skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think that would be really hard to measure. In particular, for this sort of very optimized code, we’d want to separate out the time spent designing the algorithms (which the Rust version benefits from as well). Actually I don’t think that is possible at all (how will we separate out time spent coding experiments in C, then learning from them).

Fortunately these “which language is best” SLOC measuring contests are just frivolous little things that only silly people take seriously.
C after an optimizing compiler has chewed through it is faster than C
Slick. Runs pretty well under Wine!
These days even Tinder (website version) has a boss-key.

But yeah I remember a lot of games had boss-keys that would let you pretend to be working.
> I thought the purpose of Rust was for safety but the keyword unsafe is sprinkled liberally throughout this library.

What wrong with that?
Yes, Bret Victor: https://worrydream.com/ABriefRantOnTheFutureOfInteractionDes...
This is a basic high school question. It serves no purpose other than to deflect the discussion.

If you genuinely don't understand soft power, Google is your friend.
Soft power is simply the capability to persuade others without coercion. So it’s usually a much less destructive tool to achieve the same goal when the alternative is “hard” power.

Whether you build the soft power ethically or unethically (and false propaganda could be one of the many unethical ways to build soft power) is upto the country in question.

And whether that soft power is deployed for “good” or “bad” purposes is also dependent on the actions and goals of the nation.

So it’s kind of as meaningless to ask whether soft power is “good” or “bad” as it is to ask whether a hammer is good or bad, except generally “soft” power tends to be a better way to achieve the goals of a country than the alternative (which involves the threat and/or actual dropping of bombs) and the methods of developing soft power tend to generally be better than the alternative (distributing medicines for Thberculosis, cultural exchanges, etc instead of building a bigger and more dangerous military).
I've been labeling LLMS as "teensy", "smol", "mid", "biggg", "yuuge". I've been struggling to figure out where to place the lines between them though.
Because getting what you want through persuasion is cheaper and less bloody than through coercion.
Indeed. In 50 years, loading the weights and doing math should be much easier than getting some 50 year old piece of cuda code to work.

Then again, CPUs will be fast enough that you'd probably just emulate amd64 and run it as CPU-only.
Deadlines is always about time, or i'm missing something? Did you maybe confuse with dead end?
It’s only power if the recipients view the US positively, or if other countries view the US positively for that aid.

Unfortunately I think it backfires when US power of all sorts (both hard and soft) is viewed as meddling.

At that point is the altruism worth the negative optics? I wonder.
> I am baffled by the ability to just fire everyone on the spot.

It often isn't about ability. Many of these are being challenged and courts are ordering reinstatements.

It's about leveraging sensitive, protected processes to generate so many constitutional crisis and other chaos knowing that Congress won't exercise it's safeguarding duties.

That leaves the public to engage a limited number of courts to issue orders against individual whitehouse actions - and the whitehouse undermining or outright ignoring those orders because the white house controls federal law enforcement.
It's not lol. It's more akin to construction. If you need 100 people to do a job in a given amount of time, you might be able to get it done with 99 people without issue. But that one person might have had an insight that would save you a lot of money overall. And if you kept getting rid of people, at some point the others will not be able to pick up the slack and might even ruin the project unwittingly.
The usual answer is: You only need to verify the unsafe blocks, not every block. Though 'unsafe' in Rust is actually even less safe than regular C, if a bit more predictable, so there's a crossover point where you really shouldn't have bothered.

The Rust compiler is indeed better than the C one, largely because of having more information and doing full-program optimisation. A `vec_foo = vec_foo.into_iter().map(...).collect::Vec<foo>`, for example, isn't going to do any bounds checks or allocate.
"The aftermath of the dotcom bubble didn’t just turn dotcoms into acquisition targets. Established tech companies became acquisition targets themselves. In some cases, they even sought out acquisition as a matter of survival."

Sounds like a lot of startups.
>The downside is that I can't shut it down remotely without knowing when exactly to also turn off the plug. I could create some automation, but it takes about 2 seconds being off before turning on again.

Huh, I would have expected the BIOS to not do that if it detected a graceful shutdown (or at least have a longer grace period).
You don’t seem dumb enough for that to be a good faith question.
One analogy that works for me is to consider mural painting. Artists who create huge building-size murals are responsible for the design of the painting itself, but usually work with a team of artist to get up on the ladders and help apply the image to the building.

The way I use LLMs feels like that to me: I'm designing the software to quite a fine level, then having the LLMs help out with some of the typing of the code: https://simonwillison.net/2025/Mar/11/using-llms-for-code/#t...
> Does the fact that WFH is not a thing mean that...

That's an interesting "fact".
The US is being a "fair-weather friend" in this case.
The thing is though that it takes 1 person a few weeks and then could save many more people time.

Also if you are already familiar with Android this app should take hours not weeks.
Article II of the Constitution exists and you can read it anytime:

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-2/

In short: Job protection for executive employees defeats the entire point of an executive that is accountable to the people. Major magistrate positions are subject to Senate approval before being vested authority, but they are appointed and serve at the behest of the president, who literally embodies the executive.
I've always understood constantly drinking water as a ruse to use the bathroom more often, which is helpful for Americans with sedentary lifestyles.
You can think of ejectable as the opposite of being locked-in.
No disagreement that it’s gotten worse lately, but the press corps has been weak for 20+ years, now (and it extends well past politics - it’s not like anyone’s holding anyone in tech accountable for anything, either).
I’ve been waiting for someone to do something more interesting with EFI

The recovery capabilities you mention have existed before EFI:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-on

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splashtop_OS
The cask was my introduction to him as well. Then straight into Arthur Gordon Pym. It is still my favorite book, forever.
I do like people building things, but isn't this what the share network button is in android? It creates a qr code with ssid and password, and when scanned with lens it gives you a "join" button.

Edit - ah is the point taking a photo of credentials and joining from that?
> I thought the purpose of Rust was for safety but the keyword unsafe is sprinkled liberally throughout this library.

Which is exactly the point, other languages have unsafe implicitly sprinkled in every single line.

Rust tries to bound and explicitly delimit where unsafe code is to makes review and verification efforts precise.
I like Tcl a lot, especially the Expect module. If you've ever wanted an Autohotkey for your terminal (I promise that phrase actually makes sense) it's well worth your time to look into either Expect itself or Python's `pexpect` module.
So because in 1966 Egypt didn’t give them citizenship, Israel can do the same in 2025 plus occupying then military, displace them, jail them and kill them? Until when? 10 years more? 100? 1000?

Here’s more to this story https://conquer-and-divide.btselem.org/map-en.html
I thought that the point of Rust is to have safe {} blocks (implicit) as a default and unsafe {} when you need the absolute maximum performance available. You can audit those few lines of unsafe code very easily. With C everything is unsafe and you can just forget to call free() or call it twice and you are done.
> As a friend commented, "these language models should never have been made available to the general public", only to researchers.

That feels to me like a dystopian timeline that we've only very narrowly avoided.

It wouldn't just have been researchers: it would have been researchers and the wealthy.

I'm so relieved that most human beings with access to an internet-connected device have the ability to try this stuff and work to understand what it can and cannot do themselves.
To quote the Rust book (https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch20-01-unsafe-rust.html):

In addition, unsafe does not mean the code inside the
block is necessarily dangerous or that it will definitely
have memory safety problems: the intent is that as the
programmer, you’ll ensure the code inside an unsafe block
will access memory in a valid way.

Since you say you already know that much Rust, you can be that programmer!
IBM too.
It's not like the US wasn't warned about this repeatedly for decades, and yet we chose this.
Using unsafe blocks in Rust is confusing when you first see it. The idea is that you have to opt-out of compiler safety guarantees for specific sections of code, but they’re clearly marked by the unsafe block.

In good practice it’s used judiciously in a codebase where it makes sense. Those sections receive extra attention and analysis by the developers.

Of course you can find sloppy codebases where people reach for unsafe as a way to get around Rust instead of writing code the Rust way, but that’s not the intent.

You can also find die-hard Rust users who think unsafe should never be used and make a point to avoid libraries that use it, but that’s excessive.
VOA is the old world propaganda network. Twitter/Facebook are the new ones. Direct mirror image of TikTok effects.
A previous submission on the original title, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10518507
> Presumably with inline assembly both languages can emit what is effectively the same machine code. Is the Rust compiler a better optimizing compiler than C compilers?

rustc uses LLVM just as clang does, so to a first approximation they're the same. For any given LLVM IR you can mostly write equivalent Rust and C++ that causes the respective compiler to emit it (the switch fallthrough thing mentioned in the article is interesting though!) So if you're talking about what's possible (as opposed to what's idiomatic), the question of "which language is faster" isn't very interesting.
What percentage of travelers are running into problems? How does that compare to other countries? How does it compare to your probability of being detained where you are anyways?

Not to belittle the anecdotal issues but without any baseline or comparison this is meaningless scare mongering. People are denied entry, detained and strip searches in every border all over the world, every day, all the time. If you think staying home is fine you'll find people are arrested at their home, even killed, by law enforcement at their home in many countries all the time.

1. https://news.sky.com/story/man-dies-after-being-arrested-by-...

2. https://apnews.com/article/germany-arrest-american-spying-ch...
I'm pretty sure I saw the word "programming" being used as a synonym for webdev.
There's two sides to this:

> "as harsh as it may seem, I would say that they’re trying to work in a field that isn’t for them."

I find this statement problematic for a different reason: we live in a world where minimum wages (if they exist) are lower than living wages & mean wages are significantly lower the point at which well-being indices plateau. In that context calling people out for working in a field that "isn't for them" is inutile - if you can get by in the field then leaving it simply isn't logical.

THAT SAID, I do find the above comment incongruent with reality. If you're in a field that's "not for you" for economic reasons that's cool but making out that it is in fact for you, despite "tolerating" writing code, is a little different.

> I got into the game for creativity

Are you confusing creativity with productivity?

If you're productive that's great; economic imperative, etc. I'm not knocking that as a positive basis. But nothing you describe in your comment would fall under the umbrella of what I consider "creativity".
With a diminished ability to store, recall and thus manipulate information, our learning is arguably more shallow.

With AI trained on increasingly generic input used by the casual, then the quality of our production will increase in quantity but decrease in quality.

I am not arguing to abandon the written word or LLMs.

But the disadvantages--which will be overlooked by the young and those happy to have a time-saving tool, namely the majority--will do harm, harm most will overlook favouring the output and ignoring the atrophying user.
I told my colleagues that if they’re just going to send me LLM code I cannot review it and assume they already double checked the work themselves. This gives them instant approval and if they want to spend time submitting follow up PRs because they’re not double checking their code and not understanding then they can do that. I honestly did this for two reasons:

1. The problem domain is a marketing site (low risk)

2. I got tired of fixing bad LLM code

I have noticed the people who do this are caught up in the politics at work and not really interested in writing code.

I have no desire to be a code janitor.
What I find the most interesting is that to me at least it seems like there has been some strange inversion over the course of my adult life, where the same people that used to lament things like the COA VOA propaganda, warfare, instigating and stoking and orchestrating coups, subverting democratic elections, etc. are exactly the ones doing and supporting all those things they used to decry.

I get the sense that I’ve just remained consistent in my views, but it still does not expiration things like how the same “liberals” who decried the invasion and corruption of Iraq, cheer on and demand limitless warfare and corrupted spending today on the likes of the Ukraine, while the “conservatives” want to stop wars and limit profligate spending and corruption.

It’s upside down world, and terrifying to witness how quickly people can be manipulated to take directly contradictory positions.
What driving me nuts is that we still don't have a widely deployed standard for this though.

Work gave me an iPhone recently and I was shocked the wifi initial connection screen had no option to scan a QR code. It took Android way too long to get this as well.

But on top of that, even when the option is there it's so limited - i.e. it gets presented as "must be a wifi QR code" without the option to just fill a text box from a plain text one (although on reflection I'm now wondering why that's not just a global UX option on phones).
I like imagining this clever retort oozing from the lips of someone who has had their birthday invitation refused after punching their 8 year old school mate in the stomach.
Propaganda is a message. Soft power is a means.

For example, Voice of America publishes "Learning English" radio/tv broadcasts, podcasts, and news articles. They are produced with a limited vocabulary (I think a few thousand words), shorter sentences, and are spoken slower. They often match up with native language reporting of current events so you can listen to both for context clues.

Having people all over the world able to speak a basic level of English helps further the dominant role of the US in international trade, allows our military to use friendly locals as translators anywhere they go, and gives people around the world some level of "connection" with us - shared common ground to work from.

VoA does not broadcast propaganda, they hold themselves to a very high standard of reporting only the truth. Which is why repressive governments hate it, as do people who want to create them.
There absolutely are protections for probationary employees, just not as many as there are for those not in probationary status. Courts are already re-instating people who were clearly fired without cause. Our courts just aren't equipped to deal with these types of events as frequently and widely as they are happening now.
Well, AI does make errors, and never says "I don't know". That is also true of Wikipedia though. I've seen much improvement in accuracy from 3.5 to 4.5. Hallucinations can often be hashed out by a dialogue.
and there was no more traffic on the 101
Trump is not doing things that different than Biden in foreign policy - how much more damage can Trump do the Palestinians in Gaza that Biden didn't do?

Trump is just more honest, and this embarrasses the professional-managerial liberals who support US imperialism. He's just saying what's happening as opposed to some nonsense about how he is neutral between Palestinians and Israelis while Biden was helping slaughtering Palestinians, Yemen, Syrians, Lebanese etc. while talking about peace.

No need for propaganda outfits when you're being honest.

The lies of upper middle class white liberal imperialists have been exposed - how the US treats Palestinians hasn't changed at all.

Plus some minor things - Trump is more anti-China, which is why he's winding down the Russia thing. From a geopolitical realist standpoint it makes more sense - maybe not to neocons.
They might have gotten the point but disagreed. In particular, if the style and feeling of the page is the message, and they are saying they don’t like the message and page feels bad… then, it seems like the premise was understood and rejected.
Set this up a couple weeks using an proxmox lxc script and have it using ollama to create tags. I hadn’t heard of singlefile before. That seems like an excellent pairing.
Use a smart socket and set your bios to always turn on when power is on
The key difference is that there are invariants you can rely on as a user of the library, and they'll be enforced by the compiler outside the unsafe blocks. The corresponding C invariants mostly aren't enforced by the compiler. Worse, many C programmers will actively argue that some amount of undefined behavior is "fine".
Is it unpatriotic, as an American, to envy the way the Japanese do things? I was stationed in Japan and really miss it. We could learn a lot.
That is hysterical. lol
I think we don't see these problems with calculators because we have figured out how to teach people how to use them.

We are still very early in the process of figuring out how to teach people to use LLMs.
I trust the physics works out.

The problem in these discussions is how to build an intuition about the underlying physical model.

I fail to have an intuition of how can a quantized unit of wave propagate through both slits.

I know that the equations say that the probability of finding the particle at a given location is given by the amplitude squared of the wave function (Born rule).

The image that a "quantized unit of wave propagates through two slits simultaneously" doesn't help me build any further intuition.

Do the two parts going through the two different paths carry half the unit? Clearly that's not the case otherwise they wouldn't be quanta anymore. So does it mean that the entire wavefront is "one unit" no matter how spread out? But in that case, "one unit" of what?
https://archive.is/WfHFC
In the USA, Republicans build the military and Democrats wield it.
Nevertheless Russinovich actually says something in the lines of "simple rewriting in rust made some our code 5-15% faster (without deliberate optimizations)":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VgptLwP588&t=351s
I have been told that "unsafe" affects code outside of that block, but hopefully steveklabnik may explain it better (again).

> isn't going to do any bounds checks or allocate.

You need to add explicit bounds check or explicitly allocate in C though. It is not there if you do not add it yourself.
They even burnt the card of elon musk who was a great asset in the storytelling of US of how innovation is rewarded better here than anywhere else. Now he looks like a nazi pos, only damages the US image.
There are 3 types of documentation:

1. Why/what
2. API spec
3. Tutorial

You need all 3. They are distinct, use different styles, and exist for different purposes and audiences.
It's really interesting how minor changes in your workflow can completely wreck productivity. When I'm at work I spend at least 90% of my time in emacs, but there are some programs I'm forced to use that are only available via Win32 GUI apps, or cursed webapps. Being forced to abandon my keybinds and move the mouse around hunting for buttons to click and then moving my hand from the mouse to the keyboard then back to the mouse really fucks me up. My coworkers all use MSVC and they don't seem to mind it all because they're used to moving the mouse around all the time; conversely a few of them actually seem to hate command-driven programs the same way I hate GUI-driven programs.

As I get older, it feels like every time I have to use a GUI I get stuck in a sort of daze because my mind has become optimized for the specific work I usually do at the expense of the work I usually don't do. I feel like I'm smarter and faster than I've ever been at any prior point in my life, but only for a limited class of work and anything outside of that turns me into a senile old man. This often manifests in me getting distracted by youtube, windows solitaire, etc because it's almost painful to try to remember how to move the mouse around though all these stupid menus with a million poorly-documented buttons that all have misleading labels.
To add insult to injury, not only is everything inconsistent thanks to incessant wheel reinvention, nearly all of the reinvented wheels are halfassed at best and missing functionality compared to what they’re replacing. When a company writes a new widget to match their theme they only build the bare minimum necessary to visually match mockups. UI controls have become vapid and devoid of function.
I think you'd be better off explaining why you think these changes are good for the country or the world. Otherwise it just comes off as Sealioning.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
>+ about $150 for the pcb, cooler and other stuff,

Assuming I had access to gerbers I could order replica of 5090 PCB for $65, including shipping. Intel PCB is half that. Again this is for a dude off the street buying 1-5 copies, not a bulk order.
The problem is nobody knows if they are really better at targeting ads. They say so, of course, but who could prove it? Google is the main player in the ad industry and when they say that they are the best, everybody hears them. If a small player tried to say so, nobody would be aware of that, even if they were right.
This can be used to decorate endpoints to log a known caller, like ?from_svc=telemetry, to help distinguish among multiple callers.

Unfortunately, it also makes the request busy from a human-readable view. Then again, a request missing the from_svc query param is also a signal.

It could be a form of low-level needs leaking into clean URLs. Aesthetics between human versus machine and machine versus machine (microservices).

What if in the future, the browser and OS elide URLs to be just buttons or voice-triggered? We wouldn't know at all to which host a link goes.
A WebView does not a native UI make.
If we just talk in analogies: a cup is also leaky because fluid is escaping via vapours.
It's not the same as a cup with a hole in it.

Llms currently have tiny holes and we don't know if we can fix them. Established abstractions are more like cups that may leak but only in certain conditions (when it's hot)