MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by fenilsonani | 2026-01-04 18:13:20+00:00
Yeah you caught that - right now it just binds to all interfaces by default. Definitely need to add a bind_address option in the config. That's going on my list.

If you're on a multi-homed setup right now, firewall rules would be the workaround, but I hear you - it should be in the config properly.

Thanks for the feedback, this is exactly what I was hoping to get from posting here.
by Cipater | 2026-01-04 18:13:25+00:00
The last year has been eye-opening for me as a HN reader. I've gleaned a lot of insight into the thought process of the soulless tech bro.

Thanks to the regulars on here, I now hear clearly when folks like Alex Karp, Peter Thiel or Lucky Palmer speak.

Their combination of intelligence + lack of empathy + arrogance will eat the world.
by fenilsonani | 2026-01-04 18:13:42+00:00
Honestly if you need something battle-tested right now, those are solid choices.

I built this because I had specific pain points - didn't want to set up Postgres or MySQL just for email metadata, wanted calendar and contacts baked in for a complete Google Workspace replacement, and wanted dead simple config that still does DKIM/SPF/DMARC properly.

Future roadmap includes SendGrid-style stuff - API for transactional emails, webhooks. But the core idea stays: good architecture, solve real pain points, keep it simple and fast.
by david927 | 2026-01-04 18:13:47+00:00
LeCun, “I’m not gonna make friends saying this . . . ” he tells me, “but I was reading this and I thought everything that Chomsky . . . was saying could not possibly be true, [because] we learn everything."

This was a theoretical debate until the case of Genie Wiley proved Chomsky was correct. Our capacity for language is innate. The wild thing is he still doesn't stand corrected and his world-view hasn't expanded to include it.

I'm not casting stones; I've done this. And I don't know if it will affect the outcomes of his research but it's interesting.
by kees99 | 2026-01-04 18:13:48+00:00
> initrd seems like an enormous kludge that was thrown together temporarily and became the permanent solution.

Eh, kinda. That's where "essential" .ko modules are packed into - those that system would fail to boot without.

Alternative is to compile them into kernel as built-ins, but from distro maintainers' perspective, that means including way to many modules most of which will remain unused.

If you're compiling your own kernel, that's a different story, often you can do without initrd just fine.
by tptacek | 2026-01-04 18:14:00+00:00
You're right, it's not a coincidence. The track record of standards-body-driven cryptography is wretched. It's why we all use WireGuard and not IPSEC. TLS 1.3 is an actually good protocol, but it took for-ev-er to get there, and part of that process involved basically letting the cryptographers seize the microphones and make decisions by fiat in the 1.2->1.3 shift (TLS 1.3 also follows a professionalization at CFRG). It's the exception that proves the rule. It's contemporaneous sibling is WPA3 and Dragonfly, and look how that went.
by moffkalast | 2026-01-04 18:14:08+00:00
> There were a few moments I put my hand into my pocket to take out my phone to look up something I was curious about. My phone wasn’t there.

> I smiled. Every. Single. Time.

> On the second day, I randomly walked into a neighborhood café. I ordered an americano with a double shot of espresso.

And then I paid for the coffee with my pho- oh fuck.
by monerozcash | 2026-01-04 18:14:21+00:00
Not really, no. You'd need an avalanche for that

Based on the pictures of the car, I can't even imagine how you'd get the car stuck there, much less get stuck inside the car.

This was a rural area, but he was a few hundred meters from a big road. Surely he could have just exited the car and walked there.
by schmuckonwheels | 2026-01-04 18:14:41+00:00
More than once I've run into weird issues with missing filesystem drivers and other important things that caused me major grief during an emergency.

Sure it could be blamed on shitty distro maintenance and development but a better architecture would be putting essential things like filesystem drivers in /boot without this extra kludge of rebuilding an initrd (that you hopefully didn't forget to do before typing reboot) which depends on a pile of config files set just right (and oh by the way different in literally every distro).
by lifetimerubyist | 2026-01-04 18:14:44+00:00
And now you can generate javascript infested slop frameworks for $5 per million tokens. Such an improvement.

And it's so easy to just ask Claude to make one for you, why even bother standardizing anything when you can just use bespoke slop for anything anymore.

Libraries and frameworks? Not needed. Just shove everything into CC/Codex and let it figure it out.
by graboy | 2026-01-04 18:15:30+00:00
What do you think of Dr. Schooling's response that the Mendellian effects might be inflated? I think they had a good defense but was not entirely convinced they hadn't sidestepped the issue that Schooling was getting at, wasn't sure either way.

https://www.jacc.org/doi/epdf/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.01.067
by zephen | 2026-01-04 18:15:54+00:00
There are five canonical questions: What, When, Where, Why, and How.

"When" is occasionally a good question to answer in a comment, e.g. for an interrupt handler, and "Where" is also occasionally a good thing to answer, e.g. "this code is only executed on ARM systems."

The other three questions typically form a hierarchy: Why -> What -> How.

A simplistic google shows that "code comments" are next to "what" and "how" at about the same frequency as they are next to "why" and "what."

This makes some amount of sense, when you consider the usual context. "Why" is often an (assumed) obvious unstated business reason, "What" is a thing done in support of that reason, and "How" is the mechanics of doing the thing.

But with multiple levels of abstraction, _maybe_ the "What" inside the hierarchy remains a "What" to the level above it, but becomes a "Why" to the next level of "What" in the hierarchy. Or maybe the "How" at the end of the hierarchy remains a "How" to the level above it but becomes a "What" to a new "How" level below it.

Is it:

Why -> What/Why -> What/Why -> What/Why -> What -> How

or

Why -> What -> How/What -> How/What -> How/What -> How

In many cases the intermediate nodes in this graph could be legitimately viewed as either What/Why or as How/What, depending on your viewpoint, which could partly depend on which code you read first.

In any case, there are a few hierarchies with final "Hows" that absolutely beg for comments (Carmack's famous inverse square root comes to mind) but in most problem domains that don't involve knowledge across system boundaries (e.g. cache optimization, atomic operations, etc.), the final "How" is almost always adequately explained by the code, _if_ the reader understands the immediately preceding "What."

If I see a function "BackupDatabase()" then I'm pretty sure I already know both "Why" and "What" at the highest levels. "How" I backup the database might be obvious once I am reading inside the function, or the code might be opaque enough that a particular set of lines requires explanation. You could view that explanation as part of "How" the database is backed up, or you could view that explanation as "What" the next few lines of code are doing.

Again, this viewpoint might even partly depend on where you started. If you are dumped inside the function by a debugger, your question might be "What the heck is this code doing here?" but if you are reading the code semi-linearly in an editor, you might wonder "How is BackupDatabase() implemented?"
by bbatsell | 2026-01-04 18:15:59+00:00
Anchor to new information (HN strips it from the URL):
https://github.com/IQuestLab/IQuest-Coder-V1/issues/14#issue...

Context: Earlier this week a new model was released and researchers discovered that during training it had "cheated" on SWEBench by issuing git commands to find information it should have been blinded to.

Previous discussion:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46472667
by BugsJustFindMe | 2026-01-04 18:15:59+00:00
> The video shows 6 dof tracking which for a production implementation would do SLAM tracking.

SLAM is not required to do what is shown in the video. As is an IMU. And an IMU is also not required for SLAM. Everything about the blog post is factually wrong.

> Having memory of what existed before implies you have a form of a map

Once again, you're just wrong here. Image feature correspondence works even without any spatial mapping. Once again, you're getting things backwards. You need to find correspondences before you can begin to make a map, not the other way around!

Anyway, I don't have the energy to argue more with someone who confidently doesn't actually know what they're talking about. So, good luck, have fun.
by logicallee | 2026-01-04 18:16:24+00:00
thank you for your quick code review and for these many helpful tips! I'll take a look at them and see what I can put into practice.

EDIT: Unfortunately, it seems that the code is getting near the limit of the context window for Claude, so I'm not able to add several of the feature suggestions you added with the present approach. I'll look into breaking it up into multiple smaller files and see if I can do any better.
by fooker | 2026-01-04 18:16:32+00:00
Yes, KDE aggressively caches and indexes things by default whenever you have free RAM unless you disable this behavior in multiple places in multiple applications. For example, in Okular you can tune it to choose how much of a pdf you want to keep rendered in memory, if you have a tonne of memory, this makes it the smoothest pdf viewer I have ever used.

It has become reasonable graceful in giving it back when you you need it nowadays.
by bean469 | 2026-01-04 18:17:02+00:00
I suppose you could argue that it is a great book in terms of style and prose, which is why kids should be introduced to the work. I did not grow up in the US, so I have only first read it as a young adult and I vividly remember that the book was beautifully written. It was a joy to read, which I cannot say about all classics.
by dagmx | 2026-01-04 18:17:16+00:00
A lot of language concepts are shared and abstract. It’s not hard to know many languages proficiently.

I do agree a lot of people over estimate how much they know, but I work with multiple people who know at least 5 languages well.

For me myself, only counting things I’ve shipped at scale, I’d know C, C++, Swift, JavaScript, Python, Rust, MSL, HLSL, GLSL, MEL. There’s enough in common between them that I think it’s quite doable.
by necubi | 2026-01-04 18:17:16+00:00
I moved my startup’s marketing site and blog from NextJS to Astro, and I’m happy with it. It’s in that middle ground—focused on primarily static sites but with the ability to still write bits of backend logic as needed.

I found it hard to get next to reliably treat static content as actually static (and thus cacheable), and it felt like a huge bundle of complexity for such a simple use case.
by jfengel | 2026-01-04 18:17:19+00:00
No shame in that. I keep struggling to figure out the point of view of the CSS designers.

They don't think like graphic designers, or like programmers. It's not easy for beginners. It's not aimed at ease of implementation. It's not amenable to automated validation. It's not meant to be generated.

If there is some person for whom CSS layout comes naturally, I have not met them. As far as I can tell their design goal was to confuse everyone, at which they succeeded magnificently.
by embedding-shape | 2026-01-04 18:17:27+00:00
> Your job isn’t to complete tickets that fulfill a list of asks from your product manager. Your job is to build software that solves users problems.

Very important with this, is that not every work place sees your job as that, and you might get hired for the former while you believe it to be the latter. Navigating what is actually expected of you is probably good to try to figure out during the interview, or worst case scenario, on the first day as a new hire.
by ChrisArchitect | 2026-01-04 18:17:34+00:00
Related:

Project Amplify: Powered footwear for running and walking

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45706765

and this article:

Nike's plans to put the swoosh back into its sales

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2025/oct/23/just-redo-it-i...
by otterley | 2026-01-04 18:17:35+00:00
I believe one of the main reasons why Windows 11 is getting so much vitriol is that Microsoft is focusing on customers, which aren't always identical to users. Most of the time, when you buy a Windows-based device, you're not their customer: you're the OEM's customer, and for the OEM, every nickel of expenses counts. On the other hand, direct Microsoft licensees, such as corporate ("enterprise") customers, get much more attention from the company and a significantly better experience.
by ivankra | 2026-01-04 18:17:36+00:00
Put them in a container or VM? Security benefits from layering: engine/runtime is one layer, container/VM is another - an attacker would need two independent high-value exploits to breach both of them.

High budget is no guarantee for absence of critical bugs in an engine, maybe even somewhat opposite - on a big team the incentives are aligned with shipping more features (since nobody gets promoted for maintenance, especially at Google) -> increasing complexity -> increasing bug surface.

If speed is less important and you can live without JIT, that expands your options dramatically and eliminates a large class of bugs. You could take a lightweight engine and compile it to a memory-safe runtime, that'd give you yet another security layer for peace of mind. Several projects did such ports to Wasm/JS/Go - for example your browser likely runs QuickJS to interpret JavaScript inside .pdf (https://github.com/mozilla/pdf.js.quickjs)
by port11 | 2026-01-04 18:17:55+00:00
Flutter and KMM are actually very good and better to use than the debacle that React Native can be. But they’re worlds behind in community support, and React Native became the ‘kitchen sink’ that works for most needs.

As a React Native developer for, what, 6 years, I don’t have much positivity left to offer. Bug reports to the core team that went nowhere, the Android crash on remote images without dimensions, all the work offloaded to Expo, etc.

Google couldn’t really done better, maybe Flutter should’ve become independent after the initial release.
by moooo99 | 2026-01-04 18:18:19+00:00
The problem with the reliance on self control is the self control. You have it or you don't. While I generally agree just exercising pure self control may be a viable strategy for some, it does not work for everyone. Particularly people with ADHD do have a tendency to be easily captured by screens.

I've personally struggled with adherence to my reduce screen time goals and while exercising more self control has helped, making active choices about my environment did help a lot more. And I like it that way, and I hate to see these choices be torpedoed all the time
by jama211 | 2026-01-04 18:18:25+00:00
I feel like the best lesson in here wasn’t numbered, but in the opening statement:

> the longer I’ve stayed, the more I’ve realized that the engineers who thrive aren’t necessarily the best programmers - they’re the ones who’ve figured out how to navigate everything around the code: the people, the politics, the alignment, the ambiguity.

I have been banging on about this for _years_. I’ve seen engineers much smarter than me and who write much better code fall afoul of this too. Being personable and easy going and insightful for one hour in a meeting can do more for your reputation within a company than a month of burning yourself out completing more tickets than anybody else. I really wish more people understood this.

At the end of the day, a manager or a project director who _wants_ you to join a meeting just because you’re a joy to be around and you may have some insight, shows you’re more valued than the best coder on the team if they’re a pain to bring into a meeting because they’re hard to talk to.
by Analemma_ | 2026-01-04 18:18:39+00:00
This is kind of a self-defeating argument. If the information is accurate and valuable, why bother with this blog post at all? The papers could speak for themselves.

But a lot of people are of the opinion that for many papers it helps to have a secondary publication where the author puts the work in the appropriate context. I’m trying to build a shared mental model with the author, to help me better understand the underlying work; that is harder to do when there’s no mind behind the words.
by cletus | 2026-01-04 18:18:40+00:00
I'm going to pick out 3 points:

> 2. Being right is cheap. Getting to right together is the real work

> 6. Your code doesn’t advocate for you. People do

> 14. If you win every debate, you’re probably accumulating silent resistance

The common thread here is that in large organizations, your impact is largely measured by how much you're liked. It's completely vibes-based. Stack ranking (which Google used to have; not sure if it still does) just codifies popularity.

What's the issue with that? People who are autistic tend to do really badly through no fault of their own. These systems are basically a selection filter for allistic people.

This comes up in PSC ("perf" at Meta, "calibration" elsewhere) where the exact same set of facts can be constructed as a win or a loss and the only difference is vibes. I've seen this time and time again.

In one case I saw a team of 6 go away and do nothing for 6 months then come back and shut down. If they're liked, "we learned a lot". If they're not, "they had no impact".

Years ago Google studied the elements of a successful team and a key element was psychological safety. This [1] seems related but more recent. This was originally done 10-15 years ago. I agree with that. The problem? Permanent layoffs culture, designed entirely to suppress wages, kills pyschological safety and turns survival into a game of being liked and manufacturing impact.

> 18. Most performance wins come from removing work, not adding cleverness

One thing I really appreciated about Google was that it has a very strict style guide and the subset of C++ in particular that you can use is (was?) very limited. At the time, this included "no exceptions", no mutable function arguments and adding templtes had an extremely high bar to be allowed.

Why? To avoid arguments about style issues. That's huge. But also because C++ in particular seemed to attract people who were in love with thier own cleverness. I've seem some horrific uses of templates (not at Google) that made code incredibly difficult to test for very little gain.

> 9. Most “slow” teams are actually misaligned teams

I think this is the most important point but I would generalize it and restate it as: most problems are organizational problems.

At Meta, for example, product teams were incentivized to ship and their impact was measured in metric bumps. But there was no incentive to support what you've already shipped beyond it not blowing up. So in many teams there was a fire and forget approach to filing a bug and forgetting about it, to the point where it became a company priority to have SLAs on old bugs, which caused the inevitable: people just downgrading bug priorities to avoid SLAs.

That's an organizational problem where the participants have figured out that shiping is the only thing they get rewarded for. Things like documentation, code quality and bug fixes were paid lip service to only.

Disclaimer: Xoogler, ex-Facebooker.

[1]: https://www.aristotleperformance.com/post/project-aristotle-...
by stevesunderland | 2026-01-04 18:19:03+00:00
SEEKING WORK | USA | Remote

Developer + Designer

I'm a graphic designer and web developer who creates websites, brand identities and marketing material for a variety of companies including startups, agencies and non-profit organizations. In addition to my design skills, I am also a full-stack web developer.

DESIGN: websites, apps, UI/UX, mobile, logos, marketing material, trade show displays, packaging, photo retouching, book covers, etc.

DEVELOPMENT: HTML, CSS, JavaScript, Vue, Angular, Python, Django, SQL, PHP, Bootstrap, Foundation, REST APIs, Wordpress, Webpack, Jekyll, Hugo, etc.

PORTFOLIO: https://sunderland.studio

LINKEDIN: http://linkedin.com/in/stevesunderland

CONTACT: stevesunderland@gmail.com
by OrderlyTiamat | 2026-01-04 18:19:21+00:00
Useful pointers, which match my experience well when trying this out. The one big question that springs to my mind is: when you've done all these steps, how much time did you really save?

You've chosen a strategy, broke down the solution into small easy to code parts, validated business logic, noted traps to avoid, searched for all relevant code, set up a context packing document particular to this section of the code base, experimented with multiple agents, reviewed each version of the code to see if you understand it-

That sounds like a lot of work!

And why, so the AI can do the last 10% of actually coding it up? Is there even a speedup here over doing it yourself? There's some evidence against AI speedups [1]. Of course some of these steps are themselves AI enhanced, and some of them are part of the work regardless of whether you use AI.

I still feel skeptical on this workflow and how big the gains could possibly be. I feel more for the alternate approach of writing it yourself, but using the AI for the boring parts (e.g. copy this section, but use those functions), or for sparring / research. I have however no data to show which approach takes less time.

I can however tell you from experimenting with full on vibe coding- you can do it with half the attention you'd give the task yourself. Is that what I'm gaining, that I can read a book during code generation? (https://xkcd.com/303/)

[1] https://metr.org/blog/2025-07-10-early-2025-ai-experienced-o...
by klaussilveira | 2026-01-04 18:20:09+00:00
Maybe this is worth something to people involved with using SWF files, but the Doom 3 BFG codebase has an entire SWF parser/player included, which they used for the game UI: https://github.com/klaussilveira/chocolate-doom3-bfg/tree/ma...

You could call it Lightweight Scaleform. This same codebase was used in RAGE.
by matsemann | 2026-01-04 18:20:32+00:00
If it's so many, surely someone should be able to provide some example of them being treated unfairly soon! But seriously, I'm fine with people not liking SO. I just don't think the discourse on HN around it is very fruitful and mostly emotional. SO have clearly done something wrong to get that kind of widespread reputation, but I'm also allowed to be disappointed in how it's being discussed.
by stackghost | 2026-01-04 18:21:02+00:00
>On the frontend, you have build pipelines, bundlers, CSS frameworks with their own toolchains, progressive web apps, Core Web Vitals, SEO, layout shifts, srcset/responsive images... I remember when the biggest challenge was IE6 compatibility.

It is not necessary to do this. Server-side rendering is still a thing.

I still do a lot of my side projects in ruby on rails, which is maybe not fashionable these days but:

- no heavy js means speedy first paint

- I just use normal minified css, no sass or other junk

- partials means navigation is snappy

Ruby itself isn't particularly performant but it containerizes well.