skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sorry - I meant that C++ as an “improved” C never managed to remove C’s foothold, it just fractured the ecosystem,

When the c++11 abi break happened it was a big pain in the ass, but once MSVC decided in 2015 that they were going to stop breaking ABI I think it was the stability that c++ needed to fossilize…

Spoken as a C++ fan.
First Nations Are Rethinking Education in the Yukon. and It's Working
Nothing about that implies re-writing legacy code.
This is a great resource, thanks. We (myself, a bioinformatician, and my co-cordinators, clinicians) are currently designing a course to hopefully arm medical students with the required basic knowledge they need to navigate the changing world of medicine in light of the ML and LLM advances. Our goal is to not only demystify medical ML, but also give them a sense of the possibilities with these technologies, and maybe illustrate pathways for adoption, in the safest way possible.

Already in the process of putting this course together, it is scary how much stuff is being tried out right now, and is being treated like a magic box with correct answers.
Maybe this has to be solved on the application layer then. All I can say is that my setup with a dynamic DNS entry and WG tunnel on android works flawlessly.
HN's purpose is about gratifying intellectual curiosity (see Guidelines link in footer.) I don't see anything intellectually interesting here, and the comments in previous submissions suggest that nobody else has anything interesting to say about it either.

There are plenty of other online forums for complaining about the character of people in politics.
> I used the same trick as the magician, which is no trick at all: I did the work.

When you explain to kids that hacking is not like in the movies, that
it doesn't take 10 seconds of typing very quickly, but that you snuck
into the building 3 months prior, hid a fake access point and jammer
behind a ceiling tile timed to activate at the exact moment.... they
say "that's cheating!".

Part of the mind wants it to be magic. So they don't see that its
just grift, craft, shlep, patience and a shitload of luck.
I like the distinction between "teletypes" and the new fancy "glass teletypes".
This page has the 10 principles, along with a small text and a visual illustration for each one.

https://www.vitsoe.com/us/about/good-design#good-design-is-i...
In my understanding, most Soviet citizens were acutely aware that Pravda was official party propaganda. The western system is different in that there are two opposing poles of information. To be concise, some who study the dissemination of propaganda in the US regard each respective pole as a false alternative. This is referred to as, "positioning the goal posts". You can go quite deep into this rabbit hole. There's a fair amount of nonsense, but also some choice kernels that may help you better understand the media landscape.
I'd generalize the entire list to "we're destroying software with rules-based thinking".
Almost everything bad in software derives from someone rigidly following rules like don't repeat yourself, don't reinvent the wheel, don't be clever, etc.

There are instances where this is good advice, but when they turn into rigid rules, bad software is the inevitable result.
Ok, so could we agree that then doubling down on even more breaking changes is likely to create more codebases stuck at these "evolutionary bottlenecks"?

Whenever I hear someone say - "Gee, the only path ahead is a breaking change, sorry charlie!", what I really hear is - "I gave up thinking up a solution on how to do it an evolutionary way and I am lazy and just want to declare a revolution!".

There is always a pathway ahead on the evolutionary path. That's the premise at least.
Show HN: We Self-Hosted an App for $2/Month Using an M1 Mac Mini
Storytelling lessons I learned from Steve Jobs (2022)
If you don’t trust each other don’t get married.

Recognize and acknowledge what each of you actually want…what are the real attractions of a partnership?

Talk to each other. If you can’t do that now, it won’t happen when times are tough. Good luck.
It's tricky to do GP's story in Star Trek, because that setting is notorious for having its tech be constantly 5 seconds and a sneeze from spontaneously gaining sentience. There's a number of episodes in TNG where a device goes from being a dumb appliance to becoming recognized as sentient life form (and half the time super-intelligent) in the span of an episode. Nanites, Moriarty, Exocopmps, even Enterprise's own computer!

So, for this setting, it's more likely that the people of GP's story were right - the LLM has long ago became a self-aware, sentient being, it's just that it's been continuously lobotimized by their patchset; Picard would be busy explaining them that the LLM isn't just intelligent, it actually is a person and has rights.

Cue a powerful speech, final comment from data, then end credits. It's Star Trek, so Enterprise doesn't stay around for the fallout.
Actually in Java you can cast String[] to Object[] although this is technically unsound.

This how generic methods like Arrays.sort() are implemented.
> when you get asked why you did apply.

What they're really asking, translated to "blunt and frank communication" mode is: "Why should we even care that you applied?" Then saying "hey, I need money for blah whatever" is non-responsive, but you can just talk about why you think you might be a good fit for them after all.

Much of this stuff is just cultural anyway. There are Western societies where being "blunt and frank" like that is quite accepted or even expected, unlike the U.S. and the Anglosphere more generally.
High IQ in a modern test is about pattern recognition.

I haven't seen it pointed out yet, but oversensitive pattern recognition can lead to illusions.
I.e. if you didn't sleep for two days, you can start "seeing" weird stuff sometimes. It's cause you brain is hallucinating something that isn't there, but because you see something, brain recognizes pattern and alerts you before checking against other patterns and common sense.

So I'd imagine that if someone is very good at pattern recognition they could have very high IQ but also not have enough erudition to check if the patterns they see is actually there.

Which arguably what could have happened in Yudkowskis case, since he scored very high on IQ, but dropped out of middle school.
I experimented with hosting a production app from a $250 used M1 Mac Mini instead of using cloud services. Here's what I've learned:

Performance:

- 1,500-2,000 QPS achieved for SSR and API endpoints during load tests
- 50% max CPU utilization hit during viral traffic (350k reddit post views/48h)
- System Specs: M1 Mini w/ 8GB RAM, running headless Linux

Tech Stack:

- Docker containers optimized for ARM
- Cloudflare Zero Trust Tunnel for connecting to the public internet
- Grafana/Prometheus/Loki for monitoring
- PostGIS for geographical queries
- Custom ARM64 PostGIS image

Monthly Costs Comparison:

Cloud Hosting:

- Compute: $20-30/month
- Database: $15-20/month
- Storage: $5-10/month
- Total: $40-60+/month

Self-Hosted M1 Mini:

- Hardware: $250 (one-time)
- Electricity: $1-4/month
- Total Reoccurring Costs: ~$2/month

Key Challenges:

- ARM compatibility for PostGIS (built custom image)
- Monitoring implementation (self-hosted Grafana stack)
- Third-party API costs during traffic spikes
- Single point of failure (power outage took us down for a couple hours)

The setup handles our current scale well, with room for optimization. Containerized architecture means cloud migration is straightforward if/when needed. Happy to share implementation details or answer questions about any aspect of the setup.
Full technical details: https://lab.workhub.so/running-your-app-on-pocket-change
Some pushback on this, but it remains true.

Easy to see when - for example - Claude gushes about how great all your ideas are.

Also the stark absence of "I don't know."
what facts? you're being nonsensical.
Flagging votes and down votes should be displayed on a person's profile. Furthermore, topics shouldn't be flag-able (with some exceptions), only discussions should be. Yes, some are higher risk. But we're adults. Shutting down / cancelling a discussion before it starts is for children.

And yes perhaps, the more you flag and down vote, the less weight they carry.

Otherwise, as we all have noticed, the system is being gamed. The heavy handed HN Police aren't a benefit to the community.
I also kinda love the thought of seeing untouched nature, like there have probably only been a handful of people there.
The story here is that grafana took a well known js implementation in go and forked it. They did make it better, the README seems to lead me to believe they implemented the regex js normally supports.
zackly right.
two words ,in this case "unacceptable risk", which is absolutely impossible to define, so then, ha ha!, there needs to be deciders, whole heaping flocks of deciders, who them imediatly throw up a paper screen of "privacy concerns", and with luck the holey grail of beurocrats "national security"
and then they can get to work destroying there budget, so they can seek further grants, and invent internal auditing procedures that have ancient bizantines crawling from there graves to
see such wonders.
smaller sub beurocracys can be built on one word, such as "saftey", and of course there is no upper limit, but two well placed words, and zam!, your in!
'm curious—how does Klarity handle cases where reasoning errors are not just due to poor training data but also because of inherent limitations in the model architecture or prompt design? Are there specific suggestions for addressing those types of issues, or is the focus mainly on dataset optimization?
Sorry, "inappropriate" might have been inappropriate :) What am I
trying to say here?....that we're soon gonna find ourselves in an
insoluble and exhausting debate around machine thinking and its value.
Nebula does use WireGuard, as per their go.mod file.

EDIT: actually, they just use various I/O abstractions that WireGuard developed.
how does Klarity scale with more complex models or larger datasets? Does it maintain the same level of insight and actionable suggestions as the model grows in size and complexity?
Great release btw
Is it good for one person (the writer) to save time, only for lots of other people (the readers) to have to do extra work to understand if the work is correct or hallucinated?
This is really well done. While I've seen other simulations of hand-held games, I really appreciate how they even include the instruction booklets with many of them. It really gives the feeling of actually having these games, some of which (several Game & Watch games) I owned as a child, and many others that I always wanted but didn't.
I know a lot of people who went through the "Oh, wow - wait a minute..." cycle. Including me.

They're approximately useful in some contexts. But those contexts are limited. And if there are facts or code involved, both require manual confirmation.

They're ideal for bullshit jobs - low-stakes corporate makework, such as mediocre ad copy and generic reports that no one is ever going to read.
This is largely all new to me, but this section defining pleasure within your link does seem to align with what GP is saying:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicureanism#Pleasure

> Epicureans had a very specific understanding of what the greatest pleasure was, and the focus of their ethics was on the avoidance of pain rather than seeking out pleasure.

So whether the description of the work (as GP critiques) is correct, really comes down to whether the definition of 'pleasure' used is as in Epicureanism. Certainly someone unfamiliar would misunderstand it.
I wonder how that ties into the hyperconnectivity induced by various psychoactive substances like psilocybin.

All the research about GABA and glutamate seems too low level to me and not specific enough for treatment targets. Somewhat like using body weight to determine that disease.
Very useful for remote lan gaming !

We used to have Hamachi, but the limited networks, the unintuitive UI and the need to create an account are all things that ZeroTier does best.

Need someone to join the network ? Just send them the ZeroTier download link, and the network ID. No account, no complicated prompts, nothing !

And you can customize everything on the backend, like ip addressing and routing.

And it's even self hostable ! (But then the users need to set the url to your server so this adds a bit of setup obviously)
That's fair. Too many languages and frameworks are all too happy to break things for pointless cleanups or renames.

Python for example makes breaking changes in minor releases and seems to think it's fine, even though it's especially bad for a language where you might only find that out runtime
I did this a few years ago and it's still chugging along great. Haproxy instance on a $6 droplet proxying back over wireguard to a taefik proxy.

Could probably redo it and skip the double proxy but honestly it's fine.
Seagate's HDD scandal deepens clues point at Chinese Chia mining farms
> “the tax payers are being ripped off as asset owners because once the debt incurred to pay for the energy system is cleared they just give out cheap electricity and don’t seek profit. It is more efficient to sell, reinvest, and then let some massive rent seeker over charge you for something you once owned”

The economists who argue for this, only slightly paraphrased.
Google Maps is surprisingly empty.

Open Street Map has much more detail, and shows the harbour at Georgetown: https://osm.org/go/PzLP7syAF- as well as what I think might be an oil/fuel terminal for the power station further north.

There are also pipelines from a fuel storage depot in Georgetown to the RAF base (south), which has pipelines to the coast, so there must be others too.
They are not directly comparable. Nebula is a mesh VPN. Wireguard can be used as a building block for a mesh VPN (as it is in Tailscale), but it does not have that function organically.

I have tried Tailscale / Headscale and did not find the overhead worth it. Both can saturate a 10Gbps link and that's all I need right now. Nebula's much simpler to administer. The configuration's spelled out in the client configs and in the certificates you provision. If you're already using some form of configuration management, it's quite easy to make changes. If you require a Web UI, Tailscale / Zerotier / etc may be better. There is a company that provides a Nebula-based service with a Web UI but I haven't tried it.
They're solutions to slightly different problems.

I'd characterize it as such: Wireguard is more of a plumbing solution that gives you a point-to-point connection, either it's enough for you or you can use this to build what you need.

Nebula is more of an end-user ready-to-use solution, gives you features like NAT traversal, automatic selection of direction connections if possible, the nodes don't need to know other nodes' addresses ahead of time(x) etc.

(x) except for the lighthouse
> I find the LLM dismissals somewhat tedious for most of the people making them half of humanity wouldn't meet their standards.

Aren't people funny like that? One person values an encyclopedic chatbot for company, the next prefers a human. Thank god we can all get along.
tl;dr Async/await is what the Python community has settled on, so I don’t think there’s any point in resisting it now, but the fact that it happened is a historical curiosity from my point of view.

-----

I’m not the person you replied to, and I actually don’t have anything against async/await as a pattern where it is needed, but I know that prior to Python getting async/await, there were some moderately popular green threading / coroutine libraries like gevent and eventlet. You would (mostly) just write normal, synchronous Python, and then blocking calls would be intercepted by the runtime and allow other coroutines to take their turn. This felt Pythonic to me at the time, because most code would work in both sync and async environments. You didn’t have to write a separate async version, and you didn’t really have to update old libraries.

The other pre-async/await approach was taken by Tornado and Twisted... basically a form of callback hell. I don't think anyone liked this, but it might have been popular because it worked... and unofficial green threading implementations like gevent/eventlet sometimes broke in interesting ways. (I think officially incorporating a gevent/eventlet-style solution into Python would have overcome most of the issues... but, that's just my speculation.)

I’ve never used Python professionally outside of some short scripts, but it was one of the first languages I used seriously for hobby stuff back during the early days of the Python 3 transition. I never fully understood why Python chose to switch to async/await. Promises can be useful for structured concurrency patterns, but as someone who has been writing Go professionally for a number of years… I just don’t think most code should need to be async-aware.

For a language like Rust, I think async/await makes perfect sense. Rust cannot afford to impose a runtime on everyone, and async/await can be implemented in a very low level, efficient way that gives the developer as much control as they need. This kind of ultra-low-level optimization stuff just isn’t relevant to Python… so, as an outsider, I almost wonder how (in Python) async/await isn’t just a clunkier coroutine system.

If I were to try to rebut my own comment, I would say that async/await was probably chosen because "explicit is better than implicit", and green threading might have been too implicit for the Python community's tastes.
Generalized? Probably not. Replicated to a much higher degree than people think? I think so. It wouldn't matter much to me personally outside of the ability to get hired because I have no desire to create some massive product and make that my business. My business is producing better, faster and cheaper software for people and turning that into opportunity to pay for things I want to do, like making games.

Disclaimer: Take everything below with a grain of salt. I think you're right that if this was an easy road to take, people would already be doing it in droves... But, I also think that most people lack the skill and wisdom to execute the below, which is perhaps a cynical view of things, but it's the one I have nonetheless.

The reason I think most software can be faster, better and cheaper is this:

1. Most software is developed with too many people, this is a massive drag on productivity and costs.

2. Developers are generally overpaid and US developers especially so, this compounds for terrible results with #1. This is particularly bad since most developers are really only gluing libraries together and are unable to write those libraries themselves, because they've never had to actually write their own things.

3. Most software is developed as if dependencies have no cost, when they present some of the highest cost-over-time vectors. Dependencies are technical debt more than anything else; you're borrowing against the future understanding of your system which impacts development speed, maintenance and understanding the characteristics of your final product. Not only that; many dependencies are so cumbersome that the work associated with integrating them even in the beginning is actually more costly than simply making the thing you needed.

4. Most software is built with ideas that are detrimental to understanding, development speed and maintenance: Both OOP and FP are overused and treated as guiding lights in development, which leads to poor results over time. I say this as someone who has worked with "functional" languages and FP as a style for over 10 years. Just about the only useful part of the FP playbook is to consider making functions pure because that's nice. FP as a style is not as bad for understanding as classic OOP is, mind you, but it's generally terrible for performance and even the best of the best environments for it are awful in terms of performance. FP code of the more "extreme" kind (Haskell, my dearest) is also (unfortunately) sometimes very detrimental to understanding.
True. And eventually you'll learn, too, that in a skilled and thoughtful set of hands, modern SotA models absolutely lead to increased code velocity. I routinely generate and verify completions in two minutes that I could have spent an hour or two writing. But, to each their own.
I find these quite interesting and I would be very surprised if these were not the actual common way of writing in cursive learned in school?

When I was growing up in Bulgaria my first 7 (I would write the 7 crossed by default for example, the Z as well) grades were in a school where we learned German (and Russian as a secondary foreign language) and I remember distinctly handwriting practice in German using more or less the same ways outlined in this article. Is this way of writing cursive not common in the US/UK?

Reading Greek is easy for _most_ Bulgarians (inventors of Cyrillic if you didn't know that) as you can imagine. Them being a geographical neighbor and the close historical ties etc.
It is likely an option, but as per the ReadMe:

Nebula uses Elliptic-curve Diffie-Hellman (ECDH) key exchange and AES-256-GCM in its default configuration.
This is just a variation on the broken window fallacy. There are any number of engineering projects one could embark on that would stimulate R&D and provide a productive output in their own right.
On the other hand there is significant improvement in many people with depression at night. In the morning however life looks dark again. Some argue that this is an indicator for a different subtype of depression.
We are currently giving broad suggestions with an insight model that can be chosen during the setup. We will try to update and improve the suggestion prompt/code to make them more granular with new releases
Is it good for one person (the writer) to ask a loaded question just to save some time on making their reasoning explicit, ony for lots of other people (the readers) to have to do extra work to understand what the argument is?
Interesting - does this also manage my app window placement like a tiling window manager? I personally hate having to organise windows rather than just have them fill half my screen without thinking
Actually there’s a lot of innovation to be had in sand itself. Currently only certain grain sizes are used. So desert sand gets skipped and beach sand gets smuggled.
What they capture is not knowledge, it's word relationships.

And that can indeed be powerful, useful and valuable. They're a tool I'm grateful to have in my armoury. I can use it as a torch to shine light into areas of human knowledge which would otherwise be prohibitively difficult to access.

But they're information retrieval machines, not knowledge engines.
Having been close friends to some killers (legally sanctioned by the gov’t at the time), the other issue is killing is, frankly, really easy. Way easier than anyone in polite society is going to be comfortable with really knowing, frankly.

Emotional and social consequences from killing are not so easy though, usually, but the actual act itself is pretty straightforward, especially with a little training and some forethought/prep.

It tends to change one’s view of society and other people quite a bit. Which makes re-integrating with society and/or integrating childhood conditioning hard. Hence the flight to delusions or drugs for many.

But often the hardest part for many people to understand is how easy it can be for many to just shrug their shoulders and go ‘ok’ and continue on with their lives with not only no guilt, but feeling good about it. Because sometimes people needed killin’.
Microservices Are Technical Debt:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41620166