MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by evgen | 2026-01-20 12:06:35+00:00
Sherman, set the wayback machine....

Definitely a blast from the past. One of the things that made PipeNet very interesting compared to its contemporary peers (e.g. onion routing) was that it used fixed size pipes with constant traffic. An observer would be unable to know when traffic was being sent down the pipe so correlation attacks become significantly more difficult. Pair it with some probabilistic encryption like Blum-Blum-Shub and you can party like a late 90s cypherpunk.
by christophilus | 2026-01-20 12:07:12+00:00
That’s why I use React, though. It’s much nicer (as a developer— not necessarily UX) to have a single paradigm and approach to building your app vs using one approach for the simple pages and a different approach for the handful of highly interactive pages. Inevitably, your simple pages get complex interactive edge cases and you wish you’d written those in React from the start, etc.

I know many will disagree with me and will point to livewire, etc as alternative approaches, and that’s valid. I’ve simply settled on React because it fits my mental model, I like functional programming, and I dislike that bifurcation problem.
by jeroenhd | 2026-01-20 12:07:51+00:00
I think this is one place where European automakers are going to have to adapt or die out. Even if they can get the motors, batteries, and charging systems to a competitive level, Chinese manufacturers include most """luxury""" features by default. European manufacturers go the other way, including the hardware but locking the entire thing behind microtransactions or "upgrades".

They're going to need to cover the losses they're compensating for with the ridiculous upgrade prices somehow or they're going to lose even more customers. The import tariffs raised to protect the European market from affordable Chinese cars aren't going to work forever.
by reify | 2026-01-20 12:08:05+00:00
https://noai.duckduckgo.com/

https://www.startpage.com

https://www.qwant.com

I block everything I dont like: I add these to Ublock origin, my filters.

I get a much cleaner search results. I do this for qwant as well

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="amazon."])
startpage.*##a[href*="amazon."]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="pinterest."])
startpage.*##a[href*="pinterest."]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="tiktok."])
startpage.*##a[href*="tiktok."]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="gemini.google."])
startpage.*##a[href*="gemini.google."]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="deepmind.google."])
startpage.*##a[href*="deepmind.google."]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="ebay."])
startpage.*##a[href*="ebay."]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="etsy."])
startpage.*##a[href*="etsy."]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="pinterest."])
startpage.*##a[href*="pinterest."]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="youtube."])
startpage.*##a[href*="youtube."]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="linkedin."])
startpage.*##a[href*="linkedin."]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*=".ai"])
startpage.*##a[href*=".ai"]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="meta."])
startpage.*##a[href*="meta."]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="imgur."])
startpage.*##a[href*="imgur."]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="x."])
startpage.*##a[href*="x."]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="google."])
startpage.*##a[href*="google."]:upward(1)

startpage.*##.g:has(a[href*="facebook."])
startpage.*##a[href*="facebook."]:upward(1)
by usefulposter | 2026-01-20 12:08:17+00:00
FYI:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45077654

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43979537

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43085967

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35210503
by worksonmine | 2026-01-20 12:10:58+00:00
> (not that I can see an obvious advantage to it).

Precision. I use e/E more often than w/W when editing a line or creating macros, but w/W for moving around. But more often i search with f and jump to next match with ; if I didn't hit the target right away. / then n if I'm moving to another line.
by sunshine-o | 2026-01-20 12:11:08+00:00
The reticulum dev have been trying to quit for years and have been quite open about his own personal struggles.

More recently:

- v1.0.0 was supposed to be the time his involvement is over [0]

- 6 months later [1]

> This is not a temporary break. It's not "see you after some rest", but a recognition that the current model is fundamentally incompatible with my life, my health, and my reality.

- But he pushed 3 releases since his last message [2]

It is like he is trying to quit somking.

I am not sure what the problem is exactly but it seems someone need to take over and honor the fantastic work he has done over the years.

- [0] https://unsigned.io/articles/2025_05_09_The_End_Is_Nigh_For_...

- [1] https://unsigned.io/articles/2025_12_28_Carrier_Switch.html

- [2] https://github.com/markqvist/Reticulum/releases
by adithyassekhar | 2026-01-20 12:11:56+00:00
The biggest mistake I did in 2025 was picking shadcn because it was so hyped. Saw it importing from radix anytime you enter a command. First red flag.
Then I saw the radio component. Second red flag. You should see what they've done with the select component. But we were too far into the deadline for a project with running targets. So I just gave up and asked copilot to make the changes for me, and I'm not a fan of AI anything.

Funny enough we did a POC for the same project before that without shadcn and looking back, it's so much leaner and easier.

I might just break one night and redo the whole ui library with vanilla html elements.
by davidhs | 2026-01-20 12:12:10+00:00
Maybe if Terence Tao had memorized the entire Internet (and pretty much all media), then maybe he would find bits and pieces of the problem remind him of certain known solutions and be able to connect the dots himself.

But, I don't know. I tend to view these (reasoning) LLMs as alien minds and my intuition of what is perhaps happening under the hood is not good.

I just know that people have been using these LLMs as search engines (including Stephen Wolfram), browsing through what these LLMs perhaps know and have connected together.
by skywhopper | 2026-01-20 12:12:22+00:00
This all reads like an embarrassed engineer who can’t admit they neglected to have a comprehensive to-the-byte test suite for their second-most-important-on-the-Internet DNS server, overcompensating by blaming a 40-year-old standard that (1) they probably hadn’t consulted, and (2) no one else seems to have issues with; and proposing to update core Internet standards, rather than just accept that they made a mistake when they assumed they could just append to what any regular user of DNS expects to be a meaningfully-ordered list.
by begemotz | 2026-01-20 12:12:36+00:00
It's not just the misleading "average" that is problematic. USA Today "reporting" on a "report" by Empower where you find this:

The numbers below reflect Empower Personal DashboardTM users as of October 2025, with the average and median net worth of these individuals, broken down by age. *(These figures are not identical to, nor directly comparable with, representative national data from the Survey of Consumer Finances from the Fed.)*
BOHR Chain's "AI Protocol" $2M raise: technical architecture seems non-existent
by Kangaroo_ | 2026-01-20 12:12:57+00:00
I saw this press release floating around about BOHR Chain raising strategic funds to "redefine the AI protocol economy" and decided to do a quick technical due diligence check.

I tried to audit their underlying architecture to see how they are actually handling the AI consensus on-chain. The math just isn't there.

From what I can see, their public repositories (if you can find them) show zero activity consistent with building a novel Layer-1 or even a complex L2. The "AI integration" appears to be purely semantic marketing fluff rather than actual Solidity or Rust logic. I ran a quick check on the contract structures usually associated with this project, and they look like generic templates with no custom logic to support their claims.

Also, the "VC" firm mentioned (GemHead Capital) seems to have no track record or portfolio outside of these PR loops.

Code never lies. This looks like a classic case of a high marketing budget with absolutely zero engineering underneath. Has anyone here actually managed to interact with their testnet, or is this just another vaporware liquidity trap?
by avcloudy | 2026-01-20 12:14:36+00:00
I think a really good takeaway is that we're bad at predicting the future. That is the most solid prediction of history. Before we thought speech recognition was impossible, we thought it would be easy. We thought a lot of problems would be easy, and it turned out a lot of them were not. We thought a lot of problems would be hard, and we use those technologies now.

Another lesson history has taught us though, is that people don't defend narratives, they defend status. Not always successfully. They might not update beliefs, but they act effectively, decisively and sometimes brutally to protect status. You're making an evolutionary biology argument (which is always shady!) but people see loss of status as an existential threat, and they react with anger, not just denial.
by stratocumulus0 | 2026-01-20 12:15:06+00:00
Unfortunately this is our national mentality - no one can tell me what I should do, and if I get told to stop, I will double down just to piss off that someone who insulted my pride.

The biggest enemy of a Pole is always their neighbor. One may suffocate in their own fumes, but what's important is that this loser next door dies as well.
by magicalhippo | 2026-01-20 12:15:37+00:00
> Can you give a more concrete example of what you mean?

There's been several instances. For example, the send/receive code has had bugs leading to cases[1] where the checksum and hence scrub look fine but the data is not.

edit: the recent block cloning has also had some issues, eg[2][3].

I'm pretty sure it's also possible for hardware errors like bad memory to cause the data to get corrupted but the checksum gets computed on the corrupted data, thus it looks ok when scrubbed.

[1]: https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/4809

[2]: https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/15526

[3]: https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/issues/15933
by imtringued | 2026-01-20 12:16:30+00:00
The problem with your argument is that you could have made the exact opposite argument in reverse as well, e.g. saying that all work is sex work, since the only goal of work is to reproduce.

The coercion framework is useless, because you don't actually care about coercion at all. If there is a parallel world without coercion but prostitution, you would probably still argue that prostitution is coercive.

This is because your argument fundamentally rests on the idea that you can just pick whatever situation has the fitting "moral consequence" and ascribe it to the thing you don't like to hide your own subjective opinion under the pretense of objectivity.

What reality tells us is that prostitutes don't need help getting their profession banned. They need help with switching careers and since society is built on musical chair economics, there aren't enough chairs to for them to sit on.
by n4r9 | 2026-01-20 12:17:20+00:00
One potential answer is that this tests more heavily for the ability to memorise, as opposed to understanding. My last exams were over ten years ago and I was always good at them because I have a good medium-term memory for names and numbers. But it's not clearly useful to test for this, as most names and numbers can just be looked up.

When I was studying at university there was a rumour that one of the dons had scraped through their fourth-year exams despite barely attending lectures, because he had a photographic memory and just so happened to leaf through a book containing a required proof, the night before the exam. That gave him enough points despite not necessarily understanding what he was writing.

Obviously very few students have that sort of memory, but it's not necessarily fair to give advantage to those like me who can simply remember things more easily.
by xmcqdpt2 | 2026-01-20 12:17:29+00:00
You won’t have to buy stable coins, you’ll just pay with your credit cards. This is basically sports gambling applied to the sport of news. I bet they’ll use the same kind of emotional manipulation too: “Real republicans (fans) bet here.” You’ll be watching a political debate and then you’ll have a “the DraftKings Minute” debate analysis segment which is like three guys that don’t know anything about politics screaming about odds.

This sounds exactly like the timeline we are in.
by watwut | 2026-01-20 12:17:45+00:00
> It's like you think if I put myself out there protesting a law and subjecting myself to arrest or other consequences by virtue of this opposition I really don't want to accept consequences. What do you think happens to people who protest against the enforcement of a law?

In democracies, they are just protesters protected against the retaliation by laws and constitutions. In autocracies and wanna be autocracies, police can abuse them with various levels of impunity.

In fact, people are protesting the law and it enforcement. What they do not do is following this idiotic idea OP was promoting that all protesters should do and promote:

> One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. [...] willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice

No, of course not. No, civil disobedience does not have to imply you will let yourself be abused. That can be occasionally used as tactic, but is absolutely unnecessary for it to be valid.

And it was not even what most protesters in bus protests were doing this all that much. They were trying to avoid the penalty and they were not intentionally giving themselves up to the law.
by genuser | 2026-01-20 12:18:31+00:00
The vision of seamlessly interacting with our digital world through intuitive, natural gestures has taken a significant step forward. Meta has begun rolling out a groundbreaking early-access feature for its Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses paired with the accompanying neural interface wristband: the ability to write messages by simply tracing letters with your finger on any surface, including your own leg. This “air writing” capability moves beyond voice commands and basic gestures, offering a discreet. Text-based input method that fulfills a long-promised aspect of wearable, augmented reality (AR) interaction. While currently limited in scope, the feature represents a tangible leap toward a future where our bodies and the environment become the interface.
by akkad33 | 2026-01-20 12:18:36+00:00
Wake up and smell the coffee: fsharp is dead. Look at the release notes of fsharp. It's laughable for a major version update. It's maintained by like 5 people working in eastern Europe and they only do maintenance updates basically. C# is getting all its features and DotNet is basically c# oriented anyway. So even in the past you had to learn C# to program in F#
by anal_reactor | 2026-01-20 12:19:00+00:00
> I was completely flabbergasted because, to me, discussing "What questions did you have?" was always part of the collaboration between students

When I was a student, professors maintained a public archive of past exams. The reason was obvious: next time the questions would be different, and memorizing past answers wouldn't help you if you don't understand the core ideas being taught. Then I took part in an exchange program and went to some shit-tier uni and I realized that collaboration was explicitly forbidden because professors would usually ask questions along "what was on slide 54". My favorite part was when professor said "I can't publish the slides online because they're stolen from another professor but you can buy them in the faculcy's shop".

My uni maintained a giant presence on Facebook - we'd share a lot of information, and the most popular group was "easy courses" for students who wanted to graduate but couldn't afford a difficult elective course.

The exchange uni had none of that. Literally no community, no collaboration, nothing. It's astonishing.

BTW regarding the stream of consciousness - I distinctly remember taking an exam and doing my best to force my brain to think about the exam questions, rather than porn I had been watching the previous day.
by cakehonolulu | 2026-01-20 12:19:03+00:00
Hi! Author here! You can technically offload the transactions the real driver on your host does to wherever you want really. PCI is very delay-tolerant and it usually negotiates with the device so I see not much of an issue doing that proven that you can efficiently and performantly manage the throughput throughout the architecture. The thing that kinda makes PCIem special is that you are pretty much free to do whatever you want with the accesses the driver does, you have total freedom. I have made a simple NVME controller (With a 1GB drive I basically malloc'd) which pops up on the local PCI bus (And the regular Linux's nvme block driver attaches to it just fine). You can format it, mount it, create files, folders... it's kinda neat. I also have a simple dumb rasteriser that I made inside QEMU that I wanted to write a driver for, but since it doesn't exist, I used PCIem to help me redirect the driver writes to the QEMU instance hosting the card (Thus was able to run software-rendered DOOM, OpenGL 1.X-based Quake and Half-Life ports).
by cakehonolulu | 2026-01-20 12:20:54+00:00
Indeed, and even then, there's some sw-hw-codesign stuff that kinda helps you do what PCIem does but it's usually really pricey; so I kinda thought it'd be a good thing to have for free.

PCIe prototyping is usually not something super straightforward if you don't want to pay hefty sums IME.
by 0xTJ | 2026-01-20 12:21:30+00:00
I personally don't need a bunch of screens of widgets. I've got my first screen of the 17 apps I use the most, a clock/weather widget, and the app drawer button to bring up the (iconized) app list. On the second screen a have a widget for an app used to share pictures with friends.

Launchers are personal, so Niagara works for you that's great! But for my use having everything is a single column is a nightmare.
by TrackerFF | 2026-01-20 12:22:48+00:00
Depends on the scope. If you take stock movement, and zoom in close enough, the fluctuations can be considered random. And suddenly you have people putting their money on things like binary options.

Surely, in the prediction market, it is possible to set up prediction bets which are practically impossible to predict. And with binary outcome, your odds will be 50/50.
by keybored | 2026-01-20 12:23:31+00:00
There’s nothing special about having an embodiment. A robot has an embodiment of sorts. An LLM meanwhile is a brain in a vat.

And there’s nothing special about my 21x23 square feet lawn. Can you emulate it? To what fidelity? How much should the map correspond to the territory? The same squarage, the same elevations down to the millimeter?

You’re not saying anything that counters the point that was made. Just mentioning stuff that people animals are made of with the assumed strawman argument (not made) that there is any non-physical essence at play. There isn’t.

Put a camera and some feet on an LLM and maybe it has an embodimeent.As long as it just has digital input it does not in the sense being discussed here.
by flurdy | 2026-01-20 12:24:02+00:00
Comparing renting a new type of car when you have to figure everything out for 2 days then return it, to owning a car, where you also have to figure everything out, but only for the first days, not the 600 days afterwards, is not really comparable.

Also, when you own a car you charge it at home and work, so you don't really wait for the car to charge very often.

And the next time you rent a car, it will be a bit simpler as you have done it once before. And even quicker/simpler the time after that etc.
by clemlesne | 2026-01-20 12:24:18+00:00
I built exec-sandbox because I wanted VM-level isolation for AI-generated code on my Mac without running Linux in a VM first.

Most sandboxes (E2B, Hopx) use https://firecracker-microvm.github.io/, on macOS, you need nested virtualization. exec-sandbox uses QEMU with Apple's Hypervisor.framework (HVF) and runs natively on macOS, including Apple Silicon.

What makes it different:

- Native macOS + Linux, no Docker, no nested VMs, just brew install qemu

- 1-2ms warm start, pre-started VM pool beats E2B's 150ms cold start

- Port forwarding without network, expose localhost:8080 while blocking all outbound (DNS + IP)

- Domain allowlisting, allowed_domains=["api.github.com"] for granular control

- CLI for automation, sbx run *.py -j 10 --json with concurrency control

- Package validation, blocks typosquatting against PyPI/npm top 10k

- Self-hosted, no session limits, unlike E2B's 24-hour cap

7-layer security: hardware virtualization, unprivileged QEMU, seccomp, cgroups v2, namespaces, AppArmor/SELinux, socket authentication.

https://github.com/dualeai/exec-sandbox
by agavava | 2026-01-20 12:24:50+00:00
No matter how long I’ve run a business, and that’s been many years, there’s always something I learn for the first time. Once ready-made POS systems were a revelation, and they really improved business processes. Now I’m interested in developing my own system https://spd.tech/fintech-development/the-detailed-guide-to-p... for sales, customer work, fast and quality service. And I think it’s really cool that it’s possible.
by Arnt | 2026-01-20 12:25:18+00:00
You're close to an important point.

Our current laws are written to make it legal for you to copy the Quran via your brain — some people learn it by rote and can stand up and speak the entire work from one end to the other. This is intended to be legal. Fair use of the Quran.

I went to a concert recently where someone copied every word and (as far as I could hear) every note from a copyrighted work by Bruce Springsteen. Singing and playing. This too is intended to be fair use.

You can learn how to play and sing Springsteen songs verbatim, and you can use his records to learn to sound like him when you sing, and that's intended to be legal.

Since the law doesn't say "but you cannot write a program to do these things, or run such a program once written", why would it be illegal to do the same thing using some code?

The people who want the law to differentiate have a difficult challenge in front of them. As I see it, they need to differentiate between what humans do to learn from what machines do, and that implies really knowing what humans do. And then they need to draw boundaries, making various kinds of computer-assisted human learning either legal or illegal.

Some of them say things like "when an AI draws Calvin and Hobbes in the style of Breughel, it obviously has copied paintings by Breughel" but a court will ask why that's obvious. Is it really obvious that the way it does that drawing necessarily involves copying, when you as a human can do the same thing without copying?
by rich_sasha | 2026-01-20 12:26:22+00:00
100% agreed that at least short term, we should ban it for children.

But beyond..? If we believe in freedom of speech, what's the angle? How is it different from an awful tabloid pushing its own warped reality on us? Colorful "newspapers" with topless models and stories about a stoned postman were also ragebait and dopamine hacking, only offline. I don't like them, but then some time around 18th century we concluded we let almost everyone say almost anything, to make sure no tyrant can shut down ideas singlehandedly.

IMHO the fundamental issue is a failure of education. We're in a position where people (adults) are literally too stupid to tell how bad, deceitful and dangerous this stuff can be. We should teach people properly, then let them read whatever.

Banning cigarettes is one thing, banning (awful but bon-criminal) free speech feels off.