skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>Trump is continuing a trend that has been going on since at least Bush Jr. Presidents for a couple decades now have been moving more power into the executive branch.

Are you familiar with the constitution? It describes which powers belong to the executive and which don't.
According to this https://www.learningtypescript.com/articles/why-typescript-d...

The versioning logic is fairly simple (although kind of pointless afaict?). X.1 —> X.9, and instead of going to .10 it simply increments major number. With average releases every 3 months, then major versions are simply being bumped roughly every 30 months.

I think functionally it’s just a really awkward date-versioning on a 30 month calendar instead of 12
I disagree entirely. Design is fundamentally a human-oriented discipline, and humans work almost exclusively with code before it is compiled. A strong shared mental model for whatever we're doing is as much a part of software development as any code that runs on a computer.

Programming languages can (should!) be amazing tools for thought rather than just tools for making computers do things; using these tools to figure out what we're doing is a critical part of effective development. The highest-leverage software engineering work I've seen has involved figuring out better ways of thinking about things: developing better tools and abstractions. Tools and abstractions compound since they fundamentally impact everything built on top of them. A good high-level design is the difference between a team that can add some specific capability in a day, a team that would take six months and a team that would say it cannot be done.
Is there any effort to organize scientific literature like this? I know journals often generate tags for papers but those can often be quite poor and restricted to the field The journal is in. I would happily join a volunteer effort to create tags and do some tag-wrangling for scientific literature in my research area.
> code organization

It's also the code documentation.

Having documentation that is legible is good, right? And so a reviewer is reasonable to say "this is hard to read" since it's failing at its primary purpose.
Isn't it necessary to be on the Twitter platform in order to use Grok? Unlike lots of other people, I still use Twitter, but for those who don't, I would think it is an obstacle to using Grok.

The advantage of using Grok (or any alternative to Google Search!) is that there isn't an entire ecosystem of pervasive prying Alphabet services to go along with it: Gmail, Youtube, Google Play, Google SMS (Verizon terminated its SMS for text and recommended all users use Google instead, in November 2024), Google Meet or whatever they call it, and probably more. It can track you everywhere, and a deliberate effort is required to evade it with alternative providers.
Math research is cheap, requiring only coffee + room + board + health insurance
> caught ... roach bitch

Do you not see the level of anti-social hatred you spew in response to all the people pushing back on your (flagged) comment?

Of course I am not meeting your argument; I'm matching your level of acerbic tone to demonstrate just how bad it sounds.

If there is one adult in this subthread, it's AnimalMuppet. I'm taking them up on their advice.
There are plenty of humans that got a 100% wolf and managed to keep them around, even in modern times.

In the past, people were always looking for ways to automate hunting, just like we do with technology, as this was the hardest thing.

And if you ever hunted, imagine having a wolf around when you hunt, it's nuts. They are so powerful and can so easily find prey, they have sick instincts too, much better than humans.

Pair them together and you can understand why that combination works so well.

Our ancestors also gave up lots of surviviability skills to become homo sapiens together with our beloved doges.
Typescript is capable of dependent typing, union types, exhaustive matching and everything needed to achieve this style of programming. It's just not strict.

The other language is rust. Though it's type system is not as expressive as typescript it is strict meaning nobody can really cheat their way out of it. In general Rust code requires less unit tests then typescript because of this.

The other language is Idris and Haskell. But these languages are rarely used.

This article can shed some insight into what I'm talking about:
https://wiki.haskell.org/Why_Haskell_just_works#:~:text=The%...
Git-Inspired File Context Management for LLMs
I've seen "problem baboons". The issue with baboons is that they are clever and dexterous enough to do things that other wildlife does not. They know to pull on door handles. So they can get into a kitchen via an open window, open cupboard doors until they find the one with the cold food inside, leave the door open, haul the food out, eat some, shit on the floor, climb up the drainpipe onto the roof with some of their haul etc.

They're clever enough to scatter when someone raises a rifle and points it at them; but they'll do the same if you use a wooden walking stick.

And of course they're highly social, seldom encountered alone.
Cloudflare is going to ruin self hosted things like this and force centralization to a few players. I guess we'll need decentralized efforts to scrape the web and be able to run it on that.
Yeah, it's a trade off between certainty and creativity. Constraint software would be all certainty which, if it contained all the required information, would be the perfect system. But we don't have "all the information", or at least i haven't seen anyone claim so. So some degree of out-of-box creativity is required to catch more obscure correlations and strangeness. I think AI is just about as certain as previous systems, but with a big boost to the creativity aspect. It's also free. I can imagine the omnidiagnoser would be a closely held trade secret worth billions and thus absolutely not free to the public.
How do you know? Have you gone over their financial statements?
> "At the beginning of time and the center of every black hole lies a point of infinite density called a singularity"

my understanding was that this was d̶i̶s̶p̶r̶o̶v̶e̶n̶ mathematically incorrect:

- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38636225

- sabine's take: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nz55jONtFAU

edit: disproven -> mathematically incorrect
This does not use hard links or symlinks; this uses a feature of the filesystem that allows the creation of copy-on-write clones. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_File_System#Clones
I was recently working on an upholstery project and I agree, Joann's selection was excellent.

But I think part of the reality is that most customers, even sewing customers, don't stop and consider the "feel" of fabric. If you look at what the median sewing machine user is doing, it's probably cranking out a tacky quilt made from cheap polyester fabrics. (Certainly seems to be a favorite activity in my extended family).

And honestly, for all the floorspace dedicated to sewing and crafting materials, I wouldn't be surprised if the bulk of their sales these days was coming from decorations and art supplies for kids.
I'm sorry.. "Did it hurt?"
Do you have brothers?
Funnily enough, that was the domain of Yahoo! with its directories.
Aside from the other point, macOS does, of course, have hard link functionality.
It's run by Anthropic! https://x.com/AnthropicAI/status/1894419011569344978
This is basically only a win on macOS, and only because Apple charges through the nose for disk space.

Ex - On my non-apple machines, 8GB is trivial. I load them up with the astoundingly cheap NVMe drives in the multiple terabyte range (2TB for ~$100, 4TB for ~$250) and I have a cheap NAS.

So that "big win" is roughly 40 cents of hardware costs on the direct laptop hardware. Hardly worth the time and effort involved, even if the risk is zero (and I don't trust it to be zero).

If it's just "storage" and I don't need it fast (the perfect case for this type of optimization) I throw it on my NAS where it's cheaper still... Ex - it's not 40 cents saved, it's ~10.

---

At least for me, 8GB is no longer much of a win. It's a rounding error on the last LLM model I downloaded.

And I'd suggest that basically anyone who has the ability to not buy extortionately priced drives soldered onto a mainboard is not really winning much here either.

I picked up a quarter off the ground on my walk last night. That's a bigger win.
As an American I would envy Canadian citizens for having a government that doesn't participate in this particular international conspiracy to deny civil rights. Voluntarily would be better but I'd take the win.
Reminds me (in spirit) of screeps https://screeps.com/ - any inspiration?
It may be pedantic from me but what are you calculating that needs that level of precision?

Or more specifically, why not just use a different unit base, fixed point arithmetic doesn't come for free.
It's been a long time since I've read the book but I took it to be less 'cut the function at X lines' and more 'long functions tend to be doing too many things at a time'. I think if you're able to give a good name to some sub section of a function, it's a good sign that it can be extracted out. At that point, you shouldnt need to look at the functions implementation unless its the specific function that you want to modify, because its name and arguments should be enough to know what it does and that you don't need to touch it.

Are we talking about the same thing and you'd still find that hard to understand?
With a hard link, the content of each of the two 'files' are identical in perpetuity.

With APFS Clones, the contents start off identical, but can be changed independently. If you change a small part of a file, those block(s) will need to be created, but the existing blocks will continue to be shared with the clone.
Also often live in large colonies, so there's lots of transmission. Solitary animals give themselves less chances to incubate something really nasty.

I recommend the book "Spillover" about animal-borne diseases which looks at it in detail.
How does it compare to graal wasm? https://github.com/oracle/graal/blob/master/wasm/README.md/
I've been following your progress for a while now and I'm super impressed how far you've got already.

Are you working on unifying the tools that the LLM uses with the MCP / model context protocol?

As far as I understand, lots of other providers (like Bolt/Stackblitz etc) are migrating towards this. Currently, there's not many tools available in the upstream specification other than File I/O and some minor interactions for system-use - but it would be pretty awesome if tools and services (like say, a website service) could be reflected there as it would save a lot of development overhead for the "LLM bindings".

Very interesting stuff you're building!
I am an independent researcher currently funded by a part-time job and a very supportive spouse. I play with algorithms and have discovered a new fast Fourier transform and a neural network growth+training algorithm that doesn't use gradient descent. Ideally, some benefactor would pay me to publish my findings and code, for the good of public knowledge, but my attempts to find such funding have fallen flat. Kind of funny that researchers can get funding for future work (without guarantees) but I can't find funding for an interesting discovery that is already done (there are issues with verification of the work, but it seems like a short-term NDA would take care of that).

I have resorted to partnering with a law firm, who, for a large cut of any revenue, will do all the IP work and "marketing" (i.e. contacting legal departments at companies that might be interested in the algorithm). This is not ideal, but is so far the only path presented that may help me recoup wages lost by not working full-time for several years. I figure if I retain control of the IP (and make money through licensing), I can make sure scientists and researchers have free usage rights.

If the IP thing works, I can hopefully continue independent research. If it works well, I hope to self-fund more research without the IP shenanigans. Otherwise, it is back to full-time employment.
Sounds more futuristic than old dial-up sounds though
Many comments here offering similar solutions based on hardlinks or symlinks.

This uses a specific feature of APFS that allows the creation of copy-on-write clones. [1] If a clone is written to, then it is copied on demand and the original file is unmodified. This is distinct from the behavior of hardlinks or symlinks.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_File_System#Clones
US joins Russia to vote against UN resolution condemning war against Ukraine
Opening data is an invitation to lawsuits. That is why even the most die-hard open source enthusiasts are reluctant. It is also why people train a model and generate data with it, rather than sharing the original datasets.

These datasets are huge, and it's practically impossible to make sure they are clean of illegal or embarrassing stuff.
Packagers have proven to be more reliable. Sometimes they make mistakes but there's no case of a packager ever selling out (correct me if I'm wrong.) On the other hand, there are numerous cases of developers selling out.
Ah, thanks for the clarification! TIL.

Option-dash is an en-dash (\u2013)

Shift-option-dash will render the em-dash (\u2014), (as will --, if it gets autocorrected).

https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/em-dash-en-dash-how-... for those wondering what the differences are.
Cause Twitter never censors...
Files are always represented as lists of blocks or block spans within a file system. Individual blocks could in theory be partially shared between files at the complexity cost of a reference counter for each block. So changing a single byte in a copy on write file could take the same time regardless of file size because only the affected bock would have to be duplicated. I don't know at all how MacOS implements this copynon write scheme, though.
> my understanding was that this was disproven

To the extent anything in this discussion can be absolute, it's the wrongness of your statement. Nothing about singularities has been empirically proven (or disproven).
Medieval peasants were required to work 150 days a year on their lord’s estate. That was how they paid for the land they had to farm the rest of the time to survive. They also had to spin, weave, and make clothes.

Reference:
https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/regulation-industry/medieval-...
50$ for a lifetime license.

Which really means up until the dev gets bored, which can be as short as 18 months.

I wouldn't mind something like this versioned to OS. 20$ for the current OS, and ten dollars for every significant update.
DigiCert said they could not extricate the TRO from "critical infrastructure"

Whether you believe them, or not, there was a valid reason given. They also said they fixed this particular issue internally, so I guess we'll see.

DigiCert had over two million certs issued per the "businessEntity" case sensitivity bug thread, which was 2023.

They revoked ~84,000 out of an abundance of caution - my read was they revoked every cert issued from the (now defunct) system digicert called "OEM" - which had the bug where it wasn't prepending an underscore.

I just read the entirety of the underscore and the case sensitivity threads.
If you simply buy multiple chips at once and train on them, you may overfit because they are all likely from the same wafer. If you spent an effort and bought chips from multiple sources, they might end up being all the same hardware revision. And even if you got all existing hardware revisions, there is no guarantees that the code will keep working on new hardware revisions which has not came out yet.

There is also problems with chips aging, related circuitry (filtering capacitors age too, and the power gets worse over time), operating temperature, faster degradation from unusual conditions...

As long as all you look at is inputs and outputs, it is impossible to not to overfit. For a robust system, you need to look at the official, published spec, because that's what the manufacturer guarantees and tests for - and AI cannot do this.
It is a bit weird.

However, a friend of mine was a professional Smalltalk programmer. He claims that his median line count of methods, over his 17 year career, was 4.

It is harder to do in other languages--it seems that C would be on the order of 10.

Clearly it is a rule that can lead to complexity of too many methods, compromising whatever gain smaller methods give you.
> So unlike a few `unsafe` in a safe Rust, I want something like a few "safe" in an ambient "unsafe" C dialect. But I'm not saying "unsafe" is good or bad, I'm saying that "don't talk about unsafe vs safe", it's C itself, you wouldn't say anything is "safe" or "unsafe" in C.

Eh?

The critical criterion is "does your language make it difficult to write accidental RCEs". There's huge resistance to changing language at all, as we can see from the kernel mailing lists, so in order to go through the huge social pain of encouraging people to use a different language it's got to offer real and significant benefits.

Lifetimes are a solution to memory leaks and use-after free. Other solutions may exist.

Generics: Go tried to resist generics. It was a mistake. You need to be able to do Container<T> somehow. Do you have an opinion on the dotnet version of generics?

(You mention Ceph: every time I read about it I'm impressed, in that it seems an excellent solution to distributed filesystems, and yet I don't see it mentioned all that often. I'm glad it's survived)
Super helpful and interesting!
I guess :)
What you’re describing isn’t exactly new territory for me. Maybe you’re writing for the room, and not immediately for my benefit.

Parsing is kind of… everywhere. Path piece instances? Parsing. Forms? Parsing. The whole point of smart constructors is parsing. Deserialising from the persistence layer? Parsing. Sure, JSON and Protobuf also, but even when relying on a robust library like aeson, we still write tests. Why wouldn’t you? The types you define can be serialised in different ways, and the way you deserialise needs to roundtrip with the way you (or an external system) serialise(s), which also necessitates more tests.
When you're writing it you have the help of the compiler and various other tools, plus you have the model of what the code is doing fully-formed in your head, and you have the recent memory of various other approaches you took and how and why they failed. When you're reading it you have none of those things.

So, code is harder to read than it is to write.

So if you write code that uses your full intellect to write it out, you are therefore by definition too dumb to read it.
i think it's probably bad that this made me more curious

i think someone in my head wants to try it even if it's universally unpleasant

edit: jk i read literally anything about what the experience is actually like and i don't know if i feel like boiling the body with dehydration that bad, and apparently the other way you know it's working is that your mouth and throat get so dry that it becomes impossible to swallow food without choking
Never underestimate the focus on food of a person or any animal who experiences(d) true hunger. I haven't come even close to it, yet the crave for any sort of energy when you are long over burning any sort of energy reserves was gradually overshadowing my mind.

In war times there are stories of people boiling and eating leather belts, boots and similar stuff. Imagine the drive to spend non-trivial amount of time and energy to eat that.
Did they claim the project as their own, or did they use the open source to build a project?
Almost, but the difference is that if you change one of hardlinked files, you change "all of them". (It's really the same file but with different paths.)

https://hypercritical.co/hyperspace/#how-it-works

APFS apparently allows for creating "link files" which when changed, start to diverge.
> Right, but the concept is the same, "remove duplicates" in order to save storage space.

The duplicates aren't removed, though. Nothing changes from the POV of users or software that use those files, and you can continue to make changes to them independently.
It's also about user privacy with ISPs as well as anti-censorship.
https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/dns/dns-over-tls/
Very nicely done. If I were to tweak something....

Some have different names once you click on them.

- "Speed" is "Speed and Pace."

- "Data Size" is "Data Storage"

- "Fuel Economy" is "Fuel Consumption"

On the Data Size / Data Storage calculator, I would add kilobits, megabits, gigabits, and terabits. In addition to data storage, that might make it useful as a bandwidth calculator as well.
Why Americans Dislike Government, Even When It Works
We should table this discussion and circle back EOD. Regards,
Europe let me iiiiinnnnn
there is so much for an American to envy about Canada, not being part of an international intelligence alliance would be pretty far down the list for me
21 federal technology staffers resign from DOGE
These guys are goated
No, but thanks to the Supreme Court, it will have to be litigated through to them for anyone to know for sure.
He picked node_modules because it's highly likely to encounter redundant files there.

If you read the rest of the comment he only saved another 30% running his entire user home directory through it.

So this is not a linear trend based on space used.
The last section, "Checked bending of the rules" seems pretty similar to C++ contracts[0], though the behavior on violations looks like it will be able to vary wildly between consteval and regular contexts, and whether it terminates the running program with a contract violation handler.

[0] https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/contracts
This reminds of me chirp https://archive.is/HEC29

https://audioxpress.com/news/data-over-sound-pioneer-chirp-a...
Palantir is one of the more overtly evil tech companies. Their CEO is the last person who should be talking about anyone losing their way.

Although I agree, a culture that allows companies like Palantir to be successful has indeed lost its way.
it looks really useful! I’ve always struggled with financial modeling because I wasn’t sure what numbers to use. Does ueCalc suggest benchmarks or industry data?
What is the story for querying? Can it filter and rank objects?
For the second one, I saw it as a way to very quickly get myself into the headspace of the speaker. I had no trouble picturing and identifying with exactly how they were feeling: a sense of the world crumbling around them but also it not directly influencing them but also without any control over it but also they still had all of their regular problems. Not deep, not layered, no hidden meaning, just a quick way to explain exactly where they were at.

I liked the first one less.
The US doesn't really have many for-profit universities, and those that are for-profit don't attract a lot of international PhD students. We do (or did?) have a lot of research to be done, and we would never be able to do it without international PhD students (including from China and India).

China has some immigration, and people will be attracted to stay if the research jobs are good and accessible. If China takes over the USA's role of the preeminent world power, they will have access to and need to leverage world talent to do so.
Great question! ueCalc doesn’t provide predefined benchmarks because every startup operates differently. Instead, it helps you structure your financial model based on your team’s real execution capabilities—lead generation, conversion, and retention. This makes the projections much more reliable than generic industry benchmarks.