skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
And, conversely, when people _do_ weaponize institutional review requirements to police research, you have a much more pressing and bigger problem: the existence of people who would be happy to find any mechanism to police research.
Continued exposure to the kinds of people that hang around with billionaires, I’d guess. That can change a person.
Thank you! Appreciate the feedback. Custom links are something we should be able to do -- we'll run some checks and make sure that feature is working properly. Thanks for letting me know.
Because many of them are still relatively young. There is nothing wrong with youth, but it can contribute to over-zealousness.

Also, for many of them, Rust is the first systems language they've ever touched. And that fact alone excites them. Because now they can "dream big" too.

But they have bought into the whole C/C++ are by default insecure and therefore garbage. In their mind, no mortal could ever write so much as a single safe function in those languages. So their points of view are always going to be based on that premise.

What they fail to recognize is that an operating system kernel, by virtue of the tasks it has to perform- things like mapping and unmapping memory, reading/writing hardware registers, interacting with peripherals, initiating dma transfers, context switching, etc.- have effects on the underlying hardware and the runtime environment; effects that neither the type system nor the temporal memory safety of Rust can model, because it happens at a level lower than the language itself. Rust's safety guarantees are helpful, but they are not infallible at that level. The kernel literally changes the machine out from under you.

They further fail to appreciate the significant impedance mismatch between C and Rust. When one language has concepts that are in fact constraints that another language simply does not have, there is going to be friction around the edges. Friction means more work. For everyone. From planning to coding to testing to rollout.

So you have well-intentioned, excited, but still self-righteous developers operating from what they perceive to be a position of superiority, who silently look down upon the C developers, and behave in a manner that (to outsiders at least) demonstrates that they really do believe they're better, even if they don't come right out and say it.

Just read the comments in any thread involving Rust. It is inconceivable to them that anybody would be so stupid or naive as to question the utility of the Rust language. To them, the language is unassailable.

The petty drama and social media brigading on top of it, along with the propensity to quit when the going gets tough, it's pretty easy to see why some people feel the way they do about the whole thing.

A programming language is not a religion. It is not a way of life. It is a tool. It's not like it's a text editor or something.
I don’t think this impacts your usage of CTEs; it’s a reorganization of the SELECT statement, and presumably enables the use of multiple operators and ordering of the SELECT clauses (eg you can have multiple WHERE clauses and it’ll do the right thing) and unifying the clauses (WHERE/HAVING/QUALIFY is now simply WHERE for all 3 cases)

You’d still be using CTEs on top of this to deal with deduplicating multiple SELECT/SUBSELECTs
It would be easier for me to squeeze Elon Musk through the eye of a needle...

Take his stock. Distribute to the people who built the empires.
https://archive.ph/2025.02.13-172046/https://fortune.com/202...
No, they’re fed up with underperforming fraudsters that work 3 hours per day and have the productivity of 10% of proper working employees, yet still get paid 200k+
From the Department of Transportation's statistics on aviation fatalities at https://www.bts.gov/archive/publications/by_the_numbers/tran...:

"NOTES: 2001 figures exclude two events—the September 11th Attacks and the Flight 587 crash."

(which is especially weird, because the flight 587 crash was pilot error)
They all do though. Do you think the government isn't tapping the genetic databases of 23andme and Ancestry? Or the bottomless data out that is Gmail. Or iCloud. Or Gmaps location data.

I'd rather not decide who is the worse privacy offender, companies or governments, and best restrict both to a need-to-know basis.
I get the opposite experience, never saw those comments chiming in Rust everytime another programming language is mentioned or pushing in to rewrite everything into Rust, but I get comments complaining about such invisible forces.
From the article:

> The White House got involved, requiring months of in-person mediation meetings. I was never able to get the domain back
US gov't pushing TSMC and Intel to create joint venture in the US: Report
No you can’t.

If you live in California, with a population of 39.43 million, you get the same representation in the Senate as Wyoming with a population of 538,486 residents. Not to mention gerrymandering, the electoral college, etc. Your vote even as part of a collective doesn’t represent the will of the people.

We are seeing right now with President Musk that the President can complete ignore the constitution and the laws with “qualified immunity”. Is what we ste seeing now “accountability”?
Avi Wigderson: Reading Alan Turing [video]
Whenever you think the timeline couldn't be any worse, just imagine a world where our AIs were built in JavaScript.
In your "how to cook the perfect steak" video [1] there's a picture of various doneness levels of a steak. It's a fantastic picture. The creator of that picture will get jackshit from this. Phind gets value, the user gets value but the creator does not.

You're hyperlinking to the source, which is nice. But there's no reason for the user to click through so it won't really help the creator. The upshot of all this is that the open web will have less incentives for content creators. Someone's got to create new data for the AI borg. In future, these creators are less likely to be independent bloggers/photographers. Perhaps biased media outlets will be the only ones with the incentives to create.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTCpnyICukM#t=55
And that's 1% (of the whole budget) too much.
https://archive.ph/5xhqP
Corporations are legally allowed to collect much more and more varied kinds of data than governments, in general.

Governments are not barred from purchasing data from private corporations, and it's unclear what an actually-enforceable and -effective regulation on that activity would look like.

Governments can do a lot more damage than corporations when they have that kind of data, true. But nothing stops them from acquiring it by issuing money (fiat currency in the US -- practically unlimited!) and employing it for their own ends.

So it seems like focusing on the collection of which kinds of data, irrespective of who is collecting, is the real concern here.
First hit on Google for “sql cte” gives me: CTE (Common Table Expression) and this page: https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/cte-in-sql/
I think the article did sufficient to talk about 'what would happen if one were prosecuted,' given that it's really hard to predict.

What I thought was missing was an acknowledgement of the circumstances that would cause a _prosecutor_ or _other litigant_ to decide to _bring an action to court._

Prosecutors are political, have limited resources, and are ultimately more or less accountable to electoral forces. Their prerogative is (almost) never going after every single person who does an action that is technically illegal. Factors like harm, the reputation of one's actions in their community, and their alignment with the political establishment are going to be considerations.

As written, I could see the article maybe deterring a particularly rules-abiding individual from running a potato-eating weight loss experiment with their roommates. I've seen friends and relatives get all wound up worrying about whether something is technically illegal in some marginal way.

Understanding the human factors in the pipeline between a potentially unlawful action and a consequence for it is really important. All the institutions that get anything done are keenly aware of them.
> it's like saying to people that they cannot add for example npu subsystem to kernel because they should first work for 10 years in other subsystems like filesystems on with they know little about. sound absurd? just replace subsystems in above with C/Rust and the rest is the same.

No it's not. What you're missing is that if the Rust folks are unable, for whatever reasons, to keep their promises, it falls on the up-tree maintainers to maintain their code. Which, being Rust code, implies that the existing maintainers will have to know Rust. Which they don't. Which makes it very expensive for them to keep those broken promises.

To look at it another way, the existing maintainers probably have a little formula like this in their heads:

Expected(up-tree burden for accepting subsystem X) = Probability(X's advocates can't keep their long-term promises) * Expected(cost of maintaining X for existing up-tree maintainers).

For any subsystem X that's based on Rust, the second term on the right hand side of that equation will be unusually large because the existing up-tree maintainers aren't Rust programmers. Therefore, for any fixed level of burden that up-tree maintainers are willing to accept to take on a new subsystem, they must keep the first term correspondingly small and therefore will require stronger evidence that the subsystem's advocates can keep their promises if that subsystem is based on Rust.

In short, if you're advocating for a Rust subsystem to be included in Linux, you should expect a higher than usual evidence bar to be applied to your promises to soak up any toil generated by the inclusion of your subsystem. It’s completely sensible.
The guy who killed himself outside of the Trump tower lit the fire himself. It was not a failure of the truck. In-fact the truck protected people by venting the explosion up and containing the blast. It's as wrong as counting gunshot victims as dying of COVID

Lighting a truck on fire is fundamentally different than a truck starting on fire. The fact that they are willing to count that shows me they are disingenuous.

Link for the COVID reference:
https://www.freedomfoundation.com/washington/washington-heal...
UK here. All my data has been removed from iCloud and other public cloud services now. I cannot trust the UK government, the EU or the US government to do the right thing for my data. I also can't trust the cloud vendors to handle my data either on this basis as they are subject to the laws and as indicated recently intimately involved in political matters.

The only option left is to draw a hard line and stay behind it and of course withdraw the only minuscule stick I have which is my investment in their business.
Wait until you speak out against your government or try to organize a protest.

More realistically, if you are a women trying to get an abortion in Texas and message someone to help you leave the state to get one see how much more you should be worried.

https://www.texastribune.org/2024/02/09/texas-abortion-trans...

The government has guns and policemen that can take away your freedom, your property without a trial (civil forfeiture), etc.

Google can serve you ads
Google fumbles Gemini Super Bowl ad's cheese statistic
That's now how it works in the US. Every 2 years we have an opportunity to vote for our representatives. They set the budget, and if we don't like it we can elect new representatives who will set a budget closer to our liking.

This isn't a matter of taxes being spent on things we didn't agree to, because spending this money is a priority for many Americans. For other's it's not, but that doesn't mean the money is being coerced. That's the deal with living in a pluralistic society; your personal priorities aren't the only ones. Sometimes public money is spent on things you don't like, and that's okay because other people don't like their money being spent on the things you do like. Everyone is happy yet unhappy - compromise.
Plus one for Kusto. I’ve never had this much success teaching people data analysis. It’s good for simple obvious and powerful composed queries. Though I work at GitHub so still too close to the mothership for an unbiased opinion.

There’s some Apache energy around KQL though and a few open source parsers so there’s hope yet.
In my 10+ years of being on a fully remote team, we had one person who was lying about doing their job, and it was immediately obvious since the work wasn't getting done. Generally, everyone's job has some kind of output or interaction with others that would give away that they weren't doing the job. If not, then being in the office or not isn't going to change the situation.
Or these days? Maybe $4 of tokens on a frontier LLM.
For anyone who doesn't know, CTE = common table expression, which is a part of a query representing a temporary result set that can be referenced from other parts of a query.
I mean, yeah, I said it was easy enough to work around. But it's an issue I've seen raised in a discussions of C code maintenance. (The typical conclusion is that using `-Wall -Werror` is a mistake for long-lived, not-actively-developed code.) Apologies if I overstated the case.
Depending on your lengths, budget, and your region's weather, might be worth giving second thought to just renting a little trencher and running a spare conduit or two (and maybe a water line too) then you're not locked in with one technology, and if that direct burial fails you can pull a new one in no time.

I enjoy getting dirty though, so I had fun hand trenching out to my shed -- didn't run water and I'm kicking myself
One way to test lots of patients where a) there's a low probability that an individual patient will have the disease and b) the test is expensive is to first mix some of the blood of each of N patients and do one test on the mix. If the batch tests negative then all patients are negative and you've only paid for one test. If the batch tests positive then you have to repeat the test on the remaining blood of each of the N patients to determine which were positive. Thus, with a high probability you only pay for 1 test, and with a low probability you have to pay for N+1 tests. The value of N is easily computed to minimize the overall cost, given the cost of each test and the percentage of patients that have the disease.
Sorry, but that's false. You're confusing the symbolic with the real.

Deleuze and Guattari's idea of striation and smooth space is a more honest approach to how we describe and interact with the world.
I'm no expert - not even a talented amateur. But, RSU's for employees are equity, and RSU's for non-employees are expense. I'm assuming, because books must balance, that there's a similar split in tax (and responsibility for tax).
Limit it to UK persons of interest and the Americans will be ok with it, see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Account_Tax_Complian...
Um, what sovereign default scheduled to happen within a month? Without some detail (and some supporting evidence), that sounds like conspiracy theory drivel. It also, frankly, sounds unrelated to the article.
Teenagers AI companions are redefining love as easy, unconditional, always there
You're welcome!

> So I don't think we can separate the two in a meaningful way.

I think that in that case, you'd compare like with like, upgrading both.

I do agree that gcc and clang supporting older specs with a flag is a great feature, and is something that Rust cannot do right now.

But the results of the annual survey have come out: https://blog.rust-lang.org/2025/02/13/2024-State-Of-Rust-Sur...

And 90% of users use the current stable version for development. 7.8% use a specific stable released within the past year.

These numbers are only so high because it is such a small hassle to update even large Rust codebases between releases.

So yes, in theory, breakage can happen. But that's in theory. In practice, this isn't a thing that happens very much.
the markets are, at this point, entirely divorced from the average citizen

plus most of the market doesn't move much, and even in the S&P 500 it's only a handful of companies that see serious gains. And they happen to be tech companies whose leadership "kissed the ring".
Interesting - the examples I've seen seem to have multiple layers of FROM > WHERE > AGGREGATE > WHERE > JOIN...[1], where the goal seems to be to remove the need to have nested CTEs?

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43037330
I wonder if there was any inspiration from Quake III.

Didn’t the inverse square root trick rely on bit-level floating point and subtraction of a bias?
Cheap solar power is sending electrical grids into a death spiral
Thanks for the clarification. This has given me more confidence in rust's future.
US single handedly boosting European investment in European defense companies
We'd love to partner directly with content creators. This is something we're thinking about a lot and are having conversations on how to go about it.

I will also personally do everything in my power to keep us from running ads on Phind. I want to keep Phind honest and authentic, and will do everything I can to make it a net positive for the internet.
You mean, like the rest of the world'd financial institutions do for the US? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Account_Tax_Complian...
Not at all. I haven't changed my principles. I simply learned how to say things better.
The solution would be to pass such reports on to the police.

Rapists must be removed from society to stop them. Removing them from a few dating apps just impedes them
Schneier has provided an argument that functions close enough to a steel man, and its not even overwrought, or over hyped.

Its pretty clear and calm, from an expert on the subject.
It would be the least surprising shoe drop since the election.
Several examples, including blank piece of paper: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62883713
Geoparquet 2.0: Going Native
The Patreon was specifically started to fund the Asahi development, so it's fairly disingenuous to continue taking those donations as not everyone will keep track. He can always start a new patreon.
Have you made it to the end stage where you decide that software, the software industry, developer culture, etc. is fractally bullshit and started a home repair and remodeling company?
So, I think perhaps you are confusing me with the person further up in the thread. They said "don't use a SPA". You replied with a counter argument about JS. Then *I* pointed out someone else in the thread demonstrating using XML+XSLT to to client-side rendering and I called out people using SPAs to dynamically render what is essentially a static website. So "Your take is getting more and more uncharitable" seem to assume that the GP and myself are the same, and we are not.

Your last line seems overly aggressive and confrontational. I have zero desire to engage with that.

All that being said, have a wonderful day.
For people down-voting, it's no different than being told "Don't feed the bears" and Yellowstone Park. It's worse off for the animals because they become dependent.

Link to Eric Olszewski's blog on the topic:
https://medium.com/@eolszewski/dont-feed-the-humans-they-wil...
Show HN: Deep Research Using Radpod.ai on Paul Graham's Essays
We created RadPod to bring the latest in LLM Reasoning Agents (think Gemini/OpenAI "Deep Research") to your data. You upload possibly large datasets to Pods (handles a lot more than other products), providing context for the LLM agent, and start chatting. Under the hood we employ on-the-fly code generation and execution to answer arbitrarily hard questions with in-context citations to make answers verifiable and trustworthy. This is a lot more powerful than common Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG)-based approaches

In this example Pod, we uploaded 227 of Paul Graham's essays, which are inspirational to us as founders, and show-case some example threads (questions + responses). Among other things it was able to find that:

- The most common topics are unsurprisingly Startups, Programming, and Investing
- Lisp is his favorite programming language
- There are many mentions of Mark Zuckerberg and Larry Page in the essays, but not as many as Jessica Livingston, who he really admires :)
- He wrote more frequently in the period 2005-2009

It's fun to try, ask away! Check some other cool Pods at https://radpod.ai/spotlight-pods. We find RadPod works well on many domains, such as finance and legal documents.
Show HN: Grammateus, Get Twitch comments summaries in real-time
I can't agree more. Linus position here is not dissimilar to CEOs and alike. He's trying to deal with R4L using his (allegedly) 100% technical and 0% political perspective but in this case it simply doesn't work. R4L is a political challange that require political discussions; who decides? what's the bar? who maintains what? etc

By not answering this questions and saying he doesn't want to have anything to do with the arguments, Linus simply decided that he doesn't want to solve the problem that only him can solve. The result is clear: R4L will fail if Linus decides that any maintainer can stop the "cancer" to spread and block Rust changes.

R4L implies that Rust will be present in the kernel and will need to be maintained. If Linus is ok with maintainers that have a deep/fundamental problem maintaining/coordinating the maintenance of Rust code, R4L will never happen.
This is exactly the problem. The logical outcome is so bad that the only risk mitigation is to not use their services at all.
That probably depends on how much you overcook the burrito.
We need to enforce minimum warranty periods per product category. We already have a detailed classification of every single product for import duty purposes, let's reuse that and apply specific warranties. For instance, a car or an appliance should have a 5 years warranty. They simply consume too much resources to produce, transport and recycle to justify a shorter lifespan.
the challenge with IRB's is that they are para-bureaucratic orgs without the transparency or accountability of an actual public or government review.

my limited experience with them was to do with governing access to repositories of personal health information and really, just bet that unethical research that abuses powers is going to happen, and that research product gets fed back to policymakers to increase the unaccountable powers of policymakers. any public benefit is for show.
If that 3 year old shot himself with a gun inside the truck, which has nothing to do with the vehicle he was in, does it still count?

We can, and especially in this small sample size, we can exclude it if we want to. The question is if a cybertruck is a dangerous vehicle, not can I have mental illness and shoot myself inside of my vehicle, which happens to be a cybertruck. That danger is present for any vehicle, there's nothing particular about the design of the cybertruck that helps or hinders self-inflicted gunshot wound, unlike a gas tank at the back of the vehicle that causes fire when it gets into an accident.
It's difficult to resist when it means likely losing your job and not being about to afford rent or your mortgage.
I mean apple could just sell unlocked phones that work in any country, and let people smuggle them in however they want.

Apple just happens to operate their buisness in a way that's very vulnerable to government overreach. Their OS is dependent on centralized, easily firewalled services. They have a lot of brick and mortar stores, and so on.

I believe that corporations can operate paralegally when need be.
Almost half the Chromebooks on newegg have that resolution: https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?d=chromebook&Order=8&Submit=ENE&...