MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Nextgrid | 2026-01-22 00:42:39+00:00
> "learn" which pages the users actually found useful for the given query

But due to their business model I'm not sure they are ranking "usefulness" as much as you think.

Useful results ultimately don't benefit Google because Google makes no money on them. Google makes money on ads - either ads on the search results page, ads on the destination pages or (indirectly) from steering users to pages which have Google Analytics.

It's likely the actual algorithm balances usefulness to the user with usefulness to Google. You don't want to serve up exclusively spam/slop as users might bounce, but you also don't want to serve up the best result because the user will prefer it over the ad on the SRP page. So it has to be a mix of both - you'll eventually get a good result, after many attempts (during which you've been exposed to ads).

Google does enjoy the myth that they are unable to combat spam/slop while in reality they do profit off it.
by AdelAden | 2026-01-22 00:42:48+00:00
Most agent frameworks optimize for demos.

We wanted to explore what agents look like when you design for production instead:
– memory pressure
– cost ceilings
– failure recovery
– observability

So we built an open-source framework where agents can:
• refactor their own logic
• revise plans mid-execution
• persist and compress memory
• recover from tool and runtime failures

This is not a wrapper around prompts — it’s infrastructure for long-running, self-correcting agent systems.

We’re building this in public and actively using GitHub as our distribution channel.
Feedback from people deploying agents in the wild is especially welcome.

If it’s useful, starring the repo helps us decide what to build next.
by KiwiJohnno | 2026-01-22 00:44:12+00:00
>means debris that debris that is flung up is going to have a more oval orbit, so the high point (apogee) increases and the low point (perigee) decreases. And a lower perigee means more atmospheric drag, which will help deorbit the debris.

Not quite.

If you are at apogee and accelerate, your perigee will be raised. If you are at perigee and accelerate, your apogee will be raised. You can't increase your apogee and perigee at the same time.

If the impulse is in the direction of orbit, then the altitude of your orbit 180 degrees from your current position will raise. If the impulse is against your orbital direction, your height 180 deg away will be lowered. Once you complete an entire orbit (360 degrees) you will pass through your current position again.

If you wish to move to a higher, circular orbit two impulses are required, 180 deg apart.
by zbentley | 2026-01-22 00:44:48+00:00
I suspect that Oakley could have explained that, but the thesis stands even without the asterisk, and explaining it would have an issue:

This is going to piss off some Linux folks, but when communicating from a big pulpit about how to bypass parts of MacOS, it's important to be aware that the vast majority of MacOS users are casual, nontechnical users. As such, a popular blog posting "here's how to bypass SIP/SSV lock/whatever" would lead to a wave of users disabling it for less-than-great reasons (aesthetics, conviction that e.g. a given service was causing their system slowness when that service's resource usage was actually symptomatic of something else orchestrated by MacOS going wrong). Those decisions have side effects:

- Folks brick or break their computers, potentially in a way that voids the warranty or support contracts (I hope that software bypasses don't trigger this, but I am cynical).

- Folks chasing a "cleanliness vibe" leave a lot of the system security off once they're done. Someone else in this thread pointed out that without SSV the security of MacOS is on par with most Linux, but MacOS users are a lot bigger attack risk than Linux users: there are more of them, they're wealthier and thus identified as targets of choice by malware/people, and, again--they're casual users and don't have good security spider sense. This isn't a blanket endorsement of every restriction/security feature with no opt-out that MacOS has, just an observation that its userbase is at higher risk for attack than some others--lower than windows, but higher than Linux users.

- Folks induce breakage that bricks their computers on a delay, e.g. during the next system update something chokes after encountering a totally unauthorized/unexpected service geometry and crashes hard enough to cause data loss.

I'm not saying that stuff like SSV-rw should be secret, just that it's probably for the best to not discuss it front and center in a widely-read informational blog whose content is geared towards (power) users rather than technicians. To phrase it with a different example: if someone Googles "how to disable XProtect (antimalware)", great, go nuts. But it's probably for the best that a popular article about "can you reduce resource usage by shutting down system launchd services" doesn't have a "here's how to elevate your permissions and disable whatever you like" blurb, and instead settles for an answer of "no, that's not supported."
by yndoendo | 2026-01-22 00:44:51+00:00
How can you validate ML content when you don't have educated people?

Thinking everything ML produces is just shorting the brain.

I see AI wars as creating coherent stories. Company X starts using ML and they believe what was produced is valid and can grow their stock. Reality is that Company Y poised the ML and the product or solution will fail, not right away but over time.
by directevolve | 2026-01-22 00:45:11+00:00
The Interventions Testing Program is the closest thing I know of along these lines.

“ The Interventions Testing Program (ITP) is a peer-reviewed program designed to identify agents that extend lifespan and healthspan in mice. Investigators at any university, institute, company, or other organization are invited to recommend interventions for testing by submitting an application before the February deadline each year. Testing is carried out in the genetically heterogeneous UM-HET3 mouse stock at three sites — the Jackson Laboratory, the University of Michigan, and the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio.”

https://www.nia.nih.gov/research/dab/interventions-testing-p...
by rambambram | 2026-01-22 00:45:17+00:00
Yeah, that stuff can be scary, I understand. It might almost feel extortionate. You had labor lawyers look at the applicable CAO and pension rules?

I quickly checked their website and it's a little unclear (so don't consider this legal advise), but their legal basis is probably the CAO. If that particular CAO has been made mandatory by law (which happens for certain industries that need tighter control from government, like temporary employment agencies), than it automatically applies to companies doing the exact work that's described in the CAO ('werkingssfeer').

It's a shame that RVO and Belastingdienst did not warn you correctly. The Netherlands does not want entrepreneurs, they want everybody cozy at their jobs at some big company.

Do you happen to be in or around Nijmegen with your chip development?
by codingdave | 2026-01-22 00:45:23+00:00
The idea isn't bad, but the execution of the idea will make it or break it. If you code up a simple LLM wrapper, it will suck, because it will just hallucinate. At the other extreme, if it just spits back URLs that look interesting, you aren't offering anything that can't be solved by an RSS reader. Finding the correct balance of applying some LLM assistance, but not giving it enough rope to turn into AI slop would be the secret sauce.

Getting people to pay for it is a whole other question. We've built an online culture where people don't pay for content unless it is a streaming service of some kind. I think there is potential to change that, but you'd be fighting that battle at the same time as trying to nail the correct product. Not impossible, but this is probably a harder path to success that it would seem at first glance.
by Panzer04 | 2026-01-22 00:47:55+00:00
Godamn that sucks :(. What did you do to it?

It really sucks when you break something and realise it might not ever go back to how it was before you break it (whether in how it feels or functions). I always had broken bones in my head as this thing that heal after a couple months and you're back to 100% :/ (also broke my ankle)
by hiddeninplain | 2026-01-22 00:48:23+00:00
Again, I find it very difficult to get past your own personal "language game"s.

> Game over.

Is a perfect example. What "game" is "over"?

Chomsky's philosophical linguistics have long been derided and stripped for parts, and he was friends with Epstein and his cohorts so he can fuck right on off to disgrace and obscurity, but his goals within linguistics, as I understand them, were to identify why humanity has its faculty of language.

Wittgenstein was uninterested in answering the same question, and large language models are about as far from an answer to that question as one can get.

So, again, I am unsure what has been settled to the point of decrying "Game over".

Does this game only have two "teams"? One possible "outcome"?

Who's on what side of the "game"?

What have they said that shows their allegiance to one idea, and what have they said in opposition to the other?

What about large language models either support or contradict, respectively, said ideas?

As a huge fan of the ideas and writings of Wittgenstein I find it hard to believe that there are contemporary 'philosophers' who disagree with his ideas, namely that words take on meaning through context, but there are certainly trolls and conservatives in every field.
by nandomrumber | 2026-01-22 00:48:37+00:00
Right.

There’s a country in the Middle East that has insufficient natural water supply, and they manage to thrive and be a centre of learning, innovation, industry, and culture.

Water supply and sanitation in Israel are intricately linked to the historical development of Israel, because rain falls only in the winter, and largely in the northern part of the country. Irrigation and water engineering are considered vital to the country's economic survival and growth. Large-scale projects to desalinate seawater, direct water from rivers and reservoirs in the north, make optimal use of groundwater, and reclaim flood overflow and sewage have been undertaken. Among them is the National Water Carrier, carrying water from the country's biggest freshwater lake, the Sea of Galilee, to the northern part of the Negev desert through channels, pipes and tunnels.[4] Israel's water demand today outstrips available conventional water resources. Thus, in an average year, Israel relies for about half of its water supply from unconventional water resources, including reclaimed water and desalination. A particularly long drought in 1998–2002 had prompted the government to promote large-scale seawater desalination. In 2022, 86% of the country's drinkable water was produced through desalination of saltwater and brackish water.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in...
by dspillett | 2026-01-22 00:49:18+00:00
> but definitely nothing akin to stateful, connection-oriented firewalling

This is where my confusion comes in, I think.

Surely the variety of NAT that significantly improves the IPv4 address starvation problem (IP Masq by its various names) requires a connection oriented approach to be effective? Maybe not as far as more advanced conntrack rules (trying to get connect-back based protocols to work) but even just a basic stream-over-one port protocol needs basic connection tracking so return packets get back to the right host? If you have enough resource to do that then you have more than enough resource to do the basic “block all external apart from these configured addr+port->addr+port combinations” for IPv6 that is all the protection NAT affords you by accident for IPv4.
by nja | 2026-01-22 00:49:32+00:00
Has anyone migrated off of LastPass recently? How was it? I've been a user for decades, and though my frustration with them has been mounting for a long time, I've felt locked in. Migrating seems like a pain, especially for elderly relatives on my plan who will have difficulty picking up a new manager (it was hard enough for them to learn to use a manager in the first place), but every time I use 1Pass for work it blows me away how much better it is. Meanwhile LastPass continually makes their apps worse and more painful to use (and has the audacity to put me into "tutorial mode" every so often, as if someone using the app for the majority of its existence doesn't understand how a vault works), not to mention how many times failed vault syncs result in the losses of new passwords, and of course the data breach :/

So I'm wondering just how bad the experience of switching is now?
by candl | 2026-01-22 00:50:26+00:00
I bought a glm-4.7 subscription and paired it with with claude code. According to usage, I have already used millions of tokens, yet I have barely reached the prompt limits for the tier I have per the 5 hour window. I haven't done anything crazy with my prompts as well.
Now if this were something else billed per 1 million tokens it would have cost me a lot more.
Yet apparently the majority of LLM providers are billing for 1 million tokens.
What's the catch? What I am not understanding? What other providers have similar usage/pricing pattern?
I can't see any of the providers billing per 1 million tokens to be useful/cost effective at all.
Granted, I am new to all of this, I want to see what the fuss is about so perhaps I am blind to something obvious.
by Privavault | 2026-01-22 00:51:20+00:00
Love seeing more privacy-first tools in this space. One thing I've learned building PrivaVault (encrypted doc management, launching this weekend) is that users often underestimate how much metadata leaks even when the content is processed locally. For PDF tools specifically, creation timestamps, software versions, and author info can persist through merges unless explicitly stripped. Would be curious if merge-pdf.app handles metadata sanitization – it's one of those edge cases that matters a lot for privacy-conscious users but isn't always obvious at first glance.
by neximo64 | 2026-01-22 00:51:43+00:00
This is very different. In a SE these are incorporated and sponsored by the member state. It is like each country making an equivalent copy of the same thing.

The EU-INC is EU designated without a sponsor, which is not permissible under EU law other than for the EU institutions themselves. This is one of the red lines for the design of the EU legally speaking
by lovich | 2026-01-22 00:51:59+00:00
Every time I read another article from this guy I get even more frustrated telling if he’s grifting or legitimately insane

Between quotes like these

> I had lunch again (Kirkland Cactus) with my buddies Ajit Banerjee and Ryan Snodgrass, the ones who have been chastising teammates for acting on ancient 2-hour-old information.

, and trying to argue that this is the future of all productivity while taking time to physically go to a bank to get money off a crypto coin while also crowing about how he can’t waste time on money.

On top of that this entire gas town thing is predicated on not caring about the cost but AI firms are currently burning money as fast as possible selling a dollar for 10 cents. How does the entire framework/technique not crash and burn the second infinite investment stops and the AI companies need to be profitable and not a money hole?
by didibus | 2026-01-22 00:53:04+00:00
I've paid for tools in the past, but I think there's a difference, the value of a lot of our tools isn't that great, but more importantly, there is a huge cost to adoption. Going in blind on a paid tool, putting in the time to learn and train yourself to use it, that's a high cost for something that you need to pay for entry and recurring after, that maybe 50 hours into it you start to realize you don't like it.

When I've paid for tools, it tends to be a tool that was free for me to start using, that is now part of my workflow and I love, and I am worried it won't continue to be maintained or updated so I pay for it.
by neximo64 | 2026-01-22 00:54:36+00:00
Looking at it on vibes is not intelligent either.

The design of the EU is based on a foundation where other than the EU institutions themselves the founding legal entity must sit within a member state. EU law that is one each country must replicate, there is no such way to have EU wide law without each and every member state replicating it entirely. An entity that is supranational cannot exist outside this construct & is a red line of the design of the EU itself.

This is one of the reasons the EU cannot easily raise debt for itself without going through a sponsoring member state.
by notahacker | 2026-01-22 00:55:25+00:00
> I'm not arguing against collisions becoming more likely. I'm arguing against it becoming commonplace to the point that it becomes a commercial concern.

Minimising collision risk already is a commercial concern, and the number of conjunction avoidance manoeuvres SpaceX takes in order to achieve this has been growing exponentially (which presumably is a major factor driving their move of 4k satellites to a lower orbit which involves more station keeping) Obviously this gets harder when most of the satellites avoiding their orbits coming too close don't have the same owner, particularly if some of the other megaconstellations aren't even particularly cooperative (hi China!)

> Nobody is plane changing out of a collision. And for the foreseeable future, in LEO, the birds are not propellant constrained. (And launch is getting cheaper.)

No which is why I mentioned the fact that constellations pre-emptively plane change to avoid conjunctions. The frequency with which they have to do this scales superlinearly with the number of satellites operating in or intersecting the orbital plane. Ultimately propellant use for those manoeuvres and station keeping defines the satellite lifetime: agree it's not a huge problem when a satellite is only making small orbital changes a handful of times a year, but another 70k satellites in the same plane would require quite a lot more adjustments, never mind them operating at aircraft density as proposed earlier.

> We're decades away from this being a problem. That gives ample runtime to developing e.g. magnetic station-keeping (if we go reactionless) or more-efficient engines.

Depends how fast the satellites get put up there (and also whether orbital megastructures become a reality, although non-trivial numbers of them actually might be decades away). There's some scope to improve propulsive efficiency (hi colleagues!), but within the power/mass constraints of a smallsat, you're not likely to see orders of magnitude more improvement in specific impulse over current gen EP, and we are forecast to need orders of magnitude more avoidance manoeuvres, which is generally going to mean more reaction mass. Sure, if we get reactionless propulsion suited for precise orbital changes in LEO then we can forget all about the tyranny of the rocket equation, but hey, if we perfect flying cars we won't have to think about the implications of congestion on the roads!
by smw | 2026-01-22 00:55:30+00:00
Right, and in a similar situation, if the internal device was given a routable ipv6 address by the ISP's cable modem, you could directly access that device.

This isn't a hypothetical. There are ISPs who do this out of the box. I plugged a linux box into my ISP's cable modem/router in Amsterdam and immediately noticed my ssh port was getting hammered by port scanners. This isn't what most customers, especially those who aren't technically sophisticated, expect.
by pragmaticalien8 | 2026-01-22 00:56:12+00:00
It is all related, it happens in the middle of a debug session where it just stops responding with no error message and my last message remains in the chat window.
i have to then start a new session and explain the context of pervious session and Claud goes on to ask for more context from the code and then by the time I get to any new code the session does what i explained above. i don’t allow Cluade to access my code directly its only via chat ui interaction. My usage data in the settings shows I have used less than 4% of alloted tokens
by johnnyanmac | 2026-01-22 00:56:48+00:00
>The people who are uninvolved, who fit into neither box, don't care enough

That lack of care is going to cost us all in ways we'll be forced to care about one day. Not necessarily for Vimeo, but definitely much more important things that people are ignorant or actively turning their heads against.

> They also don't have fancy accountants or corporate accounts to expense it to.

We call them our represenatives. We expense it to them with our votes (and literal expenses with tax dollars we are forced to part with). But votes require care and we're back in the loop.
by nineteen999 | 2026-01-22 00:57:43+00:00
I have a bunch of old Rpi 3B's in a 19" 1RU rack space i use for toy clustering. PoE splitters from a PoE switch to power them which also provides the network uplink. All very neat and self contained and when it comes times to upgrade/replace if they all fail (i have a couple of spares) I can just pull out the 1RU for disposal.

Intel NUC's are probably much better value for money these days but the 3B's were pretty cheap at the time I bought them.
by loeg | 2026-01-22 00:57:57+00:00
The US Left doesn't represent a broad enough population to win most national elections; certainly not enough to pass national law. They win local elections in places like SF or Seattle that were Harris +52 (e.g. contrast with Maduro's fake election only claiming a 9 point margin) and are over-represented in Dem party donors, which influences Dem representatives.

Nevertheless, they express extreme positions. Like "people should be treated preferentially by race" or "private property should be abolished/confiscated" or "the police should be defunded" or "transwomen should be allowed to compete in women's sports categories" or "illegal immigrants should receive taxpayer-subsidized healthcare." These are like 70-30 or 80-20 issues at the national level, with Leftists on the wrong side.

https://decidingtowin.org/
by nodja | 2026-01-22 00:58:12+00:00
I've been programming since ~1999 and anecdataly don't remember programmers having a culture of paying for their dev tools. On linux everything's free, and on windows I've used a plethora of freeware IDEs/compilers/etc. from turbo pascal, dev c++ (that's the name of it), later on eclipse took the stage in it's buggy mess and right before vscode there was atom. The only people that I know that used visual studio either got it for free for being a student/teacher, had their job pay for it, or most commonly: pirated it.

According to this[1] site visual studio had a 35.6% marketshare, tied at #1 with notepad++.

[1] https://asterisk.dynevor.org/editor-dominance.html
by mark-r | 2026-01-22 00:59:11+00:00
We may get there eventually just as a consequence of being part of the world economy.

I noticed a couple of years back that my "U.S. Customary" wrenches weren't fitting my new plumbing fittings which were definitely not metric, but metric wrenches did. Probably made in China.

Then last summer I noticed something similar with lag bolts. The U.S. Customary socket fit the head, but it was nearly identical to a metric one that fit just a little better. The threads are designed to go into wood, not a nut, so if they were metric you'd never even know.
by smw | 2026-01-22 00:59:11+00:00
You literally can't access the internal devices with the NAT implementation on most consumer level router/access points except for packets addressed to the port mapped to an already open connection originating from the inside. This is almost guaranteed to be a random high port. There's no way to access any other port on an internal ip address.

That's equivalent to default-deny.

I think either you're just trying to "well-actually" us or you're confused.