MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by terminalshort | 2026-01-19 21:59:00+00:00
> Are you being serious right now or just engaging in "asking questions" to suppress others thoughts?

I must be really good at asking questions if they have that kind of power. So here's another. How would we ever even know those changes were making users more depressed if the company didn't do research on them? Which they would never do if you make it a bureaucratic pain in the ass to do it.

And, no, I would much rather the companies that I explicitly create an account and interact with to be the ones holding my data rather than some shady 3rd parties.
by dang | 2026-01-19 21:59:37+00:00
Related. Others?

Bureaucrat Mode - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41745750 - Oct 2024 (49 comments)

Simple sabotage for software (2023) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40695839 - June 2024 (75 comments)

Simple Sabotage Field Manual – How to Destroy Your Organizations - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36831946 - July 2023 (95 comments)

Simple Sabotage Field Manual (1944) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35448090 - April 2023 (129 comments)

Simple Sabotage Field Manual (1945) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32356038 - Aug 2022 (3 comments)

Simple Sabotage Field Manual by United States Office of Strategic Services - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31676964 - June 2022 (55 comments)

Simple Sabotage Field Manual - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31070624 - April 2022 (8 comments)

Excerpt from CIA's Simple Sabotage Field Manual (1944) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29597454 - Dec 2021 (209 comments)

1944 OSS Manual on How to Sabotage Productivity - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28507930 - Sept 2021 (5 comments)

Simple Sabotage Field Manual - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26293804 - Feb 2021 (1 comment)

CIA's Declassified 1941 Simple Sabotage Field Manual - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23316292 - May 2020 (1 comment)

Simple Sabotage Field Manual (1944) [pdf] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22322041 - Feb 2020 (89 comments)

Spotting Field Sabotage in Meetings (2011) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16045073 - Jan 2018 (36 comments)

Simple Sabotage Field Manual (1944) [pdf] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15109771 - Aug 2017 (32 comments)

The CIA’s 1944 Simple Sabotage Field Manual (2015) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12253276 - Aug 2016 (64 comments)

Updating classic workplace sabotage techniques - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11702267 - May 2016 (280 comments)

Simple Sabotage Field Manual (1944) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10493881 - Nov 2015 (68 comments)

Declassified CIA documents detail how to sabotage employers, annoy bosses - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10490804 - Nov 2015 (21 comments)

How to make sure nothing gets done at work - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10393485 - Oct 2015 (3 comments)

Simple Sabotage Field Manual (1944) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4831363 - Nov 2012 (67 comments)

From CIA: Timeless Tips for 'Simple Sabotage' - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4243649 - July 2012 (3 comments)

How We Beat the Nazis with Bureaucracy - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1398103 - June 2010 (22 comments)

WW2 "Simple Sabotage Field Manual" declassified [pdf] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=905750 - Oct 2009 (6 comments)

OSS (pre-CIA) Simple Sabotage Field Manual - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=833443 - Sept 2009 (29 comments)

(Reposts are fine after a year or so; links to past threads are just to satisfy extra-curious readers)
by chandlerswift | 2026-01-19 22:00:02+00:00
https://gitclassic.com/navidrome:

Error: repos.filter is not a function

https://gitclassic.com/navidrome/navidrome:

API rate limit exceeded for 18.222.58.123. (But here's the good news: Authenticated requests get a higher rate limit. Check out the documentation for more details.)
by KaiserPro | 2026-01-19 22:00:07+00:00
This is going to sounds stupid, but threads isn't twitter, so its not going to have quite the same content.

One of the more pleasing things about threads is that the "for you" page doesn't appear to push stuff that is rage bait _for you_, (what ever your bias is)

There seems to be a weighting in favour of stuff that isn't angry. There is stuff, but it seems to ask for actual confirmation that you want to continue to see it.

Its not all roses though, they are busy fucking up notifications like they did on facebook.
by dvt | 2026-01-19 22:00:09+00:00
One AI smell is "it's not just X <stop> it's Y." Can be done with semicolons, em dashes, periods, etc. It's especially smelly when Y is a non sequitur. For example what, exactly, is a "high-utility response to harmful queries?" It's gibberish. It sounds like it means something, but it doesn't actually mean anything.

Another smell is wordiness (you would get marked down for this phrase even in a high school paper): "it’s a fragile state that evaporates the moment you deviate from the expected prompt formatting." But more specifically, the smelly words are "fragile state," "evaporates," "deviate" and (arguably) "expected."
by bwblabs | 2026-01-19 22:00:21+00:00
I will hijack this post to point out CloudFlare really doesn't understand RFC1034, their DNS authoritative interface only blocks A and AAAA if there is a CNAME defined, e.g. see this:

$ echo "A AAAA CAA CNAME DS HTTPS LOC MX NS TXT" | sed -r 's/ /\n/g' | sed -r 's/^/rfc1034.wlbd.nl /g' | xargs dig +norec +noall +question +answer +authority @coco.ns.cloudflare.com
;rfc1034.wlbd.nl. IN A
rfc1034.wlbd.nl. 300 IN CNAME www.example.org.
;rfc1034.wlbd.nl. IN AAAA
rfc1034.wlbd.nl. 300 IN CNAME www.example.org.
;rfc1034.wlbd.nl. IN CAA
rfc1034.wlbd.nl. 300 IN CAA 0 issue "really"
;rfc1034.wlbd.nl. IN CNAME
rfc1034.wlbd.nl. 300 IN CNAME www.example.org.
;rfc1034.wlbd.nl. IN DS
rfc1034.wlbd.nl. 300 IN DS 0 13 2 21A21D53B97D44AD49676B9476F312BA3CEDB11DDC3EC8D9C7AC6BAC A84271AE
;rfc1034.wlbd.nl. IN HTTPS
rfc1034.wlbd.nl. 300 IN HTTPS 1 . alpn="h3"
;rfc1034.wlbd.nl. IN LOC
rfc1034.wlbd.nl. 300 IN LOC 0 0 0.000 N 0 0 0.000 E 0.00m 0.00m 0.00m 0.00m
;rfc1034.wlbd.nl. IN MX
rfc1034.wlbd.nl. 300 IN MX 0 .
;rfc1034.wlbd.nl. IN NS
rfc1034.wlbd.nl. 300 IN NS rfc1034.wlbd.nl.
;rfc1034.wlbd.nl. IN TXT
rfc1034.wlbd.nl. 300 IN TXT "Check my cool label serving TXT and a CNAME, in violation with RFC1034"

The result is DNS resolvers (including CloudFlare Public DNS) will have a cache dependent result if you query e.g. a TXT record (depending if it has the CNAME cached).
by kennethops | 2026-01-19 22:01:09+00:00
So far the feedback has clustered around a few themes:

People want it to be significantly more proactive over time, things like root cause analysis, security-style probing, or guided investigations rather than just visibility.

There’s interest in going deeper on telemetry and using it to surface higher-level insights, not just raw data or links out to other tools.

A lot of people ask whether it can eventually write to environments. The direction that’s resonated most is doing this first for new or greenfield environments. For example, going from a prototype to a production-ready AWS setup in a more agentic way. For existing environments, trust and safety are still the gating factors.

My takeaway is that read-only context earns trust first, and write access has to be very deliberate and staged.
by cesaref | 2026-01-19 22:01:11+00:00
This has reminded me that in System 7, the code for the window was a system resource (resource forks contained all sorts of code, icons, text dictionaries etc). Anyhow, if you dropped an updated window resource into your system with the correct resource id, you could change this default behaviour. A friend of mine wrote a round window for a clock app, and made a copy with resedit in the system, and a reboot later, all windows were round.

It was a very flexible and hackable system, very fragile, and no security whatsoever, but lots of fun!
by kevin_thibedeau | 2026-01-19 22:01:11+00:00
Europe's infatuation with WhatsApp is bizarre. The EU is supposedly a bastion of privacy but goes all-in on a proprietary, siloed communication channel. Given their predilection for enforcing standards usage, you'd think there'd be a move for a federated SMS successor that works with IP clients to counter the risk of dependency on an American company with so much power.
by criddell | 2026-01-19 22:01:24+00:00
It's a mature market. Maybe the age of new and interesting apps is over? I know I've pretty much settled into a small set of apps that I use on my iPhone, ThinkPad, and iPad and probably haven't installed anything new (ie not upgrades) for five or ten years now.

The last new app I installed was either Fusion360 or Visual Studio Code.

I guess I have had to install apps for other things I bought (like Christmas tree lights), but I don't really count that because the app is only a gateway to the thing I really want to use.
by vee-kay | 2026-01-19 22:02:04+00:00
Ironically Obama did more wars, while Trump has stopped/paused more wars.

And like a hypocrite, Obama went and personally collected the Nobel Peace Prize AFTER he had certainly signed off on new wars and conflicts.

But I think you already knew that.

However, Trump is following on the same warmongering course of his predecessors, so it is not a surprise to anyone outside USA and NATO nations.

The world is not fooled, by the
Nobel Peace Prize mask.

Bullies will be bullies, warmongering bullies even more so.
by ssl-3 | 2026-01-19 22:02:06+00:00
Yes. There's a lot of things to work out.

Here's one scenario:

Node A has a message to send to node H, but A is disconnected (no peers). Node A stores this message for eventual delivery.

Eventually, node K (ie "any valid peer") appears. Node A gives them the message that is intended for node H and rinses its hands of it.

Does node K's possession of this message actually improve the odds of node H ever receiving the message?
by AnthonyMouse | 2026-01-19 22:02:28+00:00
> it would take decades of sustained investment without return before actual consumer products could be made on anything other than a one-off basis.

That's true of some products, not all of them, or even a majority. And even for those products, well, if it's going to take a long time then we better get started.

> And there are a fair number of raw materials we just don't have

This is again not the common case, and even then it's not necessarily the wrong solution. For example, China currently dominates the production of rare earths and the US doesn't have sufficient reserves, but Australia does, so higher tariffs on China than Australia create an incentive to move mining operations to Australia which breaks China's lock, and creates the incentive to invest in rare earth processing in the US, since then you're only paying the (lower) tariff on the (lower-priced) raw materials rather than the (higher-priced) refined product.

> Trump isn't applying tariffs in a strategic manner to get domestic manufacturing to come back.

This is more of a Trump problem than a tariff problem. If you do something wrongly enough it obviously doesn't work as well as it otherwise might.
by echelon | 2026-01-19 22:03:07+00:00
I vehemently disagree.

There used to be plenty of ways to get in touch with the owner of a brand directly. Now they're all being camped by rent extractors.

Google is chief amongst those taxing businesses. They are not government anointed to perform this role. Google should not be allowed to do this.

As a business gets more successful, Google extracts more money from them. Simply trying to access the business will send revenue to Google.

Google took the standard URL bar and turned in into a rent extraction product. This should have been illegal, but our regulatory bodies have been asleep at the wheel.

Google adds costs to every business, every product, every entrepreneur. They should stick to servicing user inquiries, not stuffing ads in front of simple trademark lookup.

It's time to knock on their doors of regulatory bodies, both in the US and abroad. No more trademark camping from the "URL bar".
by zahlman | 2026-01-19 22:03:33+00:00
Kavanaugh's concurrence does not "expand" reasonable suspicion. It explains that a combination of factors including "apparent race or ethnicity" may cause reasonable suspicion. Which, in fact, as a basic matter of probabilistic reasoning, given the other information in https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/25a169_5h25.pdf, it might.

And an important part of the decision is that (emphasis his):

> Plaintiffs’ standing theory is especially deficient in this case because immigration officers also use their experience to stop suspected illegal immigrants based on a variety of factors. So even if the Government had a policy of making stops based on the factors prohibited by the District Court, immigration officers might not rely only on those factors if and when they stop plaintiffs in the future.

and to affirm existing understanding of reasonable suspicion:

> Reasonable suspicion is a lesser requirement than probable cause and “considerably short” of the preponderance of the evidence standard. Arvizu, 534 U. S., at 274. Whether an officer has reasonable suspicion depends on the totality of the circumstances. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U. S., at 885, n. 10; Arvizu, 534 U. S., at 273. Here, those circumstances include: that there is an extremely high number and percentage of illegal immigrants in the Los Angeles area; that those individuals tend to gather in certain locations to seek daily work; that those individuals often work in certain kinds of jobs, such as day labor, landscaping, agriculture, and construction, that do not require paperwork and are therefore especially attractive to illegal immigrants; and that many of those illegally in the Los Angeles area come from Mexico or Central America and do not speak much English. Cf. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U. S., at 884–885 (listing “[a]ny number of factors” that contribute to reasonable suspicion of illegal presence).

(In other words, he clearly lays out the reasons why such a "combination of factors" may create reasonable suspicion, per precedent.)

As for Kavanaugh "realizing" any such thing, I can't fathom why you think so. This is the same guy who has been very visibly protested by activists of a similar stripe from the beginning.
by dghlsakjg | 2026-01-19 22:03:41+00:00
You're talking about the trees (who literally pays taxes) I'm talking about the forest (which parties in the entire system end up less economically well off because the tax exists, AKA tax incidence)

I'll use your example. Your argument is that when Toyota sells fewer cars as a result of a new tax increasing the landed cost of their products, that they aren't being made worse off? Sure Toyota isn't literally cutting the check to the state, but unless they are selling a product that is perfectly inelastic (they aren't, no such product exists in the real world), they will have less revenue, ceteris paribus.

I get that the suppliers aren't literally paying for the tariffs via transferring dollars to the US CBP.

I am saying that reduced demand and sales for a product as a result of a higher cost is an actual realized loss for the producer caused by the tariff. The producers are paying an economic cost for the tariffs by either reduced volume or reduced margin. My citation is the article you are commenting on.

This is a well known, demonstrable and universally accepted concept in economics you are trying to argue against. It is called tax incidence, and it very intentionally discards who pays the tax directly, and concentrates on the respective proportions of consumer and producer surplus that are claimed by the increased tax.

This is literally what the paper this post is linked to is about; what proportion of the economic cost of the tax is borne by the seller and what portion is borne by the buyer. Go get
by telotortium | 2026-01-19 22:04:04+00:00
Alaskan Native Americans may be paid in the sense that the government provides subsidies for infrastructure and the like, but it’s seen as either welfare or necessary to allow them to keep practicing some of their native way of life. All Alaskan citizens also get a dividend from the Permanent Fund, but that’s only around $1000 a year. They are definitely not being paid to discourage Russia from invading (except for the military I suppose).
by mvdtnz | 2026-01-19 22:04:05+00:00
> There’s also a consistency problem. If you use multiple monitors or virtual machines, the mismatch between macOS’s new roundness and other systems’ sharper corners creates visual friction. Once you notice it, you can’t unsee it.

I guess it's a good thing I never noticed it then? Of all the very real problems with Tahoe this one would never have even registered with me.
by labrador | 2026-01-19 22:04:13+00:00
I think "neurotypical" and "neurodivergent" suffice. I've been diagnosed and am under treatment for bipolar type II but it doesn't fit exactly. I feel I am somewhere between (or a mixture) of autism and bipolar. My psychiatrist says it doesn't matter at my age (68) what we call it.

I like the term neurodivergent because it's not stigmatized. I like the way I think and wouldn't change it. I have special abilities that make me a good computer programmer. I can tell people I am neurodivergent and not feel any embarassment or feel any stigma that comes from telling people I am bipolar.
by yowlingcat | 2026-01-19 22:04:18+00:00
I don't believe Antigravity or Cursor work well with pluggable models. It seems to be impossible with Antigravity and with Cursor while you can change the OAI compatible API endpoint to one of your choice, not all features may work as expected.

My recommendation would be to use other tools built to support pluggable model backends better. If you're looking for a Claude Code alternative, I've been liking OpenCode so far lately, and if you're looking for a Cursor alternative, I've heard great things about Roo/Cline/KiloCode although I personally still just use Continue out of habit.
by ACCount37 | 2026-01-19 22:05:01+00:00
Pattern-matching is faster because it's the "normal" path that the human mind naturally takes. The "slow fallback" is an exception, and an optional one at that. There is quite a number of humans who would be able to solve 5+5 but not 4523+5438.

If human mind was based on logic, 20+80 and 54+39 would be equally as fast. As they are for a calculator. The calculator has a simple, fast, broadly applicable addition primitive based on pure binary logic. Humans don't.

In case of addition, LLMs work the same way humans do. They have "happy paths" of pattern-matching, and a slow unreliable "fallback path". They just have better "happy path" coverage than almost all humans do.

And your attempts at making your "theory" look any better than phlogiston are rather pathetic. I'm not asking you "what logic can do". I'm asking you "what your theory can do". Nothing of value.
by mystraline | 2026-01-19 22:06:44+00:00
Thats what disturbs me about yesteryears's protest marches, like MLK's March on Washington, compared to 50501 and No Kings.

MLK wanted a non-violent showing of force as to stay "legal", but a strong implicit threat of "well, you know, theres a LOT of us. We're peaceful for now". The bus boycotts almost bankrupted down in Atlanta, so money attacks also work.

But now, we have No Kings and 50501. The whole idea of mass protest as a 'nonviolent but imminent threat' is completely gone. Protests were a prelude to something to be done. Now, its more of a political action rally, with not much of anything to follow up the initial energy.

Which is also why the protests; pussy hat rebellion, 50501, No Kings - they've all failed. Theres no goals. Its just chanting and some signs.
by Imustaskforhelp | 2026-01-19 22:07:48+00:00
So funny that America's president makes a joke about greenland and now he's so serious about it.

In case you don't know, this website is made in jest (most likely) at how hypocritical the whole situation is and 200_000+ people (almost 300K) people have signed just as a way of showing what they believe of such hypocritical matters.
by user34283 | 2026-01-19 22:08:39+00:00
I click /r/pics, and I see a photo of Black Panther protesters holding assault rifles, a pic of Musk and Trump at dinner with the title yapping about the Epstein files, multiple pics protesting ICE and literally labelling them both fascists and Nazis, a photo of Trump's Hollywood star being smeared with "pedophile", some high ranking border patrol officer labelled a "Nazi officer" for wearing a uniform coat, and so on.

I think left extremism is a fair description here; it's at least far left.
by vovavili | 2026-01-19 22:08:48+00:00
>Right now I think it's a problem that social media companies can do research without answering to the same regulatory bodies that regular academics / researchers would. For example, they don't have to answer to independent ethics committees / reviews.

These bodies are exactly what makes academia so insufferable. They're just too filled with overly neurotic people who investigate research way past the point of diminishing returns because they are incentivized to do so. If I were to go down the research route, there is no way I wouldn't want to do in a private sector.
by softwaredoug | 2026-01-19 22:08:57+00:00
Gaming and social media are the symptom, not the cause.

The real issue is real life is NOT friendly to teenagers. Theres few activities they can just go off and do on their own. A lot of places ban any unsupervised minors. My son can’t go to the escape room or several movie theaters without an adult.

Add to that helicopter parents over protective of kids, and kids reach to spaces they can feel more free: social media, gaming, etc
by dylan604 | 2026-01-19 22:09:26+00:00
For the longest time, I kept the sheet of foam that comes with the new laptop. Eventually that got lost. I then picked up a pre-cut bit of microfiber that fit the laptop and thin enough to allow for full closing. Once you get in the habit of remembering to put the cloth back before closing the lid, you'll be amazed at your screen's lack of oils.
by piva00 | 2026-01-19 22:10:01+00:00
Denmark is a founding member of NATO, deployed troops to Afghanistan when the US was attacked on 9/11 and lost 40+ soldiers. Denmark has spilled blood for the US.

It's an ally as much as it could be, the US's presence in Greenland is entirely because it is in US's interests, and for that, as an ally, Denmark has always allowed the US to deploy as many troops as it wanted. Also as an ally it allowed Americans to do business in Greenland.

What else do you want? You aren't even American for the Trump administration, do not understand how you got so entangled in this bizarre worldview.
by notatoad | 2026-01-19 22:10:20+00:00
content generation isn't the intent, it's just the side effect. the real intent is to make money.

everybody is either trying to promote some product, or promote themselves as a "content creator" so they can start getting influencer marketing deals and payouts from youtube or instagram ad splits.

the internet was at it's best when most of the content on it was just because somebody had some information, and wanted to share it. that intent is still out there today, but unfortunately it's harder and harder to find buried amongst all the revenue generation.
by alhazrod | 2026-01-19 22:10:32+00:00
Interesting quote! Turns out that it is from Frank Wilhoit[0] the composer, not Francis M. Wilhoit[1] the political scientist. How odd!

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Wilhoit_(composer)

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_M._Wilhoit#Misattribut...
by dkarl | 2026-01-19 22:11:01+00:00
I'm not on Twitter, but I know a lot of the content I see comes indirectly from Twitter. For example, for soccer news, I follow a number of fans and journalists on BlueSky, but they follow journalists, agents, and official team and league accounts on Twitter, as well as players and players' wives and girlfriends on Instagram. As much as I'd love for them to die and won't touch them myself, it's clear that a lot of the information I get originates on X and Meta platforms.