skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This brings back good old memories. Sublime was my editor from 2010 until 2016, when I switched to VS Code. Eventually, I got hooked on Neovim, and I still use it to this day since I can't live without Vim motions anymore.

But I built dozens of websites using Sublime, so in a way, it helped me earn $300k.
Rust Is Not a Functional Language
You get a LOT in return from that, think about how much you benefit from food and other goods made in those countries. Such an ignorant comment.
That's great to hear. I remember Simone Giertz breaking out the bad news to her followers and sounding no less serious than when she was talking about her own brain surgery.

My former co-worker got COVID twice, as preventive measures didn't fit into his moral framework, and the second time resulted in a mild case of long COVID. I'm saying "mild" as he was not bedridden, but the cognitive decline was noticeable.

Long COVID is no joke and seriously affect one's work as well private life.
> idunno, as a professional web dev since 1998, I don't understand why Google, Apple and Mozilla are trying so hard to make the web browser like a complete OS (I technically understand why, I just think it's ridiculous)

I am not a web developer but I completely agree with you. To me, adding more complex points of failure in humongous piles of code that we absolutely need to run in a modern life is not a great risk assessment. It’s like we never learnt from the security issues with the JVM.
I installed that. Spent 15 minutes trying to get it to work. No joy :(
Heh - exactly - the only truly easy character name that has always stuck in my mind was from "Snow Crash", I mean - who can forget "Hiro Protagonist"...?
I wouldn't say Python is good _at_ vectorization so much as good _with_ it. It's also good with AI, web systems, etc, as a result of its "play well with others" philosophy, which pragmatically accepted from the start that no one language could be best for all purposes.

One of the best improvements to Python's memory model was extending it to allow sensible access to blobs of memory containing regular structures such as vectors and matrices, making it relatively easy to interface with and control already-available, well-tried, highly-optimised algorithms.
It's not that it sucks to have this brought up, it's that the people who do are pretty consistently dismissive and infantilising about it. Naturally, folks that this happens to develop an aversion to people that say the same thing for the millionth time. It's not novel, it's not interesting (in that it never leads anywhere novel either) and it's frequently hostile.
Irrelevant since it's all closed anyway.

Who cares if they claimed they trained it using only a paper cup and two paper-clips. Their model works exactly as well as it works, and you're not reproducing their work either way.
It was definitely the fact it was Windows-first, IIS-first and smelled of Enterprise Software (i.e. Not Cool(tm).) mono was workable but second tier, though I feel it did help convince MS that the dotnet project is worth pursuing.

Today I'm running a home asisstant with a side service written in dotnet on a raspberry pi 4 raspbian in docker containers. If it didn't advertise the dotnet version in the logs I'd never know.
OpenAI has evidence that DeepSeek distilled OpenAI model after illegal access
> There is a place between "everything is impossible" and "everything is possible" that works better for getting things done.

Exactly, and we know for sure that Boom are definitely NOT in that place, how?
My napkin math says the surface gravity would be around 30 m/s2.

I'm not looking forward to a visit. Maybe it has a large moon like Earth. If it is in the same proportion as ours, the moon might even be friendly to humans.
Oh, my God, I actually wrote some code in Fortran 2 back in 1969! It's certainly a much better language now!
You can literally see ADHD in a brain scan, especially if you contrast it with after someone has taken the proper medication for it. This isn't some sort of witchcraft, it's a physical thing that's measurable.
Also, the volunteering stuff we had was mostly related to helping uni organise events and so on.

So we were unpaid labor.
Aren't these details are mostly irrelevant? Can you name one additional requirement introduced with TTDSG or TDDDG which wasn't covered by the GDPR already?
https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/spectrum.02537-22
Qwen2.5-Max: The Next Leap in AI Innovation
Here's a great recent, very dense video, almost exclusively about non-state censorship :

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B6GWoJTDttU (fr)
I want to believe DeepSeek R1 is legit… but the more details emerge, the more it feels like something isn’t right.

The claim that R1 was trained for under $6M on 2,048 H800 GPUs always seemed suspicious. Efficient training techniques can cut costs, sure—but when OpenAI, Google, and Meta are all burning hundreds of millions to reach similar benchmarks, it’s hard to accept that DeepSeek did it for pennies on the dollar. Then Alexandr Wang casually drops that they actually have 50,000 H100 GPUs… what happened to that “low-cost” narrative? If this is true, it's not efficiency—it’s just access to massive hidden compute.

The stolen OpenAI data theory is another red flag. OpenAI researchers have been hit by multiple security breaches in the last few years, and now we have a former OpenAI engineer found dead under very weird circumstances. Coincidence? Maybe. But corporate espionage in AI isn’t some sci-fi plot—it’s very real, and China has been caught running large-scale operations before (Google exfiltration cases, the ASML trade secret theft, etc.).

And then there’s the CCP-backed propaganda angle. This part is almost too predictable—China hypes up a “homegrown” breakthrough, gets state media to push it as “proof” they’ve surpassed the West, then quietly blocks foreign scrutiny. Lei pointed out that DeepSeek won’t even let U.S. phone numbers register. Why? If R1 is truly open-source and transparent, why limit access? We’ve seen this before with ByteDance, Alibaba, etc.—government-approved success stories that follow a controlled narrative.

But despite all that skepticism… R1 is real, and the performance numbers do exist. Whether they’re running stolen training data or smuggled GPUs, they’ve built something that competes with OpenAI’s o1. That’s still impressive. The question is how much of this is a real technological leap vs. how much is state-backed positioning and/or cutting corners.

So what happens next?

If DeepSeek is serious, they need outside audits—actual transparency, full datasets, external verification. Not just another “trust us” moment.
The U.S. needs better export control enforcement… we’re seeing massive loopholes if China can stockpile 50K H100s despite all the restrictions.
AI labs (OpenAI, Anthropic, etc.) need better security. If OpenAI’s data really did leak, this won’t be the last time.
I don’t think R1 itself is a scam, but the surrounding story feels curated, opaque, and suspiciously convenient. Maybe DeepSeek has built something remarkable, but until they open the books, I can’t take their claims at face value.
I see a lot of posts, articles, etc... stating that people are surprised by the complexity of a cyber attack or scam. It seems that most people haven't yet learnt that this is a full blown industry targeting countless businesses, institutions and individuals 24/7, not just some script kiddies in their bedroom. There are office blocks full of trained professionals with sophisticated tools working to compromise digital security and manipulate human nature to gain access to accounts, data and funds. Everyone needs to be adopting a form of zero trust or trust but verify to every digital interaction and every use of technology.
Try this: https://archive.md/20250129074531/https://www.reuters.com/te...
So OpenAI thinks ingesting everything they can get their hands on is fair use, but a competitor ingesting their stuff is IP theft? You reap what you sow.
The opposite is also true.

I've seen the opposite happen maaaaany times, but I have never had what you describe happen that I can remember. Coding, if done top down, will find the real problems really fast. Discussions don't have this property of touching reality.

Discussing a problem is like theology.

Coding it is like science.

One involves thinking real hard, the other involves hard reality.
Ah yes, Web Components. Famous for having exactly zero tradeoffs and excellent dev experience.
Optimization Algorithms for Your Career
> Or you have to accept that broken inconsistent data is a fact of life that can happen at any time

You have to accept this anyway. Data can be broken and inconsistent in so many different ways that you cannot protect against every possible way. People will type the wrong thing in sometimes, in ways you never expected. Someone pasting text into the wrong field is just as "broken and inconsistent" as an ID field pointing to a nonexistent entity. How important those errors are to the business depends on how important those columns are, not whether they're an ID vs. text. And as another person pointed out, data always ends up split/replicated among multiple systems anyway.

> Also, you will limit yourself to exactly one application using the database, because otherwise you will have to duplicate your constraint logic in any application precisely.

Layer your architecture? Expose an API? Microservices? There are all sorts of ways around this problem.

Yes, it makes it harder for people to just log into your database and run their own SQL queries. Sometimes that may be politically hard to sell. But I heard this same argument in college when private variables were introduced: wait, but, what if someone wants to directly manipulate private variables of class members? That is not a virtue. It's perfectly reasonable to assert that some internals are simply private implementation details. You are reserving your right to change those details in the future as the application changes. You are separating the details of your persistence layer from the public interface that you're exposing. That is a virtue.
Ex-ownCloud devs seek new start at OpenCloud
> my main ST days were developing a JS application in the days before Typescript / Flow and the like, so all my work relied on my own memory, consistent naming, global search and cmd+p to open files.

Ohh the days where you could open a JS project, immediately understand what it did and make a quick fix.
Now it's 15 lines of imports, then one line of code that you have no idea what it does because you have to find what it actually does by digging 10 layers down in the import inception. Buf if you have a IDE you can tell by the type annotation that it's an EnterpriseJavaScriptBeanConstructorFactorFunctionIterator and by clicking ctrl+space you can see that it has four methods: .create() .read() .update() and .delete()
that is a horrible way to be treated by a doctor. In Germany you have free choice of your doctors. Although sometimes you have to wait quite a bit to get appointments...
I am not sure, but with a a European health insurance card you should be able to also go to doctors in other countries and be at least partially covered by your insurance.
No it doesn’t. Popular vote just thinks these are good qualities for their president. One of the failures of democracy is letting people vote themselves into an autocracy, and forgetting that democracy must not become the tyranny of a majority.
ztna+ can help here. VPN give access to entire network, with all the rubbish services sysadmins have laying around like unauthenticated smtp servers (sounds total shit but it happen everywhere.... need to send email notifications from all sorts of shit and no one wants to manage these accounts... sadstory..)
ztna+ will for users kind of seem like vpn, good protection,but it only give access to services the user is allowed to access, not the entire vpn network.

it help alot against these type of scenarios.

also, how fast is fast? you can scan an internal network on a single port in the blink of an eye, so if u don't have good network IDS/IPS internally, u will not really see the scan and it seems like someone 'knows the network in advance' because they scan it in like 2 seconds and based on results automatically run scripts etc. - it doesn't need to be knowledge gained in advance.

- monitor internal network properly, asif its external network.
- use ztna+ if you can afford such solution
- do regular audits for things like unauthenticated services and use these kind of incident to in a friendly manner educate sysadmins about risks of such services. they will usually understand it, especially after an incident. aslong as you bring it friendly with a good explanation, not some demanding attitude.

- use a lot of mail filtering... more is better. it can be a bit tedious. at my company we have more than 4 solutions to scan all email and attachements etc. , still stuff slip through, but not a lot...
- also scan outbound or 'local' email. (BEC fraud etc.)

- do good post-incident reviews and use learnings each time something happens (sounds obvious, but this is often omitted, the learnings are only kept within sec teams, or turnt into one-off remediations rather than process etc. )

edit: oh.. and also monitor for logon anomalies. a lot of solutions support this. e.g. a user logs in from a unique new ip - alert on it, or even block it. , that action depends a bit on what's normal, so here actually ML and such solutions are great.. but basic statistical analysis etc. can also help if u can't pay or create ml solution. (its not too hard to create really, basic models will suffice.)
It might achieve that goal, at the too-high expense of other things.
If only he hadn't been photographed standing next to Obama...
https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1602220-xi-jinping-winnie-th...
Maybe Sublime Text is good, but I refuse to pay for something as profane as a text editor. A decent editor (syntax highlighting, LSP, regex search, keybindings for the 21st century etc) needs to be part of every operarting system.

For me nowadays, Lapce is quickly growing on me.
> Those people have a severe lack of imagination, because they fail to see how much worse they can make it for themselves.

It's interesting that in this entire thread following my original comment, not one comment has defended Democrats by describing how they do good things and significantly help the public. Talk about a severe lack of imagination.

That the choice is always phrased in terms of harm reduction just proves my point about the duopoly and corruption. Why are better things never possible?
>>COVID causes chronic fatigue syndrome in some people. Because so many were affected (millions worldwide), it got its own nickname.

It already had a name - post-viral fatigue syndrome. It's happened after other viruses before.
Hassabis: "I've Been Driven My Whole Life to Build AI as the Ultimate Tool"
I’m talking about the typical crud biz app or startup codebase they the majority of us here slarp out.
EXO is also great for running the 6bit deepseek, plus it’s super handy to serve from all your devices simultaneously. If your dev team all has M3 Max 48gb machines, sharing the compute lets you all run bigger models and your tools can point at your local API endpoint to keep configs simple.

Our enterprise internal IT has a low friction way to request a Mac Studio (192GB) for our team and it’s a wonderful central EXO endpoint. (Life saver when we’re generally GPU poor)
Ask HN: Any downsides to using personal licenses at work?
I have a license to JetBrains Ultimate, Pinegrow, and a few other tools. Work won’t pay for these but I want to use this software on my work machine for work purposes. Assuming the software is licensed to make that okay (I.e. for JetBrains they can’t reimburse me) are there any cases where doing this led to the employer owning all IP produced with those tools, even if that was IP was made on my own machine for a side project?
My question is not a false dilemma. As the link you gave points out, a false dilemma starts with a false premise which limits the subject to two absolutes when in-fact multiple exist. My question has no false premise, it's simply asking, if given this scenario, which would you choose and why. I am not saying that in reality you only have those options. The original comment setup the contrast of USA and China, so my question was a way to elucidate more about that contrast.
Sam Altman’s mask of pretending they are developing AI “for the good of humanity” continues to crumble.
Well, the planet is terraformed
Edge of space is a meme.
Consider the hardware realizable and efficient O(1) time complexity sorter
Sort up to some maximum number of items (N items) on a machine with N^2 processors: for each of the N items in the input array, which we assume are distinct, we will designate N-1 processors to the task of counting in parallel the number of times the item compares greater than another item. In parallel we obtain such counts for every item in the input array. Now we have only to place the N items in their proper order within the output array according to the counts, again this can be done in parallel. Call it what you will, I call it "alreadysort".
> The problem is that an "invalid state" is highly dependent on your perspective. A state that is invalid to use in one part of your codebase is perfectly valid in other parts. The ubiquity of "draft", "draft final", and "final" shows that humans want to represent "invalid states" all the time! Aren't you glad your IDE lets you represent invalid code? Okay, fine, that data is not ready for the annual submittal, but does that mean I'm really not allowed to save it at all?

It's perfectly possible to define a schema that can represent draft or incomplete data, syntactically invalid code (as a VARCHAR/TEXT), etc. while still also enforcing that a complete and valid domain object must be available when the record is in a non-draft state.

> Haven't you been 300 hours into the development of a system when suddenly someone springs on you, "Oh yeah, Bob has two bosses. Why should that be a problem?" And you're screaming internally, "Of course it's a problem! You assured me six months ago that everyone only has one supervisor, and now you're telling me this one guy has two!? This changes EVERYTHING!"

Schema updates and migrations should not be this difficult in any reasonably designed system.
So, it is like that, but it's also not. A couple decades ago, with the advent of GWASes, because of all the multiple testing that was going on, there was an agreed new p-value threshold p < 5e-8. This was to account for multiple testing going on (how that number came to be requires more explanation of LD + other things).

That is the minimum threshold. This study found that peak was at p < 1e-37 or so. But that is where the biological analysis begins. Unlike social scientists, we don't stop with the statistical correlation, we then go on to look at what we know about that gene, the type of mutation, if it's a loss or gain of function, what role that gene has in various tissues, etc. And mendelian randomization is another way to unpick the causal direction of effect.

Not to say this is the truth or causal, but it's a lot closer to causal than what you are implying.
> And if America isn’t the people, what exactly is it to you?

Not grandparent commenter, but I wanted to make the snark comment that maybe America is now just the blustering violence, at home and exported, and that even bullets are more protected than kids.
Your editorialized headline is false, misleading and technically not possible with only api access.
> we rarely see exploits

I can't think of an analogy that doesn't come off crass.

I posit the likelihood the morass that is webgpu not having exploitable bugs approaches 0 approximately 25 seconds after the first public release of the code, if not months prior.

Its only when one of two things occur that publishing happens, basically: intelligent frustration, and "for the lols".

Someone hits a bug and gets pissed that the authors of the libraries blame everyone but the library authors. When working around the bug discover its not just a bug. Warn devs. Sometimes responsible disclosure means a quiet fix and then disclosure, but usually it means "here's the exploit they don't care ig"

If there's not enough curious people poking things, exploitable stuff could remain hidden too long.
The model works, sure, but that's not the point. OpenAI and others can replicate any technical advances for future models moving forward. DeepSeek R1 will be "outdated" in 6-12 months and be replaced by other, more powerful models for sure. If DeepSeek's success is based on stolen data, they won't be able to replicate their success as for sure such security gaps will now get closed.

There have been talks about a laissez-faire attitude regarding cybersecurity at OpenAI for a long time.... but this is surely coming to an end now. Same at Google.
If I have, would you change your opinion?

Because this feels like you are making an appeal to authority in order to reject any criticism, when what I'm cautioning that there's a long history here.

Have you carefully examined the literature and verified the positive results are replicable?

I agree with Sagan's phrase "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence". I remember the excitement after the Fleischmann–Pons announcement. I knew physicists at my college who were eagerly trying to replicate it. They failed. So did just about everyone else.

At this point, practical cold fusion is an extraordinary claim.

Yes, I've seen papers since Fleischmann-Pons where "contributors reporting positive results", but upon further examination they ended up being errors, like detecting helium presumably caused by fusion events, when it turned out to be a leak from another experiment in the building.

We know hot fusion experiments report positive results, but it's still a long way from those positive results to a working hot fusion power plant. A Farnsworth–Hirsch fusor reports positive results, but cannot be used for commercial energy production.

A Crookes radiometer uses sunlight to power a device. It is not an economically competitive power source.

If cold fusion is to be a viable alternative to fossil fuels, it needs to be economically competitive to wind + solar + batteries.

No cold fusion experiments have demonstrated that this is possible. Even in this letter, the strongest claim is merely "one at least confirming claims of genuineness by powering a device from its output", without details about who did it, how much it costs, or how much energy it produces.

And the history of "free energy devices" shows scam upon scam upon scam devices, including cleverly hidden power sources, along with its own free energy suppression conspiracy theory.

It's clear that cold fusion at this point requires extraordinary evidence to show that it's not merely a variation of the free energy device contrarians.
As a passive hotel owner and active programmer, I can confirm it's always been the case. In the hotels business, getting customer requests, invoices and refund requests seemingly out of nowhere isn't too uncommon. Receptionists, who have the authority handle customer cancellations and refunds, but also package / documents receipt for them, frequently fall for the slightly more laborious scams, in spite of the safeguards in place.

The phishing emails we get at my software dev job for security certification and pen testing pale in comparison to the actual effort being put in by scammers, who coordinate bookings with parcels and random invoices so that they tell a story, always targeting different shifts (almost never the same).
Source on weed being a "downer"? I think this is just your personal bias on weed and how it makes YOU feel. Weed doesn't slow heart rate or respiration like proper downers. The effects are almost always in the eye of the beholder. Being un productive or "baked" is not a given.