. Even if seL4's IPC is, by most standards, minimal, I do not consider it to be so objectively. I described a meaningfully more minimal alternative.

Delegating scheduling to userspace is trivial. If necessary, designate a scheduler to run if no scheduling decision is available. It has been done before, and the only usual objection is performance.

> No. A syscall is usually defined as a call to a ring one level in from the one where you currently are. But lots of things that are syscalls right now do not necessarily have to be.

Just as hardware interrupts can be abstracted into messages, syscalls can be abstracted into messages. I'm not saying that the hardware implementation directly conforms to the abstraction.
by gpm | 2026-01-19 21:14:18+00:00
> I think that means 4,500 shares, or $450,000, is on the "No" side and 500 shares, or $50,000 is on the "Yes" side. Do I have that right so far?

No - there's always an equal number of contract outstanding on both sides of the bet. A contract is a promise from the person who sold "no" to pay the person who bought "yes" a dollar if the outcome happens. These contracts can trade from anywhere between 1 cent to 99 cents corresponding to a 1% chance to a 99% chance that you would die*. The odds the market reports is just whatever price the last contract traded at (or alternatively whatever price sits between the current open offers to buy/sell contracts. In liquid markets these tend to be the same).

> If nothing changes about the market and I'm still alive at the end of the day, everyone who holds a "No" share splits the $500,000 pot, correct? There are 4,500 of them, so they each get $111.11 per share.

They each get $1 per share. Their profit is $1 minus how much they paid for the share. It's not (meaningfully) a shared pot which is divided up, it's a fixed amount per share.

> They decide they want to dump $50,000 in on the "Yes" side. That's not going to buy them 500 shares, because they would need someone willing to sell 500 shares at the current price.

Ignoring the numbers at this point - you're generally right that they need to find someone willing to sell them the contracts. The existence of a large number of outstanding contracts doesn't guarantee this - they might be held by someone who is holding them to minimize the payout a hitman could get for killing you for instance.

The most direct guarantee is the order book The order book is the collection of open offers "I'm willing to sell X yes-contracts at Y price" that the market has for potential purchasers. The hitman can look at this and snatch up all of these simultaneously (up to some race conditions in the market - we can mostly pretend those don't exist but they do introduce some risk on the hitmans side). This can be thought of as the size of the currently available bounty.

There's a chance the market will continually over-price these yes contracts - and the hitman will never kill you as a result. That would be a huge mistake on all the financially motivated holders of yes contracts though - their positions go from worth something (if they sell to the aspiring hitman) to worth nothing if they don't price them low enough. In general you should expect the market to find the price at which a hitman will carry out the contract - so long as there's enough money in the market in the first place.

* Ignoring transaction fees and the time value of money, it's close enough for this discussion.
by kyrofa | 2026-01-19 21:14:27+00:00
That's not actually true: cell phone rx/tx power is quite low. We can get away with that because all they need to do is get to the nearest tower, which has a ton of power, sensitive antennas, and is very tall. Amateur radios have far more power available to them, but any "p2p" (i.e. simplex in amateur radio) runs into normal RF issues, like obstacles and interference. If you used the existing radios in cell phones to communicate directly with other cell phones, you wouldn't get very far. Even amateur radios, with all their power, use repeaters to the same effect as cell towers.
by mothballed | 2026-01-19 21:14:59+00:00
I've been held ~24 hours by DHS under RAS, it is definitely a thing near the border where they don't need PC to jail you. They put me in jail but I was never under arrest, I later got my federal arrest record and there was nothing. Maybe that was what they were referring to?

Jailing citizens with no warrant nor PC was happening to me under Biden so it's not new either.
by thih9 | 2026-01-19 21:15:07+00:00
> The screen needs more effort to keep clean than a normal screen and comes with a special wipe that needs to be used instead of microfiber

> I’ve learned to bring my special wipe when I bring my laptop, and I slip a few rubbing alcohol wipes in there as well.

Not for me then, the extra flexibility wouldn't be worth the loss of convenience; I prefer low maintenance and I work mostly indoors anyway. Still, good to have options, I guess.

In any case, that was a good and helpful review!
by pear01 | 2026-01-19 21:15:31+00:00
I think we also shouldn't sell the nonviolence short. It wasn't merely nonviolence. It was subjecting yourself openly to state violence and not resisting. It was letting the brutality of the state be made manifest as it washed over you. As the cops abused and beat people who were not responding even remotely in kind.

That was part of Malcolm's moral clarity, though in the alternative. He suggested it was immoral to subject yourself or people you loved to such an exercise, tantamount to one of self immolation.

Malcolm X essentially advocated a system of sovereignty not unlike the American founders, who of course were violent, not nonviolent.

In that way MLK JR really was America's Christ. He was willing to be nailed to the cross if it meant bending the arc towards justice.
by Dylan16807 | 2026-01-19 21:15:45+00:00
> "Unfairly biased most of the time" and "unjust more often than just" are the same claim when discussing legal outcomes. If the system is systematically biased, it produces unjust outcomes. Don't play word games.

Then that's not an extraordinary claim.

I'm doing my best to avoid word games here.

If someone is claiming that the system is biased always, but not claiming that most outcomes are wrong, that is a reasonable claim.

Calling plea bargains inherently coercive is a reasonable claim. Yes they're broken in some ways.

> The assertion that 98% plea bargain rates represent coercion rather than efficient processing is precisely claiming the system gets it wrong most of the time.

No no no no no no no no. That's not what those words mean.

> Pick one: is the system broken or just imperfect?

Some imperfection will always be there.

But there are important imperfections that could be reasonably fixed, therefore I would say the system is broken. By my definition of broken; yours might be different.

I don't know what "fundamentally broken" means exactly so I won't comment on that term.
by anonymous908213 | 2026-01-19 21:16:15+00:00
Virtually all humans demonstrate the ability to reason about logic within a few years of development. Anyone who can conduct arbitrary arithmetic, such as correctly determining that X + Y = Z without having seen and memorised the result beforehand and without using a calculator, is reasoning about logic and therefore intelligent. Some are more intelligent than others and can handle more complex reasoning; my theory is that differences in intelligence are a result of brains setting a threshold limiting energy consumption rather than letting one thread consume all system resources. The threshold differs based on environment; in an environment that rewards correct reasoning, more energy will be allocated for it, whereas in an environment where correct reasoning is not important, less energy will be allocated as it is not beneficial or necessary for survival. This has compounding effects over the course of one's life, as the more energy that is allocated to building pathways between neurons conductive to reasoning in a lifetime, the more complex the reasoning that can be conducted.