MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Applejinx | 2026-01-08 14:49:56+00:00
It would be pretty weird if they were so broken they were incapable of saying anything right, even at times when they were trying to be ingratiating. You'd have to be astonishingly insane, more even than these people are, to be totally unable to identify something that would be good press.

I'm not saying they can't reach that point, but this ain't it. They are just getting details wildly wrong and being generally obtuse, but this is an attempt at not seeming completely insane and should be graded on that curve. You can't expect every little detail to be insane, that's asking a lot.
by LightBug1 | 2026-01-08 14:50:36+00:00
I've started using Gem 3 while things are still in flux in the AI world. Pleasantly surprised by how good it is.

Most of my projects are on GPT at the moment, but we're nowhere too far gone that I can't move to others.

And considering just the general nonsense of Altman vs Musk, I might go to Gemini as a safe harbour (yes, I know how ridiculous that sounds).

So far, I've also noticed less ass-kissing by the Gemini robot ... a good thing.
by conductr | 2026-01-08 14:50:45+00:00
They don’t have to buy to fuck up the market. They just have to bid. If there’s low inventory, people that actually need to buy a home are forced to beat/match the bidding.

They can also target just specific areas of specific major metros and there are ripples throughout the entire market.

The housing “market” does work the same as the stock or commodity markets. People aren’t buying an intangible share. They’re buying this specific and unique house and if they’re told “we just got a cash offer for $50k over ask”, they may be tempted to beat it. That doesn’t happen when people buy AAPL. The shares are fungible.

There’s only empirical evidence of their buying activity. We’ll never know how many deals they bid the price up on but didn’t buy. This auction like quality is evident in any market like this; watch Storage Wars and one disinterested buyer will bid up the price just to fuck with his competing bidders.
by techblueberry | 2026-01-08 14:50:48+00:00
Maybe this is a nuance that makes it “better” but I’m 99% sure that Google login means if so visit a site that supports it, Google will share my email with that site even if I don’t explicitly speaking login. Maybe there’s a workaround these businesses are using to get it? But either way my inbox is littered with emails I didn’t sign up for,
by hypeatei | 2026-01-08 14:50:56+00:00
If you want to play lawyer, that's great but everyone just watched an execution of a mother in broad daylight. I think most reasonable people would agree that this is over the top especially because they made it extremely hard to render aid after it happened. Not to mention the various training documents that say not to do what this ICE agent did: stand in front of a car then incapacitate the driver.

It's not just "politicians speech" either, these are leaders in the executive who will bring any charges and are the ones investigating themselves. If they're not professional, and completely lie about the circumstances, how can we expect justice? States can bring charges, I guess, but I'm not going along with "nothing they say matters" idea.
by ratelimitsteve | 2026-01-08 14:51:08+00:00
RFK is insane about a lot of things but I've been eating roughly like this with a focus on lean protein and fresh produce and I brought myself back from the brink of prediabetes and basically got rid of my sleep apnea. Besides, the last food pyramid was just as worked by industry lobbyists as this one is. That's the problem with tolerating a little bit of corruption: the difference between you and the blatantly corrupt goes from being a difference of kind to merely a difference of degree.
by sjw987 | 2026-01-08 14:51:25+00:00
I can see a pretty uncivil but effective (in the UK) approach for shutting down this trend pretty early.

Calling people wearing these 'nonces' (pedophiles) regardless of truth or not. It worked with Google Glass before and it'll work again. Attach a stigma to it straight away to discourage uptake.

It's true you can already film people in public, sure, but covertly filming people is another level on from that.

Personally, I simply can't see any good reason to wear a camera or AI overlay on the face in a public area like this as opposed to just keeping it on the phone where it is now. As a glasses wearer, I'd rather not have anything on my face wherever possible, especially in a country with such bad weather. I can understand the technology in private hands-free settings and for filming action shots (like how GoPro are often used), a lifestyle which (sadly) most people do not possess.
by gwern | 2026-01-08 14:51:26+00:00
The conclusion here seems largely unjustified by the data and indeed is difficult to relate to simple distributions or statistics:

> Increasingly, public institutions seem to exist to manage the obsessions of a tiny number of neurotic—and possibly malicious—complainers.

Why would anyone complain about airport noise when it is ~100% guaranteed to do them no good, and almost all the benefits go to everyone else even if it somehow did anything? Just thinking like an economist here... (Indeed, if a large fraction of locals did complain about something like airport noise, that would itself be highly suspicious to me - as it would indicate an organized campaign or an issue which has become politicized in some way and is now a pretext for something else entirely like a culture war.)

And if there is something I've learned about design and problems, it's that you can have a huge problem, and you are lucky if even 1% will ever tell you.

Your website could be down, and if even 1 person takes the risk of going out of their way to tell you, you should thank your lucky stars that you have such proactive, public-spirited readers!

See also: "Theory of the Nudnik: The Future of Consumer Activism and What We Can Do to Stop It" https://gwern.net/doc/economics/2020-arbel.pdf , Arbel & Shapira 2020; https://pointersgonewild.com/2019/11/02/they-might-never-tel... (commentary: https://gwern.net/ref/chevalier-boisvert-2019); https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1%25_rule
by jakevoytko | 2026-01-08 14:51:46+00:00
"Chuck Norris facts" was a text-only meme format from the mid '00s. Stuff like "Chuck Norris is the only man to ever defeat a brick wall in a game of tennis" or "When Chuck Norris does push-ups, he doesn't push himself up, he pushes the Earth down." The Jeff Dean Facts use the same format. It doesn't have anything to do with Chuck Norris himself.
by pjmlp | 2026-01-08 14:52:03+00:00
Also to point out that outside UNIX, surviving mainframe and micros, the filesystems are closer to NTFS than UNIX world, in regards to what is enforced.

There is also the note that some of them are more database like, than classical filesystems.

Ah, and modern Windows also has Resilient File System (ReFS), which is used on Dev Drives.
by al_borland | 2026-01-08 14:52:18+00:00
Processed food and sugar consumption has also gone up.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8805510/

> Conclusions: As observed from the food availability data, processed and ultra-processed foods dramatically increased over the past two centuries, especially sugar, white flour, white rice, vegetable oils, and ready-to-eat meals. These changes paralleled the rising incidence of NCDs, while animal fat consumption was inversely correlated.
by Aurornis | 2026-01-08 14:52:36+00:00
> Do you think the majority of those people are lying

I don’t think they’re lying, but it is very clear that ADHD has entered the common vernacular and is now used as a generic term like OCD.

People will say “I’m OCD about…” as a way of saying they like to be organized or that they care about some detail.

Now it’s common to say “My ADHD made me…” to refer to getting distracted or following an impulse.

> or do you think it's possible that our pursuit of algorithmic consumption is actually rewiring our neural pathways into something that looks/behaves more like ADHD?

Focus is, and always has been, something that can be developed through practice. Ability to focus starts to decrease when you don’t practice it much.

The talk about “rewiring the brain” and blaming algorithms is getting too abstract, in my opinion. You’re just developing bad habits and not investing time and energy into maintaining the good habits.

If you choose to delete those apps from your phone or even just use your phone’s time limit features today, you could start reducing time spent on the bad habits. If you find something to replace it with like reading a book (ideally physical book to avoid distractions) or even just going outside for a 10 minute walk with your phone at home, I guarantee you’ll find that what you see as an adult-onset “ADHD” will start to diminish and you will begin returning to the focus you remember a decade ago.

Or you could continue scrolling phones and distractions, which will probably continue the decline.

This is a good place to note that a lot of people think getting a prescription will fix the problem, but a very common anecdote in these situations is that the stimulant without a concomitant habit change just made them hyperfocus on their distractions or even go deeper into more obsessive focus on distractions. Building the better habits is a prerequisite and you can’t shortcut out of it.
by LudwigNagasena | 2026-01-08 14:52:57+00:00
> Such a huge amount of ML can be framed through the lens of kernel methods

And none of them are a reinvention of kernel methods. There is such a huge gap between the Nadaraya and Watson idea and a working Attention model, calling it a reinvention is quite a reach.

One might as well say that neural networks trained with gradient descent are a reinvention of numerical methods for function approximation.
by wanderingstan | 2026-01-08 14:53:27+00:00
It’s the 2nd paragraph:

> Methods We used a retrospective matched case–control design in a preregistered study to compare famous singers with matched less famous singers (total N=648) based on the matching criteria of gender, nationality, ethnicity, genre and solo/band status. We compared mortality risk using a Kaplan-Meier curve and used a Cox regression to test the effect of fame.
by borplk | 2026-01-08 14:53:40+00:00
Not quite what you asked, but here are some thoughts.

Do you have the sales "fire power" to sell this solution?

Because it sounds like the kind of thing that governments or complicated companies would potentially buy. And they are not easy to sell to, to put it lightly.

I used to have some startup ideas that are in this category => "Most people don't need or want it, and people who do need or want it are not going to buy it from my flimsy bootstrapped startup (they will take 2 years and spend 100M with Deloitte on it instead)".

Not sure what's your situation/size/funding/scale but personally I'm happy to stay away from that category.
by zug_zug | 2026-01-08 14:54:10+00:00
I don't think this article provides any evidence of anything to be scared of.

That said, based on what we know already, there is no reason to take everything is this article at face value necessarily.

Firstly, if anybody isn't aware of the history of Stuxnet, it's worth reading, because otherwise you'd underestimate the government's ability to use 0-days by an order of magnitude (we're talking full custom-written multi-month hacking projects with root-kits and custom fake drivers delivered successfully to an airgapped system, source wikipedia). Also worth learning about Dual EC DRBG debacle.

Secondly am immediate friend of mine worked at a FANG company that routinely sent a firehose of all sorts of things matching all sorts of filters directly to governments. In fact many ISPS have back-doors built in and that's not really disputed (wikipedia: room641A).

So the question to ask yourself is -- if this was a deliberate interaction that cloudfare was required to participate in via a warrant, would they legally even be allowed to publish a blog post that contradicted this?

So I think that is probably the default attitude of skepticism you are seeing, which in my opinion is a good default. Plus the primary claim of this article "Look it wasn't 1 routing issue, it's been happening for even longer! Therefore nothing to look at here!" seems really weak.
by cogman10 | 2026-01-08 14:54:25+00:00
I really hope you are right, but I fear you aren't. The conservative media bubble has already congealed on "She was trying to run over everyone and deserved to be shot".

If someone wants to believe that ICE is the good guys and people protesting ICE are bad, they'll be pretty quick to adopt any narrative that will justify the actions of ICE. You can see that in this very thread.

This might sway a few people, but I really think the Trump "I could shoot someone on 5th avenue" is simply a truth.
by AndrewKemendo | 2026-01-08 14:54:25+00:00
Well we know that education didn’t work so that’s not a solution

We know that command economies don’t work so that’s not a solution

We know that formal hierarchies don’t work so that’s not a solution

Have any solutions?

Humans can only really coherently plan at the global scale required on the order of months into the future

However our activities, even at the individual level (burning a tire for example) have extreme impacts and costs on extant populations globally and future populations.

It’s like we completely stopped talking about climate change and how the ecological collapse is about to punch everybody in the throat.

This is a mathematical formula that does not have a solution

The only possible solution is to change the properties of the atomic unit which is individual human actor

Since we cannot change the foundational biology of humanity then there is a impossible to solve problem here if there is a desire to retain the human element in the future. I stopped desiring a human future about 30 years ago because it makes no sense.

The biological limitations of the human species is now the single weakest link of all possible futures.

That was not true before (insert your preferred period, upper paleolithic, neolithic, industrial revolution etc…) but has only been accelerating since.

Unless some absolutely foundational things change, like the foundational functioning of human systems, then we will continue this cycle of destruction forever.
by ep103 | 2026-01-08 14:54:27+00:00
> For example, in a situation where you can strongly benefit from the Napoleon technique, and all the potential negative outcomes are minor and unlikely to occur, you will almost always want to implement this technique. Conversely, in a situation where there is even a moderate likelihood that this technique will lead to serious negative outcomes, you will likely want to avoid using it, even if it has some potential positive outcomes.

I swear, AI is decreasing everyone's reading and writing abilities.

Well written language conveys maximum information (or emotional impact, or etc) with minimum verbosity. AI is incentivized to do the exact opposite, and results in slop like the above.

The quoted paragraph above takes 71 words to say "You should do this technique if the positive potential outcomes outweigh the negative ones," which is such a banal thought as to have been a waste of the reader's time, the writer's time, and the electricity it took to run an AI to generate those sentences.
by chantelcrother | 2026-01-08 14:55:05+00:00
SEEKING WORK | USA | REMOTE | Part-time

Location: San Luis Obispo, CA, USA

Technologies: React, TypeScript, Next.js, C#.NET, Ruby on Rails, PostgreSQL, JavaScript, Tailwind

Email: me@chantelcrother.dev

Website: https://www.chantelcrother.dev

I'm a Senior Full-Stack Engineer with 10+ years of experience building and shipping large-scale web applications with teams at companies like Mindbody and AppFolio. Currently working as a contract engineer, owning projects end-to-end and collaborating closely with teams to build reliable, maintainable software through thoughtful design and clean, efficient code.

Currently open to new contract opportunities.
by xbar | 2026-01-08 14:55:08+00:00
Actually, not a bad policy idea. But it is not enough to solve the set of problems that arise when you take a basic human need (housing) and subject it to market forces--inexorably the ability to profit from the need drives costs higher than is affordable for some "market participants," leading to death.

Small investor ownership in single-family homes (for both short- and long-term rentals) have been devastating to communities. What is the right number of single-family homes to permit individuals/trusts to own and how do you disincentivize small empires?

Wall Street investor monopoly ownership of dense housing in urban areas remains a major cause of rents outstripping income (see Blackrock's 2020-2025 market takeover and subsequent market manipulation of apartment rental rates in San Diego). Simple policy solution: trust-bust apartment ownership. Harder, more effective policy solution: municipality ownership of apartment blocks a la European cities.

If regulators allow the same behaviors with water, you can expect a similar set of harms.
by Gareth321 | 2026-01-08 14:55:17+00:00
> Steak is a terrible source of protein (in terms of nutrient density).

At 23g/100g, lean beef has a very high protein/weight ratio. Similar to chicken and turkey breast and exceeded only by canned tuna and processed protein isolates like soy protein isolate, whey protein isolate, and wheat gluten. For comparison, protein content of firm tofu, lentils, and chickpeas is much lower, at 14g/100g, 9g/100g, and 8.5g/100g, respectively. They all contain a lot more carbs per 100g than lean beef.

Further, lean beef contains a full and balanced amino acid profile, which lentils, tofu, chickpeas, soy protein isolate, and wheat gluten does not. It's an excellent food. However there is evidence that charred red meat and red meat containing nitrites is associated with a slight increase in colorectal cancer, so people should be consuming minimally processed red meat where possible, as per the guidance.
by MallocVoidstar | 2026-01-08 14:55:18+00:00
> Bouchaud estimates that of the 800 posts, a little less than 10 percent of the content appears to be related to child sexual abuse material (CSAM). “Most of the time it's hentai, but there are also instances of photorealistic people, very young, doing sexual activities,” Bouchaud says. “We still do observe some videos of very young-appearing women undressing and engaging in activities with men,” they say. “It's disturbing to another level.”
by gosub100 | 2026-01-08 14:55:43+00:00
Black rock shouldn't buy any family homes. Not a single one.

I'm sick of the arguments that rely on the meaning of "most/many/some/not all". The arguments are irrefutable because you can always weasel your way through the meaning of the quantifier, or the false implication that only the "biggest" of something needs redress before the next in line.

A person owning a second home is fine, that's one of the paths towards financial independence: small business ownership. Someone starting out in a tiny money making operation is a good thing, and they do not need to compete with a trillion dollar empire!
by onionisafruit | 2026-01-08 14:56:19+00:00
Although he doesn't spell it out, I suspect this is the primary misunderstanding that drove Filo to open with "I need everyone to stop looking at go.sum, especially to analyze dependency graphs". I've had more than one code reviewer ding me on a module showing up in go.sum. Usually it's a situation where a dependency has tests for compatibility with some other module so that other module gets added to go.sum. Given Filo is a professional open source maintainer, any annoyance I've run into he's probably experienced 100x.
by misja111 | 2026-01-08 14:56:49+00:00
This mentioning of 'Wall Street' with investors if typical for the kind of populist argument that is used to argue that banning investors from buying houses is a good thing.
What would this 'Wall Street' even mean? Would it mean that companies listed on the stock exchange are banned but privately owned companies not?

Anyhow, I argue that investors are positive for the the house market. They shouldn't be banned. Investors provide enough liquidity to the market so that the building companies have enough certainty to invest in large housing projects, because they know that their properties will be sold quickly.
If investors would be banned they would sell their houses eventually as well but it would take much longer.

Similarly, investors improve mobility and throughput. An individual putting his house for sale will find a buyer much faster when investors are in the buying market, who are willing to buy up a house when nobody else takes it and sell it for a better price later.
So: sellers sell faster, so they can move out and buy a new home faster as well: mobility in the house market increases.

In IT terms: investors function as a buffer.
by hwguy45 | 2026-01-08 14:56:54+00:00
They are still deportable offences. You cannot walk into a country and never leave just "because".

And no, it's the vast majority are not overstays. Less than half are overstays that came here legally [0]. So 58% crossed the border illegally.

Asylum seekers have been coached on what to say, few are seeking asylum at all. The system is obviously being abused when these people vacation back to their home country that was so "dangerous" they claimed asylum.

I'm not sure if you are engaging in wishful thinking, have been manipulated, or have an agenda for sharing falsehoods but you are factually incorrect on all counts.

[0] https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R47848
by kentonv | 2026-01-08 14:57:02+00:00
I submitted this "fact" and it is indeed a true story, exactly as you said.

The "global protobuf db" had comments all over it saying it's not intended for production-critical tasks, and it had a lot of caveats and gotchas even aside from being built by Jeff's desktop, but it was so convenient that people naturally ended up using it anyway.
by wt__ | 2026-01-08 14:57:50+00:00
If this really is attributable to ADHD (and I’m sceptical) perhaps the opposite is those of us with (very mild, undiagnosed) OCD who insist on cleaning our tabs up several times a day?

I can fully understand “hoarding” for people who don’t understand how tabs work, or that they can slow things down/get in the way, so don’t realise (on iOS Safari for instance), they have dozens of old tabs in the background.

What I don’t understand is:

(a) as I see it, surely the default behaviour is… you’re working on some project or other, gradually accumulating more and more tabs, the space for each starts to get a bit small, you can’t tell what they are, you know you don’t need most of them, your computer starts to feel a bit sluggish (and frankly something will be hogging memory, I can’t imagine how bad it would get with hundreds of them, never mind figures like 7,800 in the comments) so… therefore “oh I have too many tabs open, let’s close a few / them all”

(b) why don’t more people make use of History? That’s got me out of a hole many times, especially as I can often remember roughly when looked at something and Firefox offers a filtered search by page title.

c) Tab Groups make my head hurt every time I’ve tried to use them, it feels like more effort organising the groups, and knowing that sooner or later i will place a tab in The Wrong Group, and then I have to move it to the correct one, and mentally debate if I should even still have that group at all, get distracted by the stuff in those tabs instead of what I should be working on etc.