MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bloomingeek | 2026-02-09 21:12:25+00:00
Tailgating is against the law. Tailgating causes hard braking.

I recently pulled my travel trailer from OK to Charleston, SC and back. I never drive over 65 MPH for safety and MPG reasons. I always stay in the right hand, slow lane except if I have to take a left lane exit. Since I was always driving slower then everyone else, not once did I have to hard brake. Tailgating is a choice and a dangerous one.

I was never honked at, even by the crazy semi truck drivers.
by digiown | 2026-02-09 21:12:26+00:00
A minimum wage should not necessarily afford you a median home, that's why it's called a minimum. But for a functional developed nation I argue it should afford you a private room or a very small apartment. Ideally the cost between the two wouldn't be that different, but due to decades of building restrictions the latter does not really exist. This isn't true in Japan for example, where you can find arbitrarily small apartments at correspondingly low prices.

A living wage is for living indefinitely, not just surviving. That should afford more comforts like a reasonable amount of space, a car if needed, and saving for retirement or emergencies.
by shakna | 2026-02-09 21:12:53+00:00
Uh... Most Schemes don't use linked lists under the hood. That doesn't impact the syntax, just the implementation.

Guile uses vectors, for example. [0]

Chicken... Is Cheney, so your list disappears entirely, half the time.

Gambit uses vectors. [1]

[0] https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/Cheaper-...

[1] https://github.com/gambit/gambit/blob/master/gsc/_back.c#L11...
by Thiez | 2026-02-09 21:12:58+00:00
Sure, I just think we if we're going to pathologize activities with intent to pass laws we ought to at least stick to a science-based approach. Right now there is no basis to conclude that even a single person is addicted to TikTok, since no such diagnosis exists.

The word 'addicted' is used informally in all kinds of contexts where it's a wild exaggeration. Just like people say they have OCD or autism when they sort something, or say they are hypochondriacs when they wash their hands more often than average. Of course people who actually have these conditions might do the same, but a lot of the time it's just perfectly neurotypical people using hyperbole and/or a flawed understanding of psychiatry.

Let's wait until psychiatrists agree on the existence of TikTok addiction and come up with a set of diagnostic criteria. Until such time we should take the existence of such addictions with a grain of salt, and refrain from moral panic.
by sdellis | 2026-02-09 21:13:04+00:00
For a lot of us, work is not our life. Turns out that most people really want a paid vacation. Smart Capitalists know that it's easier to extract value from workers with higher morale.

If you would rather trade your paid vacation for an extra week of pay, I am sure you and your boss can work it out. Companies pay out unused vacation all the time. Just don't ruin it for the rest of us!
by _DeadFred_ | 2026-02-09 21:13:34+00:00
Reminder that the Republicans' policy has been to starve the beast. That is push up government costs while passing huge tax cuts (like the big beautiful bill Republicans just passed that is greatly increasing the debt) in order to sabotage government's ability to function, then blast from every rooftop that we need to cut government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast

"The very reason why we object to state ownership, that it puts a stop to individual initiative and to the healthy development of personal responsibility, is the reason why we object to an unsupervised, unchecked monopolistic control in private hands. We urge control and supervision by the nation as an antidote to the movement for state socialism. Those who advocate total lack of regulation, those who advocate lawlessness in the business world, themselves give the strongest impulse to what I believe would be the deadening movement toward unadulterated state socialism."

--Theodore Roosevelt
by swiftcoder | 2026-02-09 21:13:53+00:00
My Spanish identity card has my full address. Not sure if the DNI does as well, or only the foreign resident version.

> And what do you mean by “us”?

US folks are pretty used to being able to up and drive across the country with a suitcase, without filing any paperwork (at least till the taxman comes knocking next April)
by jsattler | 2026-02-09 21:13:54+00:00
Recently came across this website after watching this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpxSaOiT2LE. Seems like a cool hobby to try for when I'm finally replaced by AI. I knew about the sling from movies but I didn't know this is actually a thing to do. Very impressed how far you can sling something with it (477m/1564feet). Sharing this in case someone is on the hunt for a new cool hobby.
by AstroBen | 2026-02-09 21:14:11+00:00
I'm curious why you hate ads? Outside of the most obnoxious recipe sites plastered with them I don't find they effect me much

The business landscape would look much different without advertising. New products would struggle to get the word out there. Cost to reach customers would go up, leading to higher product prices and lack of innovation due to not being able to break in

YouTube creators would struggle, probably going under unless they own their own products if they can't rely on sponsorships or ads

People love to complain both about privacy invasion of tracking, and then also about irrelevant products being pushed on them that they'd never want

Bad targeting is the problem! Targeting needs to be better. Do you think a business wants to push their products on people that don't want them? Of course not. It's a total waste of money

Imagine a world where micro-niche businesses could exist, where we could innovate products exactly for you and a tiny sub-group of other people that would improve your life. The only way you'd ever find out about them, and thus that they could be sustainable, is with better ad targeting

I love ads
by Saline9515 | 2026-02-09 21:14:28+00:00
There are many ways to keep yourself (and your son, after, like in SG). You can use arbitrary force and secret police, as it is the case in DPRK or China.

Or you can use the fact that you basically own the State to pit everything against your political opponents. There are various ways to do this, and at different intensities. SG's PAP is famous for using lawfare against political bloggers, newspapers and political opponents who question their rule.

Western democracies, where the selectorate is currently fearing for a populist takeover has started to do the same: German politicians filed more than 4,000 defamation cases, vague "hate speech laws" allow to selectively try your opponents, the State funds compliant press and NGOs, and so on. The EU functions in a way that democratic oversight and popular will is so dilluted that it isn't a real constraint, while keeping the "democratic" varnish and some legitimacy.

At least in SG, DPRK or China, things are clear and not hypocritical, maybe it's better for everyone.
by einarfd | 2026-02-09 21:14:32+00:00
I see a lot of people here are worried that we will end up with ads in all AI vendors products, or at least the frontier labs.
I think this is unlikely.

We are already seeing a market for AI for productivity in companies, the Claude code product is the first serious one here, but we can expect more to show up. When you look at the B2B market, ads are basically not a thing in these segments, companies are generally more willing to pay for products, and less willing to accept outside influence on how the product works, and I don't think this will change when companies are buying AI either. Companies might be happy with selling ads in their own products. On the other hand consumers, don't like to pay, and that will probably drive consumer oriented products to be ad funded.
Basically what I'm expecting will happen, is that we will end up with two types of AI vendors.

Those that target the consumer market and those that target the business market. Consumer AI will trend toward companionship, entertainment, casual chat — things like digital friends, relationship play, even adult content. Companies want none of that, and some of it is serious legal liability. Even a few missteps and you get expensive backlash in the business market.

It does look like OpenAI is trying to succeed in both the consumer and business market, and there are companies that are able to pull this off, most do not, and end up serving one of the markets. Given their lead in the name recognition I suspect they are going to end up an ad financed consumer brand, and will lose the business market to someone else. But I might be wrong.

The saving grace for those of us that don't want ads to bleed into our AI tools, is that we probably will be able to buy the same products that the small business segment buys. Some consumer oriented features might be missing, but they might either be features we don't need, or maybe open source could fill the gaps?
by kbenson | 2026-02-09 21:14:33+00:00
The test is whether you can successfully identify phishing attempts bu approximating what they look like in the wild. Bypassing the test entirely means there's no data on whether you're susceptible to this, and just because someone knows there's a header and how to bypass something doesn't mean they aren't also the kind of person to be distracted and click on stuff they shouldn't.

This method of test passing wasn't okay when Volkswagen did it, and it's not appropriate for employees at a company that asks them to take the test, for the exact same reason.
by throwway120385 | 2026-02-09 21:14:40+00:00
No, it's rentiers. The government takes about a quarter but the rentiers easily take 2 times as much in interest, monthly fees, and other costs that I have to pay in perpetuity. You just don't consider that because you think those people are necessary for living a good life. In reality their purpose is to extract as much money from you for as little work as possible.
by worik | 2026-02-09 21:14:44+00:00
I am amazed. What an incredible statement!

The USA is very corrupt, true. But getting rid of the "huge administration" and burning tax receipts is not going to solve that. How could it?

One of the roles of the state in a modern society should be to ensure no one is left behind to starve, wither and freeze amongst the incredible resources we (as a society) have accumulated.

That takes administration. That takes resources. That is what your taxes should be used for.

I agree that far too much is used to give aid to the powerful, but the solution to that should not be to condemn the weak.

Burning taxes and de-funding the administration is exactly that: condemning the weak.
by anon7000 | 2026-02-09 21:14:54+00:00
Representation needs to be less about black/white political ideology and more about the specific needs of various people. Farmers need representation, white color workers need representation, small business owners need representation, but their needs are all different, and don’t really boil down to left/right politics. The government isn’t treated as a forum to collaborate on solving problems, but as a playground for the powerful to create boogeymen that get people riled up.
by crabmusket | 2026-02-09 21:15:09+00:00
I recently moved a small community group from Slack to Zulip. Half because of the UX for infrequent visitors (topics are so much better than "50 unread messages in #general"). And half because of your organisational values, which are more aligned with ours than are those of Salesforce.

The Bluesky team talks about "credible exit", and Zulip has that in spades - which makes me not want to exit.

Thank you for the work you do. Hanging out in CZO watching the Zulip team work in public is inspiring!
by jlhawn | 2026-02-09 21:15:21+00:00
> control inflation

I think you are confusing cost inflation with an increase in the money supply. The way the US government funds deficit spending is not by increasing money supply (though it could) but by issuing debt in the form of US Treasury bonds. That is a transfer of money from bond investors to the government. No new money is made. This is distinct from the way that banks issue loans which is by creating new money in the form of credit (but that credit money gets "burned" as loan principal is paid back). So federal taxes do not actually control inflation in the way you are describing. Since federal deficit spending is not financed by increasing the money supply, it can only cause price inflation if it increases aggregate demand over the current productive capacity of the economy. An example would be paying more for healthcare subsidies when there's a shortage of doctors. Or subsidizing demand for housing with more mortgage subsidies when there's a housing shortage. Taxes could also increase inflation if they have the effect of reducing supply of some goods or services (like tariffs do).

Edit: I want to mention that the Federal Reserve can and does increase money supply by buying US Treasury Bonds from banks (converting the asset into cash reserves). There are various reasons why they do this but overall it's done with their dual mandate in mind: control inflation and minimize unemployment.
by spwa4 | 2026-02-09 21:15:24+00:00
How does any of this make sense? Other than your first sentence (sorry about that, of course you're right, he tried) every claim is bogus.

> The point of international law isn’t protection but to distinguish wrong from right.

It is actually explicitly stated in almost all international law (mostly except human rights/Geneva convention, which would be the one Maduro violated and Trump didn't) that the ONLY point of international law is international cooperation. International law is completely voluntary for states and consists of individual treaties you can join ... or not join. Don't join or decide to leave? That bit of international law doesn't apply to you anymore.

> What do you think why even Putin made some bogus claims why his actions are justified?

Because Putin always does that. Even decades back, when he was backing gangsters, he did that. I'm sure at one point it was necessary, and now the guy is 73. His habits won't change anymore. Besides, his idol, the Soviet Union, also did that.

> In which war did Maduro commit war crimes?

No war required for that. Besides what even is a war? One of the older "international law" treaties which nobody remembers that a war is only a war when declared by at least one state. Very few declared wars in the last decades. Israel-Palestine? Not declared (according to hamas that's just how things are forever and Israel just defended I guess). Sudan? Not declared. The 123818th conflict between India and Pakistan? Not declared. Iran-Israel? Iran-Syria? Iran-Lebanon? (more like Iran-everyone) Turkey-Kurdistan? You get the picture. The only war that was declared was Russia attacking Ukraine.

> Law protects also criminals to a certain degree because the alternative is anarchy, chaos and global wars.

Unless you mean an extremely minimal degree law does not protect criminals against the state. And any amount of force that is required to get a criminal to stop is legally justified essentially everywhere. In fact, in the countries most humans alive live in, no law protects you against the state, criminal or innocent.

> International war was a lesson learned from the world wars.

Actually the history goes back quite a bit further than that. And if you consider international law is just treaties between countries/factions then ... The most famous bit of international law, the convention of Geneva, was a lesson learned in the holocaust.

> Seems like we need to learn again the hard way.

Why? "We"? Venezuela was not respecting international law before this happened. Neither was Russia. Neither was ...

> Tue right way of doing those things is rarely the glorious, it’s bureaucratic

I doubt Ukraine, or any other actual victims of war crimes will agree on that one. For instance, international law is clear that hamas must surrender to Israel. Could you explain how this can be achieved in a bureaucratic way?
by adventured | 2026-02-09 21:15:50+00:00
Historically it's reasonable for anybody to have roommates. It's a modern scenario where having your own place is supposed to be the standard.

Historically housing was much smaller. And people lived with their families for a lot longer commonly. A lot less was also spent on domestic appliances (not just washer & dryers) and at-home entertainment (a lot less was spent on entertainment in general).
by cbdevidal | 2026-02-09 21:15:51+00:00
The problem with defining “living wage” is you must trust that the person defining it has your best interests in mind, and is calculating it while including _your_ needs.

For example, you don’t want me to be the one to define “living wage.” I’ve been a prepper/bushcrafter for 20 years… the ACTUAL “living wage” is _zero_. There are innumerable resources all around you if you know how to find and use them.
by hilbert42 | 2026-02-09 21:15:55+00:00
Ha-ha, I didn't read this until I'd written the above reply, seems we have something in common.

Incidentally, I'm one of those mad people who'll put on a recording of Helmut Walcha playing Bach's Passacaglia and Fugue in C minor on a Silbermann and turn the volume up until the room shskes.
by PaulHoule | 2026-02-09 21:16:05+00:00
Now that I look at it that article has AI tells like:

In 2026, we are seeing a rising trend of "insulation fatigue."

But I dunno, I think there are always going to be enterprising techs who will figure out how to replace the $25 fuse inside a $2500 module. I've bought back more than one ICE car from the insurance company after it was totaled and managed to get it back on the road at a reasonable expense.
by rconti | 2026-02-09 21:16:38+00:00
This is a great use of this technology. In aggregate, these hard braking events _do_ tell us about road design issues. They also tell us about problematic drivers, in aggregate.

I'll never use one of these dongles, though, because I don't want my every move second-guessed. There's nothing _inherently_ dangerous about isolated hard braking or cornering or acceleration events. It all depends on context. Am I braking hard to avoid an obstacle or mistake by another driver? Is there someone behind me that's likely to rear-end me, or am I in the middle of a highway in the desert? Did I just replace my brake pads and I'm bedding in the new pads?

I don't want to have to worry about whether I've used up my invisible quota before the algorithm decides I should be moved into a more expensive insurance bracket.
by smelendez | 2026-02-09 21:16:52+00:00
And we have giant "big box" stores and overnight delivery that together are good enough for a lot of purchases. Some huge portion of the American public belongs to Amazon Prime and/or Walmart+ and/or Costco.

A lot of malls are basically surrounded by discount box stores like Walmart and Target, along with specialized ones like Barnes & Noble, Old Navy, Homegoods, DSW (shoes), and dozens of others at various price points. Even though walking through a mall is more arguably pleasant than driving around an arterial road and sprawling parking lots, you'll find better selection and often better prices at the box stores than the smaller mall storefronts. Sometimes you will find local independent stores setting up in malls, but I think rents make that hard.

And then thanks in part to obsolescence and disinvestment, going to the mall as an outing also doesn't really make sense anymore except as a rare novelty. The food options are typically pretty bad and overpriced by today's standards, restrooms are usually down a long and dirty hallway, etc.
by noleary | 2026-02-09 21:17:10+00:00
Reserves means something specific in the context of minerals! Reserves measure 'economically viable' deposits. [1]

There used to be tons of tungsten mines in the USA, e.g. in Colorado linked below.

[1] https://resourcecapitalfunds.com/insights/rcf-partners-blog/...

[2] https://coloradogeologicalsurvey.org/publications/tungsten-m...
by mrguyorama | 2026-02-09 21:17:22+00:00
>Back in the good ol' days of the internet, access to the internet in of itself was a decent filter: you had to want to be online, you needed to be somewhat technical, or at least willing to grapple with technical problems, and you needed to actively seek out communities online which aligned with your interests, and there was little financial motivation to do so in bad faith

And it was horrifically expensive to be online until the mid 90s, or late 90s depending on where you were.
by Marsymars | 2026-02-09 21:17:47+00:00
> It ought to be illegal to buy ads against trademarks (+/- some reasonable edit distance).

I get the intention here, but how do you limit the collateral damage? (Or do you not care about it / see reducing the ability to advertise as a positive?)

There are a lot of trademarks, and they have to be scoped to specific goods and services, but Google has no way of knowing if you're actually looking for something related to that trademark.

e.g. doing a quick trademark search, I see active, registered trademarks for "elevator", "tower", "collision", "cancer sucks", "steve's", "local", "best", "bus", "eco", "panel", "motherboard", "grass", etc. etc. I'm not familiar with any of those brands, but that's just a small sample of the fairly generic terms that would no longer be able to be advertised on.
by anthk | 2026-02-09 21:17:55+00:00
Heh, that happened with phony nostalgic gen-z kids trying to recreate 'old times' with Discord and turd themning for Windows AKA called 'Frutiger Aero' while bitching against XMPP calling it 'malware'.

They wil learn by brute force. As we had to do.
by lkbm | 2026-02-09 21:18:12+00:00
> The Wikipedia Tungsten article states the largest reserves are in China followed by Canada, Russia, Vietnam and Bolivia. This contradicts the articles claim. Just because it's all over does not mean it is easy to dig up and refine.

It doesn't contradict the claim.

Just because it's all over does not mean it is easy to dig up and refine, but just because it's not the largest reserve doesn't mean it's not easy to dig up and refine.
by marcyb5st | 2026-02-09 21:19:14+00:00
In my European mind (I have 25 mandated days off per year), if there was not a mandatory paid vacation limit two things would happen:

1. Further exploit desperate people since those that don't need to work at any cost would steer clear of jobs that have 0 holidays.
2. You would further penalize people with families where both parents work. It is well understood that if your kid is sick you can't really use your sick days and so must use your PTO days. Having 0 available days doesn't play well with having kids (personal experience).

And finally, having mandated PTO allow you to actually take holidays. I heard too many times of companies that offer unlimited PTO and when the employer tries to take some they sabotage him/her or plainly threaten his/her job security.
by calvinmorrison | 2026-02-09 21:19:30+00:00
Great observation, and thank you for pointing that out. I deployed a new MR for that using the awesome YASaaS for only 17.99/mo to create QR codes in your NextJS website. Using your company credit card to a new platform tied directly to your bun dependencies to pay for all your library subscriptions. Would you like me to tell you how much you'll spend this month?