MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Nextgrid | 2026-01-22 03:05:25+00:00
A lot of the pressure to expand revenue comes from within thanks to the flaws of permanent employment - you hired permanent employees at a discount compared to the equivalent contractor/temporary workforce in exchange for a promise of perpetual employment. These people will thus do their best to ensure their perpetual employment (they will never say "hey I think we've finished building your product, now you can lay us off to make profit").

You can of course sidestep that and use contractors for the initial build out - plenty of agencies and freelancers will give you a quote with various terms. It'll cost way more in the short term because you're essentially paying upfront the years of salary they would otherwise earn building the same thing as permanent employees, but at least it's an upfront, honest transaction with no expectation of loyalty. You can then hire a permanent skeleton crew for the continuous upkeep.

Want a turnkey Vimeo you can deploy on a cloud or truckloads of servers you can just rack up in a colo? If you have a spare 1.4B laying around, I'm sure that can be arranged.
by cogman10 | 2026-01-22 03:05:56+00:00
How we do it in Idaho, which I think is pretty much the ideal level.

1. Everyone votes on paper.

2. An electronic tallying machine tallies the vote.

3. Vote counts are sent to a central system, IDK if it's electronic or not.

4. Candidates can challenge and start a hand recount at anytime.

I think this combo is pretty close to the ideal. The actual ballots are easy to audit. Discrepancies can be challenged. And the machine doing the tallying isn't connected to the internet, it's just a counting tool that gets the job done fast.

For people with disabilities, poll workers can come in and help with the vote.
by idiotsecant | 2026-01-22 03:06:32+00:00
Oh yeah? Your source for why mail voting is a shaggy dog friend of a friend definitely real story?

Mail voting has routinely been proven to be extraordinarily difficult to exploit at scale. For as much feverish dedication there is to the idea of how terrible it is (for quite obviously partisan benefit) there is absolutely no evidence of any kind of substantial fraud. It's a right wing fever dream exercise in post hoc logic to justify depriving the 'right' people in our society of their vote. Simple as that.

Mail voting is common in many systems, it's convenient, and worst of all ... More people vote!! All of which is very dangerous to the power of a certain class of politicians.
by insane_dreamer | 2026-01-22 03:06:36+00:00
I suppose they've successfully instilled the fear that "our way of life" will be destroyed if they don't vote for Trump, despite 1) being a lie, and 2) a vote that will make things worse for them. It's amazing how powerful these relatively minor cultural issues can be. It certainly makes for interesting case studies for future political science and sociology university (if the humanities survive).
by aj2048 | 2026-01-22 03:07:17+00:00
Flatpak is handy, but given their history, if I can run it in the browser, I'll leave it there. I don't want it, even in a sandbox.

Check out these CVEs:
* https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-49457
* https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-22844
by yandie | 2026-01-22 03:07:50+00:00
Because you can’t make me sign my ballot? Because without my signature the ballot is void. I can also show up in person to cure my vote if you force me to sign it at home btw.

It’s not impossible - I won’t deny it. But we haven’t had any substantial evidence despite the current administration trying to claim otherwise.

If we are to roll back mail in ballot, let’s also make voter ID free and easy, and also make Election Day the weekend or a public holiday, rather than the various frictions including long lines at the poll.
by sgc | 2026-01-22 03:08:41+00:00
This is like the education or gun debates, or basically any quality of life message you might have. It's almost impossible to get your message heard. There will always be some non-reason why everything is oh-so-different in the US. It's very frustrating to live here with all the matter-of-fact head-in-the-sand know-it-all bloviating.

Meanwhile our teachers are suffering enormously, our education is terrible, our roads are terrible, we are poisoning ourselves with substandard food, we have extremely expensive but relatively poor healthcare to deal with the problems that creates, we have no time off and are labor slaves where maximum effort for minimum pay is the norm, and half the country has become violently oppressive to the point of absolutely thriving off the suffering they perceive inflicted on others. And still, we know better - of course - because we are Americans.
by pxc | 2026-01-22 03:08:52+00:00
I just took a look in F-Droid, and it looks like there are more than 20 launchers in F-Droid that are under active development (updated within the past three months). A lot of them are very different from each other, and a few look quite nice.

I was a long time Nova user, so clearly at one point I looked at the F/OSS offerings and didn't love any. But the longer I've used Android, the more I have come to appreciate the way F-Droid calls out anti-features, dependencies on proprietary services, etc. This kind of privacy violating stuff just can't sneak up on you on F-Droid, or get buried in a ton of fine print. (The extreme cases, of course, are patched out altogether lest an app simply be banned from the store entirely.)

In the time since I first gave Nova a shot, the Play Store has become a source of absolute last resort for me, in sourcing apps. I think this time, I'll explore launchers that are exclusively F/OSS, and only via F-Droid, for at least a few months before I even consider recommendations from the Play Store.

The wild thing is that I don't think you need to be either a F/OSS zealot or a miser to get it, at this point. Even if you're fine with proprietary software, even if you don't mind paying for your apps, it's too hard to find apps that are vetted for decent behavior outside of F-Droid. There is no store for "well-behaved, sometimes-proprietary apps".

So that's my recommendation: even if you don't think of yourself as a F/OSS hardliner, consider looking to F-Droid first in seeking your replacement for Nova. There's something relaxing about getting your apps from a supplier that respects you.
by dikobraz | 2026-01-22 03:09:02+00:00
No matter how they’re designed—manager discretion, calibration committees, or opaque algorithms—performance reviews in big tech reliably produce results that are neither meritocratic nor humane. In practice, compensation and promotions still hinge on a single decision-maker.

I wrote a dark, deliberately cynical essay comparing Apple and Roblox, two companies where I managed teams, that tried very different approaches to performance evaluation and failed in different ways.

Even if we could make these systems “fair,” I’m not convinced that’s the right goal. What people actually want isn’t better algorithms, but humane treatment and rational judgment when it matters.
by lolive | 2026-01-22 03:09:57+00:00
I still pay for Spotify, but nowadays 99% of my music consumption are local FM radios, plus mainstream webradios [radioParadise, FIP, BBC6, NTS]. I sometimes Shazam things, but rarely have the time to listen them back on Spotify.
My attention time is limited by other things [:those stupid real-life stuff every normal person was praising in the old times: kids, family, work, burnout, failing cars, gardenning. And sleep!]
by nerdponx | 2026-01-22 03:10:15+00:00
Prediction: In 2026 the Trump administration will attempt to ban all other forms of voting and will claim that it is in the interests of election security, because the Democrats can't be trusted to count votes (remember the 2020 election was "stolen"?), so we need to mandate all votes be counted electronically using some sketchy electronic voting system, which a company that is very politically friendly to Trump just so happens to be ready to provide. It will get immediately shot down in several courts but it will take months to resolve all the lawsuits, and SCOTUS won't hear the case. This will cause the election to be held in some places but not others, and overall delay final vote tally by several months. Some kind of data breach will occur but details will not be reported. Neither party will trust the election results but won't go so far as to call fraud lest public trust in the system completely unravel.
by adiabatichottub | 2026-01-22 03:10:25+00:00
I feel you, but something like an R730 or 7810 with a pair of E5-2690 v4 and 128GB RAM can be had for under $400. Not the most power efficient, but you'd have to run it quite a while to make up the difference in energy cost. Plus there's way less work in getting it all set up.
by jcrawfordor | 2026-01-22 03:10:53+00:00
Good data is hard to come by, but from a brief survey electronic precinct tabulation (the most common system in the US) is also in at least partial use in Canada, Mexico, India, the Phillipines, and Russia, and a laundry list of smaller countries.

Now, you might contend that this is not a list of first-world countries exactly (but rather I sampled the largest countries). You must keep in mind that the use of electronic tabulation in the United States is mostly a response to the very limited budget on which elections are carried out; electronic tabulation is much less expensive than significantly increasing staffing. As a result, globally, electronic tabulation tends to be most common in poorer countries or countries with newer election systems, while hand tabulation is most common in wealthier countries with long-established election procedures.

For this reason, the countries you might go to for comparison (like France and Germany) have largely manual election processes that have often seen few changes since the Second World War.

The Help America Vote Act (2002) had a de facto effect of making the United States a country with much newer election processes, as HAVA requires strict accessibility measures that most European election systems do not meet (e.g. unassisted voting for blind and deaf people). Most US election systems didn't meet them either, in 2002, so almost the entire country had to design new election processes over a fairly short span of time and on a shoestring budget. Understandably, election administrators leaned on automation to make that possible.

It's also important to understand that because of the US tradition of special-purpose mill levies and elected independent boards (like school boards), the average US ballot has significantly more questions than the average European ballot. This further increases the cost and complexity of hand tabulation, even ruling out entirely the "optimized" hand tabulation methods used in France and Ireland.
by hansvm | 2026-01-22 03:10:55+00:00
Without a root of trust though, how much good is that? When I needed a copy of my birth certificate to get a CA driver's license, I just sent my home state $10-$20 and pinky promised that I was me. Getting utility bills or whatever delivered to your favorite name isn't hard either. It's cheap and easy to bootstrap your way into somebody's identity.

Maybe the payout isn't worth it, but (a) empirically, people seem to be willing to spend a lot more than that per vote if necessary, and (b) it's not substantially harder or riskier to do that than to risk prison voting for a dead person or whatever else some fraudster might cook up; if we think this is an important system which people are trying to rig then the proposed cure just keeps honest people honest.
by mindslight | 2026-01-22 03:11:26+00:00
No, you cannot necessarily to choose whether to transact or not. For life's necessities (eg food, shelter) this is straightforwardly obvious. And you are making this claim in the context of the employment market, which is one step removed from that.

But even in the general case your argument still does not make sense. When we talk of a business providing societal utility, we don't include the business owner themselves in the integral. For example your assertion lets you conclude things like a casino owner who has made a pile of money but impoverished the community has made society better.
by nonethewiser | 2026-01-22 03:11:41+00:00
>Minnesota has a better system. You fill in a paper ballot using a pen, and the paper ballot gets optically scanned.

>Besides avoiding any issues (real or imagined) with touchscreens,

Wait... I don't think these are the complaints being made against internet voting at all. The problem is with a computer counting and reporting it, right? Centralized, less transparent, etc.

I dont view writing my vote on paper and scanning it to be paper voting if it's just immediately fed into a computer.
by idiotsecant | 2026-01-22 03:11:50+00:00
I signed my ballot poorly last year because I had nothing hard to put behind it when signing. It was compared to previous years and rejected. At a minimum you need to know what someones signature looks like, which reduces the possible scale of this attack from 'small' to 'vanishingly small'. You can also get rich stealing peanuts from squirrels, if you can find enough squirrels. Good luck with that.
by hackyhacky | 2026-01-22 03:13:00+00:00
> Want paper vote? That's racism. Want counting in a day? That's xenophobia. Want to limit certain time window for counting? That's definitely racism.

This characterization is reductive and basically a straw-man.

The principle underlying opposition to "counting in one day" is basically that every vote that is correctly placed in time should be counted, and as many people as possible should have access to voting. Mail-in voting, for example, has been shown to increase voter turnout by making voting more convenient, but you have the question of what to do with ballots that are received late. There are pretty good arguments for counting all mail-in ballots that are postmarked before the election, and I don't think "xenophobia" is among them.

In America specifically, all decisions relating to access to voting are considered against a backdrop of our widespread and systematic attempt to restrict voting. A modern example of this is related to wide disparity in the number of polling places, and therefore the amount of time required to vote, in "urban" regions of some southern states as compared to rural regions.

I have never heard of a racism-based opposition to paper ballots. I think you just made that up.
by johnnyanmac | 2026-01-22 03:13:18+00:00
1. we're on a tech forum and can quickly link to other discussions on the company. Many employees may not even be aware there was a change in management. If they were, their statement outright lied to them saying they still wanted to continue to grow. Meanwhile, many Vimeo clients won't know about this for months or even years. So no, not everyone knew.

2. And I'm saying a cooperation shouldn't be able to make reckless decisions like "lets lay off most of our workforce" withotu reprecussions. Like most civilized societies outside the US do. Thats's what the bulk of my previous response is about.

What are you arguing? That you can do anything you want to something you own? That's not true for nearly anything in modern society.
by protocolture | 2026-01-22 03:14:01+00:00
>Malware on the voter’s phone (or computer) can transmit different votes than the voter selected and reviewed. Voters use a variety of devices (Android, iPhone, Windows, Mac) which are constantly being attacked by malware.

Yeah see this is where I thought this was going.

Phones can be insecure, but in aggregate they are secure enough for literally every other component of life to be conducted on them.

>Malware (or insiders) at the server can change votes. Internet servers are constantly being hacked from all over the world, often with serious results.

Again, great point. Accepting this point will the government erase all the private identifiable data it has collected on me from its systems? Probably not, because they have made a cost/benefit analysis that suggests the risk is middling compared to the reward.

>Malware at the county election office can change votes (in those systems where the internet ballots are printed in the county office for scanning). County election computers are not more secure than other government or commercial servers, which are regularly hacked with disastrous results.

This seems like a weird seppo thing.

Currently the risk of an election being seen as fraudulent is high, and the reward of online voting is low.

But we dont have to conceptualise the modern boring election when we look at online elections. We can look at alternative models, closer to real time use and other gains that tip things back in its favor.

Actually the biggest issue I see with online democracy is apathy and minimum quorum sizes.
by insane_dreamer | 2026-01-22 03:14:30+00:00
You could say the same when your stock price drops because large investors dumped your stock suddenly. Yes, there was a buying party (or they wouldn't have been able to sell), but the price drop hurts your company and worse can trigger more sales and more price drops.

similar with the US T-bonds - this pushes the yield up making it more expensive for the US to finance its debt (which already consumes nearly a fifth of the entire federal budget).
by astrange | 2026-01-22 03:14:44+00:00
> If instead of looking at it as an attempt to enshrine a viable, internally consistent ethical framework, we choose to look at it as a marketing document, seeming inconsistencies suddenly become immediately explicable:

It's the first one. If you use the document to train your models how can it be just a "marketing document"? Besides that, who is going to read this long-ass document?
by joshuamcginnis | 2026-01-22 03:14:58+00:00
My original argument is getting dismissed, in part, because people are fearful of how it would be implemented while at the same time, completely hand-waving over the obvious flaws of the Claude philosophy of moral relativism.

I'm not arguing that it would make the edge-cases easier to define, but I do think the general outcomes for society would be better over the long-run if we all held ourselves to a greater moral authority than that of our opinions, the will of those in power and the cultural norms of the time.

If we could get alignment on the shared belief that there are at least some obvious moral absolutes, then I would be happy to join in on the discussion as to how to implement the - no doubt - difficult task of aligning an LLM towards those absolutes.
by burnt-resistor | 2026-01-22 03:15:22+00:00
I just watched a case of, albeit local cops, shooting and killing someone under the guise of a "welfare check" where they didn't announce themselves and shot without giving the person's house they were invading a chance. They killed somebody in their own house without evidence, exigency (arguably), or reasonable suspicion. They caused someone to defend themselves and murdered them for protecting themselves when they weren't wanted.
by shwaj | 2026-01-22 03:15:28+00:00
They say they’re developing products where the constitution is doesn’t work. That means they’re not talking about your case 1, although case 2 is still possible.

It will be interesting to watch the products they release publicly, to see if any jump out as “oh THAT’S the one without the constitution“. If they don’t, then either they decided to not release it, or not to release it to the public.
by Nursie | 2026-01-22 03:16:34+00:00
> Want to limit certain time window for counting?

Why would you want that?

Surely what you want is to enable everyone to vote, and then to count all the votes?

In the UK where I have most experience of this stuff, there are many, many small polling stations, and usually you just walk right in and vote without queueing. The longest I ever had to wait to vote was about 30 minutes. Votes are counted locally and results usually declared within a handful of hours. Some take longer due to recounts etc if the tally is very close in a certain area, but the whole thing is pretty uncontroversial and pretty low-effort.

Here in Australia, voting is compulsory, it's always on a Saturday, and there's usually a charity sausage-sizzle at the polling place, it's sorta fun. And again, AFAICT (I'm not a citizen yet) the infrastructure is over-provisioned so people aren't waiting around forever.

From what I hear about the US, in some places voting can take hours, it seems like the number of polling places is deliberately limited to make it hard for people to vote, and you have those weird/horrible rules cropping up like it being illegal to hand out water to people in line, which seems purely designed to discourage electoral participation. And then you have all these calls to stop the count after a certain time etc.

It's deeply weird from an outside perspective. If counts are taking too long, if people are having trouble voting, provision more... but of course it seems clear that there are motives for underprovisioning, because one or other group thinks it will benefit them.
by 9rx | 2026-01-22 03:17:01+00:00
> supply management is far better than the alternatives.

Why, then, only dairy, poultry, eggs, and — at least until 2007 when the government bought back the quota — tobacco production? If the farmers growing the foods that are actually deemed important in a healthy diet end up bankrupt, no big deal?

> It also ensures the market price is fair to farmers.

Well, it creates a two-tier system where the 'blessed' farmers who are born into it (or born into a European farm that can be sold at a high enough price to buy a farmer in Canada out) have artificially high incomes to spend on land, equipment, etc. at inflated prices. It is hard to think that is fair to all the other farmers who have to compete against the farmers of the world when selling their product but have to pay supply managed farmer prices for inputs.

I suppose everything is in the eye of the beholder. I'll grant you that all the other farmers' retirement plan is to sell off their land to a supply managed farmer who will pay way more than it is worth. That keeps the peace. Bit sad to see everything go to those producers who get special treatment, though.
by hi_hi | 2026-01-22 03:17:25+00:00
You might be interested in the list of similar services to this, from my own similar service (see the list at the bottom)

https://listofdisks.pages.dev/

Note, this is painfully out of date, I no longer maintain it.

How did you get the data? I went the scraping route after having difficulty qualifying for access to Amazons API as I didn't generate enough purchases via the affiliate links. Would be interested in hearing how you approached this.
by arjunchint | 2026-01-22 03:17:34+00:00
Honestly we should just have block chain based PUBLIC voting.

This article is right about secret internet voting: it’s fundamentally incompatible with unsupervised devices and global networks. But secrecy is the constraint that breaks everything.

If you instead require public, verifiable voting, most of the "unsolved" problems disappear. The core requirement becomes: everyone can independently verify inclusion and correct tallying.

That’s where blockchains are a genuine game-changer:
- They provide a public, append-only, tamper-evident system of record.

- Anyone can recompute the tally from first principles — no trusted servers, no “checker apps,” no special dispute resolution.

- Server compromise or insider attacks stop being catastrophic; fraud becomes immediately visible rather than silently scalable.

- Malware can still affect an individual’s vote, but it can’t secretly change the election at scale — the main failure mode highlighted in this post.

If trust is the goal, opacity is the wrong primitive. The secret ballot is mistaken path solving a non existent and purely theoretical problem of vote buying.

In a world where we expect everything to be easily accessible, the hardships placed by all the steps required to vote (registration, confirming residency location, waiting in line for polling booth) is seriously impacting voter participation. We need to get with the times and modernize this voting infrastructure.