MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by egypturnash | 2026-01-19 20:38:33+00:00
I've been using a sunshield I made out of some black mat board for at least a decade now. There's a few little magnets in it to cling to the magnets hidden in my Mac's lid. It's been on like 3-5 computers now, looking increasingly battered; whenever I upgrade I get to see if the magnets are in the same orientation or not.

Works great, I keep it in the padded pocket in my laptop bag next to the computer and the drawing tablet and take it out when I'm sitting in the park.
by lurk2 | 2026-01-19 20:39:12+00:00
> If you take a plea deal because you were convinced you'd be prosecuted otherwise, well, that also sucks

You are completely sidestepping the thrust of the grandparent commenter’s comment, which is that the cost of defending yourself from prosecution is prohibitively expensive and punitive in the sense that the outcome is worse than negotiating a plea deal.

> if you took one under duress, then that would be why the higher courts exist, to invalidate your guilty plea when taken under duress.

In this hypothetical the accused doesn’t have the money to pay for a lawyer; they aren’t going to be beating the case on an appeal.
by throw0101d | 2026-01-19 20:39:21+00:00
> Admittedly having not read the 400-page study […]

It is not a 400-page study: it is a 400-page book that goes over the research available at the time and summarizes it. The book leans slightly academic, but it's a fairly easy read.

A movement's success is (partly?) determined by its size and how much of the general population gets on board with the original (presumably) small group that started it.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3.5%25_rule

The/A thesis of the author is that people are turned off by the use of violence/force and are less likely to agree with, and/or get involved in, movements that use violence.

So if a movement wants to grow the 'coalition' of people that will help and/or join them, that growth is best achieved by eschewing violence as much as possible.

[Edited GP post to add some of this comment.]
by sdrinf | 2026-01-19 20:39:22+00:00
Note: I strongly recommend against using Novita -their main gig is serving quantized versions of the model to offer it for cheaper / at better latency; but if you ran an eval against other providers vs novita, you can spot the quality degradation. This is nowhere marked, or displayed in their offering.

Tolerating this is very bad form from openrouter, as they default-select lowest price -meaning people who just jump into using openrouter and do not know about this fuckery get facepalm'd by perceived model quality.
by asdff | 2026-01-19 20:39:23+00:00
Direct ecological management is unfortunately a bit of a game of using a bucket to fix a leaky ship. The equilibrium that established the ecosystem dynamics in the first place is disrupted. A new equilibrium might form over time, but we enforce the old one because that is what we documented when we first came to a place, even though it is no longer thermodynamically favorable.

Ironically, the ecology of an island itself came from events like a random animal swimming to it over the historical record and finding sufficient spare resources or an ecological niche they could satisfy sufficiently to reproduce. Distance from mainland and species diversity is very strongly correlated reflecting increasingly scarce odds of these "heroic journeys" at greater distances. Species themselves are capable of exhausting an islands resources and putting themselves into local extinction even with no human intervention (such as the case of the last of the mammoths on wrangel island).
by skippyboxedhero | 2026-01-19 20:39:56+00:00
There was a paper, that i am not going to dig out, on the first set of China tariffs by Trump that found that exporters reduced margins. You don't have to look far, you just need to look a few years ago. For some reason, the claims made earlier last year were apocalyptic despite there being clear evidence from the very recent past that this wasn't the case (making money in equities last year was terribly easy).

Btw, you can find papers where tariffs are paid by consumer, where they aren't, where there is no effect. The thing that is being measured is completely different to the actual tariffs. The impact, like everything in economics, depends on the context in which the tool is used. That context is typically hard to model, so we end up with a lot of shitty papers claiming that it is about the tariff when it is about the context/implementation/etc.
by webspinner | 2026-01-19 20:40:26+00:00
Sure thing! I was able to put some in there, and it worked! I use NVDA. Nothing seems to be wrong, at the moment. Hmm, can I put my monthly readin goal in there? It didn't seem to have a way to add those. I'm not a big reader, so starting small, by reading a book a month, lol! That's more of a feature type thingy.
by threethirtytwo | 2026-01-19 20:40:39+00:00
>How ironic of you to call my argument an analogy while it isn't an analogy, yet all you have to offer is exactly that

Bro I offered you analogies to show you how it's IRRELEVANT. The point was to show you how it's an ineffective form of reasoning via demonstrating it's ineffectiveness FOR YOUR conclusion because using this reasoning can allow you to conclude the OPPOSITE. Assuming this type of reasoning is effective means BOTH what I say is true and what you say is true which leads to a logical contradiction.

There is no irony, only misunderstanding from you.

>I argued that a developer today is 1000x more effective than in the days of punch cards, yet we have 1000x more developers today. Not only that, this correlation tracked fairly linearly throughout the last many decades.

See here, you're using an analogy and claiming it's effective. To which I would typically offer you another analogy that shows the opposite effect, but I feel it would only confuse you further.

>Software jobs will be redefined, they will require different skill sets, they may even be called something else - but they will still be there.

Again, you believe this because of analogies. I recommend you take a stab at my way of reasoning. Try to arrive at your own conclusion without using analogies.
by saila | 2026-01-19 20:41:16+00:00
I mostly use IDEs for day to day coding, and pretty much every IDE supports vim keybindings, which I always have enabled. I also use vim in the terminal for small edits and one-off files, so it's not either/or.

After the initial learning curve and fiddling with settings, it just becomes natural and you can edit code or other text at blazing fast speeds. I also find that it helps with RSI by reducing arm motions reaching for the mouse.

Of course, there are other good options out there, but if vim fits your brain, it can significantly boost your editing speed. For those who say programmers don't spend that much time typing, that's true sometimes, but there are periods after the design/planning phase where we type a lot, and I want that to go as fast as possible while I have an implementation loaded into short term memory.

As someone who used to be a vim skeptic myself, I'd suggest you either give it another look or just accept that it works well for other people and go on with your day.
by jakelazaroff | 2026-01-19 20:41:23+00:00
I realize that "duress" probably has a specific legal definition, but colloquially speaking all plea bargains are made under duress. If I (a private citizen) kidnapped you, locked you in a cage and told you that I would continue to hold you captive if you didn't agree to my terms, no one would mistake that for a free or fair negotiation.
by tsimionescu | 2026-01-19 20:41:26+00:00
Politicians don't have anything to lose from this. There is (shockingly!) nothing illegal about politicians making trades based on decisions that they know they are about to take that have a significant and easily predictable impact on the market.

By contrast, making public bets based on classified information that you are not authorized to publicize is a simple and relatively direct breach of laws regarding the handling of classified documents and state secrets.
by lovich | 2026-01-19 20:41:34+00:00
Only legitimate crazy people here would have a problem with the sentence “All lives matter.” People have a problem with the slogan “All Lives Matter”, which was made in reaction to “Black Lives Matter”.

I don’t know if you are ESL if you aren’t American but the capitalization I used matters and it’s difficult to explain the context of hearing a sentence vs a slogan. That’s also before you get into people specifically trying to conflate them so they can do a sort of motte and bailey type argument by claiming they weren’t saying “All Lives Matter” just that “All lives matter, so they can uno reverse you as the bigot
by Melonai | 2026-01-19 20:41:41+00:00
That sounds awful and will send administrators on a wild goose chase throughout their stack to find the issue without many clues except this thing is failing at seemingly random times. (I myself would suspect something related to network connectivity, maybe requests are timing out? This idea would lead me in the completely wrong direction.)

It also does not give any way to actually see a warning message, where would we even put it? I know for a fact that if my glibc DNS resolver started spitting out errors into /var/log/god_knows_what I would take days to find it, at best the resolver could return some kind of errno with perror giving us a message like "The DNS response has not been correctly formatted", and then hope that the message is caught and forwarded through whatever is wrapping the C library, hopefully into our stderr. And there's so many ways even that could fail.
by dkdcio | 2026-01-19 20:41:54+00:00
> Imagine the ad police. “You blogged about a product. Someone said you sounded insincere. Let’s see the receipt for purchase. Can’t prove you bought it? Prove you weren’t compensated for your blog post or pay a fine.” Kafka land.

immediately to a fantasy slippery slope argument, cool!

your argument seems to boil down to paid ads being the lifeblood of the flow of information. my argument is it corrupts that flow of information, and we’d be better without them —- everything would operate just fine. individuals and organizations would have better incentives to share valuable information, not what they get paid to. obviously there would be plenty of details and edge cases to work out, as with any policy in the real world

I’m not going to write out policy in HackerNews comments and play that game with someone who jumps to the “imagine this crazy world where the police start arresting all of us over free speech!” as their explanation for what would go wrong
by SV_BubbleTime | 2026-01-19 20:42:17+00:00
Is that explicit or implicit? Like did someone explicitly write that is what all lives matter meant? I don’t quite get it. If it is implicit, isn’t that just subject to perspective?

How many people who wanted all lives matter to be “the thing” just didn’t want to see one race singled out over others? Isn’t today MLK day?
by RickKirby | 2026-01-19 20:42:56+00:00
Most companies are governing everything their AI does; drafts, summaries, internal tools, trivial actions, and calling it safety.
I argue this makes systems less safe, not more.

The article makes a deliberately extreme opening case for removing governance entirely, then pivots to a risk-weighted model: govern authority, not cognition.

If you think this is reckless, you’ll probably want to read it.
by Dylan16807 | 2026-01-19 20:43:17+00:00
> If you plead guilty to an offence you shouldn't serve the same amount of time as someone who shows no remorse.

Showing remorse is good, yes, but holding that over someone's head as a way to force them to plead guilty is disgusting.

Also pleading guilty does not imply showing remorse.

If we can't disentangle plea and remorse, then factoring remorse into the sentence does more harm than good. It would be better to ignore it entirely and pretend everyone said they're deeply sorry.
by jmyeet | 2026-01-19 20:43:30+00:00
I want to call out this part, which is just as relevant today as it was 60+ years ago:

> I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

What MLK is talking about how the "white moderate" sides with the oppressors by defending the status quo and choosing "order" over progress.

This is the exact schism that currently exists in the Democratic Party today. If you pay attention to American politics, you'll probably have an idea that there is a civil war within the Democratic Party between "liberals" and "leftists". "Liberals", the same "white moderates", defend American imperialism, want to put a smiley face on ICE rather than abolishing it and basically just want to be "Republican lite".

These policies are deeply unpoular with the base, such the the net approval of the Democratic Party is at historic lows [1]. This isn't incompetence. It's a choice to favor the donor class and their future job prospects over the interests of their base.

A lot of these "white moderates" today get angry at leftists (way more than at Republicans, ironically) for being "single issue voters" about Palestine since that's now become a litmus test for candidates in primary season. First, they don't understand what a single issue voter actually is. Second, and more importantly, there's not a single politician who has a good stance on racial justice and equality, women's rights and so on that has a bad position on Palestine. There is a refusal to see how these things are interconnected.

[1]: https://civiqs.com/results/favorable_democrats?uncertainty=t...
by grumio | 2026-01-19 20:43:45+00:00
They're not simply enforcing laws on the books. They're breaking them.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/lawyers-allege-dept-homeland-secur...

DHS denying legal council to detainees.

https://www.propublica.org/article/videos-ice-dhs-immigratio...

ICE using chokeholds in defiance of DOJ standards for use of force.

> after more than an hour, agents held down Zapata Rivera’s arms. One, who Zapata Rivera’s lawyer says wore a baseball cap reading “Ne Quis Effugiat” — Latin for “So That None Will Escape” — pressed his thumbs into the arteries on Zapata Rivera’s neck. The young man then appeared to pass out as bystanders screamed.

> The technique is known as a carotid restraint. The two carotid arteries carry 70% of the brain’s blood flow; block them, and a person can quickly lose consciousness. The tactic can cause strokes, seizures, brain damage — and death.

> In a bystander video of Zapata Rivera’s arrest, his eyes roll back in his head and he suffers an apparent seizure, convulsing so violently that his daughter, seated in his lap, shakes with him.

> In a social media post after the incident and in its statement to ProPublica, DHS did not cite a deadly threat. Instead, it referenced the charges against Zapata Rivera’s wife and suggested he had only pretended to have a medical crisis while refusing help from paramedics. “Imagine FAKING a seizure to help a criminal escape justice,” the post said.

Is this new information to you, koolba? Or do you believe this is enforcement of laws on the books?
by skippyboxedhero | 2026-01-19 20:43:52+00:00
I would argue tariffs are inherently easier to deal with than NTBs. I will never understand the absolute hate that is leveled at countries that use tariffs vs. the very noisy, tariff-hating countries that use NTBs.

EU is, obviously, one of the worst offenders here. Tariffs are a great evil...there are still massive barriers to trade within the EU. Let me repeat: WITHIN the EU, a bloc of countries that share a supra-national political system. Like Wymoing putting up a barrier to trade with Iowa (which, btw, do exist in the US too...but are significantly lower than in the EU where there isn't harmonization in even basic products like financial services due to the problems with competition in so many European countries).

The discussions on trade are insane.
by pixl97 | 2026-01-19 20:43:56+00:00
>reates a sympathy for the cause among impartial 3rd parties

Only if you have good advertising for your cause.

Violence is typically good advertising, most news is simply salivating to cover it.

Which means in any non-violent group seeking a goal, it is optimal to have a small violent 'unassociated' group cause just enough problems to get noticed in the global media.
by throw0101d | 2026-01-19 20:43:58+00:00
> If you're movement is going to 100% cause a reaction of violence with the opposition regardless if you're violent or not, then there is zero reason for your movement not to use violence themselves. Simply put, you'd be rounded up and exterminated simply for existing.

The book covers such scenarios: where you are non-violent but the Powers That Be are violent towards your movement.
by ModernMech | 2026-01-19 20:44:09+00:00
> Harris had a big bump in the polls as soon as she entered the race

The election was always going to be 50/50 come election day no matter who the candidates were. The consternation about polling over the summer was especially frustrating for this reason, because 50/50 is exactly how it played out despite whatever temporary polling boosts she got. If she hadn't replaced Biden, his poor polling also would have reverted to the 50/50 by November.
by to11mtm | 2026-01-19 20:44:13+00:00
I agree with some of their sentiment but disagree that it is secularism specifically.

If anything, my observation has been that social media provides better avenues for exploitation by bad actors and, for lack of a better term, people unwilling to do 'self work'.

It used to be a lot harder to 'grift'; historically, a community would eventually suss out bad actors which leads to shunning/etc.

But, when your 'community' is an entire country or a large area of the planet, the signal/noise ratio changes along with the behavior of the bad actors.

As an example not directly related to Amazon, I've worked with more than one person who would be a decent programmer if they worked on their job skills as much as they worked on their job hopping skills; online job posting (at least for a while) made it way easier for someone to just hop from job to job collecting a paycheck before the 'well now they should be onboarded and productive' red line is crossed and they are found out.

I've seen it with more than one person that is happy to screw over multiple 'friends' because they just use the internet to find the right groups to make new friends [0].

I've seen it with acquaintances where they just keep burning through 'matches' on dating sites without any introspection as to their own toxic behavior[1].

And sure, in all these cases people bad actors can still get 'outed'. However the bad actors are also happy to be dishonest in their own messaging, which again messes with the SNR. They'll just try to drag you through the mud and drain your endurance fighting their lies if you try to speak up, and unless you've really got time to burn... everyone stays quiet.

And, well, society is worse as a result.

[0] - They'll even pick up new interests in the process, once they've sufficiently burned themselves in a given community.

[1] - My favorite example was two narcissists that -both- were looking to replace the other before they broke up with each other...
by markbao | 2026-01-19 20:44:42+00:00
This is a great option if you work outdoors a lot. As a designer though, I couldn’t get used to the “dusty” appearance of the nano texture (and yes, contrast loss – glossy displays are just more punchy) at least on the Pro Display XDR. You mostly get used to it if you aren’t doing design, I’m guessing.

Def a tradeoff that depends on your lifestyle if you work outside a lot (or want to). It does look nice there in the mountains
by tokymegz | 2026-01-19 20:44:52+00:00
I didn’t interface much with Rocky outside of the shoot, our director Dan was talking to him regularly and he certainly had options and great ideas but mostly left it up to us. All of the creative came from Dan and bouncing ideas off us / trying things and seeing what was possible with this tech. By the end of the process it was awesome to get Dan also into blender helping set up camera moves himself, in addition to finessing the edit and animatic to help point us in the right direction.
by SV_BubbleTime | 2026-01-19 20:44:53+00:00
> if you are black specifically your chance of getting killed in an interaction with police is higher.

Again, not an expert. But, are we talking per police interaction, or per capita, or of all police homicides?

Pretty sure when I saw, far more unarmed white people were killed than unarmed black people per year, which per capita makes sense, right? But, isn’t total police interactions more inportant?
by Lerc | 2026-01-19 20:45:08+00:00
>In the eyes of the law, if you have been found guilty "you are guilty".

Yes but this is just another way to describe the problem, invoking it as a justification becomes tautological.

The patent office has a similar issue where they tend to consider prior work to be just what they see in other patents so the first person to patent is declared to be the first person to express the idea. To turn that view from the default position takes a lot of resources.

Laws should be unambiguous, but they shouldn't achieve this simply by defining the resolution of the ambiguity to be different from reality.
Ask HN: Why not have cemeteries for lines of descent?
by amichail | 2026-01-19 20:45:10+00:00
Imagine a cemetery with no bodies.

Each headstone represents a line of descent that will not continue. Not a person who died, but a lineage that ends. The marker might list the earliest known ancestor and the last descendant, or simply note that the line terminates here. What is being memorialized is not a life, but a future that will never exist.

The goal would not be judgment or blame. Lines end for countless reasons: chance, choice, illness, migration, history. This would be a quiet space for acknowledging that extinction happens not only to species and cultures, but also to family lines, and that this kind of ending is usually invisible.

By using the familiar language of a cemetery, the idea makes an abstract concept concrete. Walking through it, you would be surrounded not by the dead, but by unrealized continuities. It is less about mourning individuals and more about reflecting on fragility, contingency, and time.

What do you think of this idea?
by araes | 2026-01-19 20:45:35+00:00
Cool, and thanks for the explanation. Gotten interested in retro software recently, so may actually be helpful for trying to set up pictures in some of the retro consoles. Most do tend to be limited to foreground / background. The stuff listed here [1] is pretty representative of what's being dealt with.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_8-bit_computer_hardwar...

Note: If you happen to know how to do multi-color dithering with some of these that would actually make significant improvements on some of these old picture hardware tests.