MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by milesward | 2026-02-03 18:56:06+00:00
bwahahahah I was in a meeting with Ali execs to discuss a partnership between their cloud teams and my cloud team. We got an overview of the platform, to understand what API's it included, and they showed an CloudSQL/RDS equivalent. I asked what MySQL version it ran, and they argued that it didn't, that they'd rewritten it from scratch.

I guess not. My laugh at the time was appropriate it seems.
by ProllyInfamous | 2026-02-03 18:56:11+00:00
The AO Smith (retail $1678) cost $250, after rebates (available to all SFH in any of TVA's power sellers, typically between Thanksgiving and NYE). With rebates the Rheem was $1000 (and is two years older).

Without rebates, they're similarly priced.

As far as reliability, they both have decent warranties and backup heating elements. Both heat water without internet connectivity. Similar performances (as far as heat output).

Overall, I feel the AO Smith is more customer friendly. Definitely easier to install:

1) AO has both top and side water connections; Rhm has one top and then one side connection (why?!)

2) AO's venting connections are far superior to Rheem's (which require custom/expensive adapters if installed in spaces <700sqft) — AO just has two standard 8" duct connectors on top... so much easier/cheaper to install into a closet. Rhm's top slit needs a $120 plastic adapter, and then ejects to the side (of a 24"D cylinder) [again: why?].

3) Rheem will not stay in ELECTRIC-HEAT (only) mode, for longer than two days — it automatically reverts to the prior heat pump option (which is annoying; you can use the app and set up a schedule to "force" electric mode... but then you have to use an app). AO stays in whichever mode you select.

4) AO is just nicer presentation. Despite a few obviously less-expensive components and design decisions... the AO is better thought-out. Just as an example, the Rheem has a threaded 3/4" socket for condensate, while the AO has a pre-installed (cheaper, too) drip tube.

5) The AO's electric vault is on the side (and not top) so a top leak is less likely to fill the conductors // corrosion. This is a better decision.

6) Rheem will likely last longer, despite being two years older. We'll see.

Either one will save you a lot of electricity + bonus dehumidification (while operating). I bought whichever was cheapest, the first time; now I would buy the AO even if ~$250 more expensive because the install is that much easier. This last rebate period I bought three =P
by dathinab | 2026-02-03 18:56:26+00:00
needing consent and informing the user are two distinct concepts

I think you did need to explicitly tell the user about it.

But I think (not fully sure) they did relax that recently so just listing it in you Privacy Policy or similar should be enough by now.

But also due to how enforcement is designed it's not that you really had to worry about anything if you only have non-censent requiring cookies and list them clearly in the privacy policy. Worst case a privacy agency tell you to "improve on it" without penalty.

It's just which site (or app) today doesn't use something like Google Ad Network, or Metas Ad Network, or Apples Ad network. All of which do not support ads without tracking (which still are very viable, e.g. select ads based on what the side/ad is about).
by datsci_est_2015 | 2026-02-03 18:56:30+00:00
Alright so it is implicit that it is someone’s duty to learn Python. Don’t get me wrong, Python is better than Excel in a million ways, but not many companies are competent at hiring people who are competent at Python - including software companies from my personal experience hah.

I’ve also heard plenty of horror stories of bus factor employees leaving (or threatening to leave) behind an excel monstrosity and companies losing 6 months of sales, so maybe there’s a win for AI somewhere in there.
by bborud | 2026-02-03 18:57:43+00:00
leaders that ignored the potential to set up homegrown cloud providers, software suites or tech companies

Remarkable how it is the politicans who should have been doing this when it doesn't get done, and how everyone is quick to complain if politicians meddle in what the private sector should have been doing. This is a recurring theme in a lot of debates. And I think it has to do with our need to blame someone but ourselves.

Yes, one could solve this through procurement rules that favor domestic or regional products. And there are sometimes procurement rules that state that domestic vendors should be preferred. But I have seen that in practice and it doesn't actually work. One one project I worked on decades ago the military was sourcing a system for "local administration". A company that was effectively bankrupt, had the weirdest OS I have ever used, and the worst office support systems I've had the misfortune of trying to use, was the only domestic candidate. Yes, it did check the boxes in the procurement process, but everyone knew it was never going to happen.

Interoperability, product maturity, familiarity, feature completeness, quality etc tends to win out.

I think we have to realize that this has almost nothing to do with our political leaders and everything to do with our inability to create software businesses in Europe. We need to figure that bit out. And perhaps this is the kick in the behind we needed to get our act together.
by artahian | 2026-02-03 18:57:45+00:00
A lot of this is still work in progress, but the key idea is that the framework and the cloud environment have to work together for this, because what you have in the current version of the code has to be compared with what the environment has before the deployment.

We don't automatically generate migration code - there's a set of structured mapping / guardrails, so for example if you add a new field without marking it as optional, you should get a warning/error when deploying it on an environment with existing data that has old records without that field set.

Modelence also has built-in support for user-defined migration scripts for more complex cases, but in these simpler cases we will be adding easy mappings with existing patterns, for example "set the field to X as the default value for all existing data".

Our focus here is the guardrails rather than the migration itself - LLMs today (especially Opus) are smart enough to figure out how to do the migration, but the guardrails make sure they don't miss it under any circumstances.
by anon291 | 2026-02-03 18:58:14+00:00
And who is the largest contributor to ffmpeg? These sorts of things are so silly. By and large, open source software is worked on by companies who are paying contributors because the project provides them some value. Most of these are American companies, which means they exert control, whether you like it or not.

In the case of ffmpeg, about a decade ago, I worked at a company who made substantial contributions to it, and employed many significant contributors. You guys live in fantasy land.

Linux is also an American thing. The benevolent-dictator-for-life of Linux lives in Portland, OR. Intel (also in Portland mostly) is one of the largest contributors, along with AMD. We can go on and on. this is obviously going to be the case when the main CPU vendors are American.
by vercaemert | 2026-02-03 18:58:48+00:00
I'd encourage you to try the -codex family with the highest reasoning.

I can't comment on Opus in CC because I've never bit the bullet and paid the subscription, but I have worked my way up to the $200/month Cursor subscription and the 5.2 codex models blow Opus out of the water in my experience (obviously very subjective).

I arrived at making plans with Opus and then implementing with the OpenAI model. The speed of Opus is much better for planning.

I'm willing to believe that CC/Opus is truly the overall best; I'm only commenting because you mentioned Cursor, where I'm fairly confident it's not. I'm basing my judgement on "how frequently does it do what I want the first time".
by alexsmirnov | 2026-02-03 18:58:50+00:00
I did create and actively use a similar tool, but with different purpose: configure AI tools for each team member to use the same code style and architecture guides across projects. It includes:
- build docker images for claude code and opencode dev containers.
- creates custom MCP server that works as a proxy and combines several tools into a single one ( for example, web search, fetch, and context7 tools exposed as a single "web_research" that invokes custom code to answer question )
- copy code style, documentation, and best practice rules for technologies used in our projects
- deploys a bunch of helper scripts useful for development
- configure agents, skills, hooks, and commands to use those rules. Configuration changed per "mode" : documentation, onboarding, code review, and web development all have different settings.
- run AI tools in docker container with limited permissions
- feedback tool to generate session report, that is used for automatic evaluation and prompt optimization.

This came out of necessity, as active using of AI assistants in uncontrollable way significantly degraded code quality. The goal is to enforce the same development workflow across team
This is internal tool. If someone interesting, I can create a public repo from it
by cosmic_cheese | 2026-02-03 18:58:51+00:00
A full rebuild might be throwing out the baby with the bath water. As someone who’s been using it since it was known as Project Builder, bugs seem mostly concentrated in the XIB/Storyboard editor (formerly known as a interface Builder), SwiftUI live preview, and SwiftPM package resolve.

In a project with code-only UIKit, only a smattering of SwiftUI for small components, and minimal dependencies, Xcode isn’t too bad of an experience and I’d say comparable to and in some ways better than Android Studio (that localization XML editor, not mention Gradle… ugh).
by keeda | 2026-02-03 18:59:10+00:00
Oh for sure, as a non-white, bearded person I've had more than my fair share of "random" screenings!

My dad, with similar features, had the additional (mis)fortune of several work trips to the Middle East and China on his passport. He was "randomly" selected pretty much every time on his US trips, until about ~10 years ago.

Hmmm, now I wonder. Like most other people I had suspected that the "random" screenings of people fitting a certain profile were just biases of the agents creeping in. But could it be, given that the whole process is rather public in view of the rest of the people in line, this is also part of that security theater... i.e. maybe the agents are sometimes pandering to the biases of the travellers?
by kstrauser | 2026-02-03 18:59:12+00:00
My first reading was that you were disagreeing with the bits about email worrying about compatibility, and that part seemed reasonably true to me.

As to the other bits, I think even in the uucp era, email was mostly internal, by volume of mail sent, even though you could clearly talk to remote sites if everything was set up correctly. It was capable of being a worldwide communication system. I bet the local admins responsible for monitoring the telephone bill preferred to keep that in check, though.
by moron4hire | 2026-02-03 18:59:39+00:00
My IT department is convinced these "ChInEsE cCcP mOdElS" are going to exfiltrate our entire corporate network of its essential fluids and vita.. erh, I mean data. I've tried explaining to them that it's physically impossible for model weights to make network requests on their own. Also, what happened to their MitM-style, extremely intrusive network monitoring that they insisted we absolutely needed?
by joe_mamba | 2026-02-03 18:59:59+00:00
>but no regulations is certainly not better than some regulations,

I never meant such a thing.

>assuming the people in government positions have the actual best interests of the country in mind

They don't.

>Deregulation specifically led to the sub-prime mortgage crisis and the current situation, not the existence of regulations itself.

Deregulation is also a form of regulation because the government is the one that removes the previous safeguards put in place. And Clinton was the one responsible for the sub-prime mortgage deregulation.
by Imustaskforhelp | 2026-02-03 19:00:04+00:00
Hey website creator here! Can you elaborate? Do you mean like going through only the specific unique-words?

That would be interesting. This might be more helpful to the people who are interested in finding people's the unique grammatical words they used

So do note that this comment is written by me (a human hi!:D) but the following sql query isn't.

SELECT
by AS username,
sum(length(splitByWhitespace(text))) AS total_words,
-- Extract words, clean punctuation, and count distinct values
uniqExact(
arrayJoin(
arrayFilter(
x -> x != '',
arrayMap(x -> lower(replaceRegexpAll(x, '[^a-zA-Z]', '')), splitByWhitespace(text))
)
)
) AS unique_words,
-- Calculate diversity: What percentage of their vocabulary is unique
round((unique_words / total_words) * 100, 2) AS diversity_score
FROM hackernews_history
WHERE type = 'comment'
AND deleted = 0
AND lower(by) = lower('NooneAtAll3')
GROUP BY by

№ username total_words unique_words diversity_score1

NooneAtAll3 942372 4752 0.5

Hope it helps :D Have a nice day (still written by human, alright I am going to sleep right now. Had a lot of fun today with this posts/running random sql queries :D)

Good night! This might be my last comment today before sleep! I will be busy tomorrow so I might not be able to see any interesting ideas that people might have here to run it.
by contingencies | 2026-02-03 19:00:19+00:00
For discrete designs rather than integrated chip design there are some less formal type systems already build in to KiCad, for example using net classes, footprint categories, and pin counts to limit parameter selection. I suspect other design tools are similar.

Strong type systems require zero exception domains, but unfortunately physics isn't a zero exception domain in the way software is: there's always an oddball requirement which has to cater to differences in supply chain, production process or partner, final assembly, testing, operating environment, etc.

In my experience what you tend to see emerge in thornier domains are multiple overlapping systems of relaxed formality that get the job done while retaining a comprehensibility through reduced cognitive load. That is, "useful approximations". In discrete design we can view the standard set of formalisms (symbols, footprints, netlists, etc.) as relaxed type system examples.

Each have issues. Each differ somewhat over time and package. Yet they are still how things are usually designed after decades of evolution, and I don't see that changing for manual discrete designs beyond relative triviality any time soon.

In fact, on zeitgeist I'd wager the problems people are seeing trying to march beyond the status quo in to AI designed schematics, board layouts and firmware are analogous to those issues your prospective type system is going to have problems exhaustively formalizing.

While I have no experience designing custom silicon, the apparently intended domain here,but I am skeptical enough to wager it is free of the thorny problems we see in discrete electronics: that is, physics doesn't let you select arbitrarily without vengeance, so treating your system as a simple system of lego bricks (albeit 'guaranteed type-compatibile') is never going to yield reliable results. Specific decisions probably require multi-disciplinary insights across thermal models, EMI/radiation, timing and power, not just "the plug fits". Further complicating change is social friction and time friction. I'd wager the stronger designers are deeply invested in current tooling (hell, they probably wrote it) and not time-rich enough to try something new because "academia". Their projects are expensive and often set to difficult schedules.

Good luck changing the world! Perhaps building enhanced type systems specifically targeting the AI design domain would be the best approach, because uptake will be quicker than humans? Maybe consider joining one of the AI-designs-my-board startups.
by Y-bar | 2026-02-03 19:00:21+00:00
> EU doesn't care about small / midsized companies because they don't have enough income to bother with.

I am so very tempted to quote you sarcastically using mixed upper lower case text for how incredible wrong you are. Yes, there is less enforcement than I want of GDPR, but any insinuation that they do not bother is a lie.

Here is your proof:

https://www.enforcementtracker.com/
by zephen | 2026-02-03 19:00:38+00:00
> 1024 bearing near ubiquitous was only the case in the 90s or so

More like late 60s. In fact, in the 70s and 80s, I remember the storage vendors being excoriated for "lying" by following the SI standard.

There were two proposals to fix things in the late 60s, by Donald Morrison and Donald Knuth. Neither were accepted.

Another article suggesting we just roll over and accept the decimal versions is here:

https://cacm.acm.org/opinion/si-and-binary-prefixes-clearing...

This article helpfully explains that decimal KB has been "standard" since the very late 90s.

But when such an august personality as Donald Knuth declares the proposal DOA, I have no heartburn using binary KB.

https://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~knuth/news99.html
by pjdesno | 2026-02-03 19:01:03+00:00
I had a computer architecture prof (a reasonably accomplished one, too) who thought that all CS units should be binary, e.g. Gigabit Ethernet should be 931Mbit/s, not 1000MBit/s.

I disagreed strongly - I think X-per-second should be decimal, to correspond to Hertz. But for quantity, binary seems better. (modern CS papers tend to use MiB, GiB etc. as abbreviations for the binary units)

Fun fact - for a long time consumer SSDs had roughly 7.37% over-provisioning, because that's what you get when you put X GB (binary) of raw flash into a box, and advertise it as X GB (decimal) of usable storage. (probably a bit less, as a few blocks of the X binary GB of flash would probably be DOA) With TLC, QLC, and SLC-mode caching in modern drives the numbers aren't as simple anymore, though.
by quadrifoliate | 2026-02-03 19:01:29+00:00
> This is an extremely naive way to put it. US tech is much more developed because of money infusion even on companies that take 10/20 years to get productive.

Not sure if this is aimed at the immediate parent comment or mine, but I agree completely. US tech is developed due to the unique VC ecosystem, but in my opinion EU governments have lagged behind on setting up their own ecosystem (VC or otherwise) that would create equivalently sized and capable companies.

I also don't understand what the parent means by OSS being "owned" by the US. That ownership is not meaningful due to many/all of the licenses; and there are many meaningful EU OSS contributions.
by forrestthewoods | 2026-02-03 19:01:38+00:00
Who cares about AI’s embedded in IDEs? Here’s the tooling I need

* text editor with intellisense
* build system
* visual debugger
* CLI coding agent

It’s totally fine if those four things are different. In fact I actually probably prefer them to be different. Having an all-in-one IDE is a complete and total non-goal.

People have historically confused the first three as needing to be a single IDE. This has always been wrong. The number of people who think you can’t debug with Visual Studio if the exe wasn’t built from a .sln is shocking. They’re all independent!
by paddy_m | 2026-02-03 19:01:46+00:00
That's a great idea, and I was just thinking about how it would pair with self hosted CI of some type.

Basically what I would want is write a commit (because I want to commit early and often) then run the lint (and tests) in a sandboxed environment. if they pass, great. if they fail and HERAD has moved ahead of the failing commit, create a "FIXME" branch off the failure. back on main or whatever branch head was pointed at, if tests start passing, you probably never need to revisit the failure.

I want to know about local test failures before I push to remote with full CI.

automatic branching and workflow stuff is optional. the core idea is great.
by aniforprez | 2026-02-03 19:01:53+00:00
Correct me if I'm wrong but lefthook doesn't run its hooks exclusively on the staged changes IIRC. pre-commit, and prek by extension, have a process to stash the unstaged changes using git and running the code only on the staged files. Last I used it, lefthook ran on every file regardless of git status. This annoyed me because I'd have a few stray files that were not ready to be checked in or tracked that would trigger failures in lefthook. At the time this also made some hooks run slower since it would run on every single file but I think most linters have become significantly faster now.
by rasikjain | 2026-02-03 19:02:10+00:00
Location: Greater New York (US Citizen)

Remote: Yes (Remote Only)

Willing to relocate: No

About: I am a Gen-AI/ML Full-Stack Software Engineer delivering scalable, and secure solutions that integrate modern web development with data-driven insights. I’ve applied AI techniques to enhance products — from data preprocessing, building predictive models to integrating LLMs and RAG architectures into applications. Focused on implementing AI-driven features such as natural language querying, intelligent summarization, and contextual insights generation.

Technologies:

• AI/ML : AI Agents ㆍ LLM ㆍ RAG Pipelines ㆍ Langchain ㆍ VectorDB ㆍ Pinecone ㆍ Python ㆍ NumPy ㆍ Pandas ㆍ Matplotlib ㆍ scikit-learn ㆍ Tensorflow ㆍ NLTK ㆍ Jupyter ㆍ Streamlit

• Web & Frontend : React ㆍ Next.js ㆍ Node.js ㆍ TypeScript ㆍ JavaScript ㆍ Redux ㆍ Express.js ㆍ Tailwind CSS ㆍ GraphQL ㆍ MongoDB ㆍ Firebase

• Backend: Node.js ㆍ Rest API, C# ㆍ Web API ㆍ Asp.Net MVC ㆍ Lumen

• Databases: SQL Server ㆍ PostgreSQL ㆍ MySQL ㆍ MongoDB ㆍ Redis ㆍ CouchDB

• Cloud / DevOps: AWS ㆍ Azure ㆍ GCP ㆍ Docker ㆍ IAM ㆍ RDS ㆍ Aurora ㆍ DynamoDB ㆍ Serverless Functions

• Packages & Tools: Figma ㆍ Chart.js ㆍ D3.js ㆍ Git ㆍ Jenkins ㆍ Keycloak ㆍ Retool

Email: jainrasik [at] gmail.com

Resume/CV: https://www.rasikjain.com/resume/

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rasikjain/

GitHub: https://github.com/rasikjain

Stack Overflow: https://stackoverflow.com/users/1993944/rasik-jain
by AuthAuth | 2026-02-03 19:02:29+00:00
Doubt. Its always like this in projections and never in reality. This article seems completely off compared whats coming out in reports. China has consistently lied about emissions, capacity and total generation %. They can get away with it because western reporting takes a year or two to catch up and can only estimate. This report cites CarbonBrief which is grossly pro China thinktank who grades China on a completely different curve. A western country will actually reduce total emissions and get criticized while China can increase emissions slightly less than the last year and the article reads like they've just cut emissions significantly. Example that took less than 5s to find https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-worlds-biggest-historic...
The US is not the worlds biggest polluter, that would be China who pollutes more than the next 6 biggest polluters combined and who's all time pollution has over taken the total output from Europe and the US in under 50 years.

China using renewable capacity as a measurement is misleading. Solar/wind dont generate constantly while coal does. So they're still having majority of their energy generated by coal which produces a ton of emissions. The article also tries to suggest that Solar is displacing coal but its not, solar is reducing the rate coal grows but new coal plants are still being built at insane rates and coal usage is still going up. When you're producing as much emissions as China is there is no excuse to be increasing CO2 emissions, its destroying our planet simple as.

This is just a classic paid china greenwashing piece IMO. I've been reading these exact opinions since 2018 all the while sitting and watching emissions double. You can say their renewable rollout is impressive(it is) without painting a false reality.