Found the problem, the total regex doesn't handle magnitude suffixes:
2018: total: 17,856,024 → parses as 17856024 (correct raw count)
2020: total: 18.17 million → parses as 18.17 (WRONG - drops "million")
2025: total: 39.3 million → parses as 39.3 (WRONG)
So the chart jumps from ~18 million down to ~18, making it wrong. The fix is to handle "million/billion/trillion" after total.
Please study why tariffs exist in the first place. It is not to punish a country. It is used as protection from a stronger adversary, especially by developing countries, for balancing trade disparities. Not everything can be lop-sided in favor of US.
Because US is a developed country. US should not be imposing tariffs and taxing its own citizens for zero gains.
> about punishment and such
Tariffs is like taking a battle-axe and hacking your own foot. So it is definitely a punishment for US Citizens. Who do you think was paying the exorbitant 40-50% import duties? It is not the exporting country. It is the US Citizen/Company, that was importing the product/raw material, which had to pay those duties. It is a massive tax on US Citizens apart from the tax they are already paying.
None of them have country wide tariffs (not counting reciprocal tariffs imposed after Trump imposed tariffs).
US has nearly double the GDP of second in line: China. It can easily dump goods at lower cost compared to China or any other country on the planet and destroy domestic competition. Which is why tariffs are imposed on select industries/products. It is an anti-dumping measure.
Like I said, US is behaving like a developing country by imposing tariffs. Which is only going to hurt its own citizens.
And this is the fractal spiraling hacker double-think I was looking forward to enjoy. Now China is a poor little developing country which is vulnerable to the USA dumping their low-cost goods onto them.
Edit: I appreciate that you are arguing your points like a gentleman, while I'm maybe not.
> Now China is a poor little developing country which is vulnerable to the USA dumping their low-cost goods onto them.
It is not about being poor or little per se, but more about being developing. Just because China is second in GDP and is a behemoth in various sectors (and clearly way ahead, in comparison to US in some of the sectors), it is still clearly not on the same level as USA both economically or militarily. Despite that, China does not apply a blanket tariff on all nations of the World. It is more targeted and specific to sectors where it feels the other nation can endanger it. Heck, it can even remove tariffs if it feels domestic production is more expensive. For example, China removed 30% import duty on Indian pharma sector because domestic production of the same generic as well as branded drugs was more expensive.
The higher you are in the economic ladder, it is only beneficial for you to reduce your tariffs. Because of two simple points:
1. You being higher in the economic ladder implies you have higher disposable income. That means your citizens can buy produce/services at cheaper rates from those below the ladder.
2. Lower/zero tariffs ensures no brakes on spending.
If you increase tariffs, you are going to reduce the disposable income of your own citizens. Because those tariffs are borne by the citizens. The tariff that is collected does not reduce any deficit that exists between your country and the countries below you in the economic ladder as deficits are reduced through increasing exports and not by taxing imports.
The problem with Trump's tariffs is that it is not targeted. It is across the board. This reduces disposable income of US citizens drastically, thereby forcing them to NOT spend on anything except for what is needed for survival. Wages are not increasing to offset the loss in disposable income (it is hardly keeping up with rising inflation). So what is the net result if citizens do not have sufficient disposable income to buy products/services beyond what is bare necessities? You end up in recession or worse a depression.
It is not the first time this has been tried. It has been tried before with devastating consequences for US and indirectly rest of the World. Read up on 1930's Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act which directly contributed to accelerating the depression: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot%E2%80%93Hawley_Tariff_Ac...
Tariffs are great for developing countries. It protects their nascent industries/businesses that are not even ready to compete with those from developed countries and specifically to prevent developed countries from dumping goods (look up anti-dumping laws). Tariffs suck for developed countries as it just raises tax on its own citizens without any benefits that are enjoyed by developing countries.
> being the devil when the US implements them, and being double-plus-good when the European Union implements them (or China or South America).
You can also flip the argument and say that it is "double-plus-good" when USD is reserve currency but is the devil when Euro, Yen, Yuan, Rubles, Rupee et all want to be reserve currency too. Why does US admin go bananas when the topic of a BRICS currency is brought up?
Developed countries have levers. Developing countries have levers too. That's how balance has been maintained all these years since the World order was established post-WW2. Now if US wants to undo this World order (which it itself help setup) and wants to behave like a developing country, then developing countries will encroach on areas US holds dear to it: USD as reserve currency, cross-border transactions through SWIFT, imposing sanctions etc. Remember that it is not US alone that holds all the cards. Everyone else has their own cards as well.
Yep! Quit LinkedIn when it went downhill. Has only gotten worse since then. Most social media is filled with AI slop. For someone who grew up in the 90s-2000s BBS/IRC era this sucks!
You can cut 90-95% of the slop posts by checking the project's GitHub repository. If it has .cursor / .claude folders it should be automatically pushed into a slow queue with the queue shifting every X hours. For example, this really popular post from 27 days ago was just pure AI slop. It got on to front page of HN and stayed there for days. Should have been nuked the very first hour:
Can easily detect the AI slop. It is like how ads were splattered everywhere (and still do) in some old school websites and you would train your brain to ignore those ads. This is coming for AI slop as well. As more and more people realize they are reading AI generated vomit, they will instantly close whatever they are reading.
I think they already do? Which is commendable tbh. But I keep my popcorn ready and warm for the day when their vibe coding can't keep up with the codebase. Of course they will try their best to hide that fact for as long as possible.
What worries me even more is tens of thousands (or even magnitudes higher) half-baked, over-hyped, vibe-coded spaghetti "open-source projects" released publicly for clout or to attract investment.
It is like all the garbage papers you find in academia that you need to sift through until you find that one good paper. Needle in a haystack.
2026 will be the year of vibe-code driven enshittification. Github will be the casualty.
In the last 6 months we've seen no fewer then a dozen vibe coded/AI assisted open source, self hosted projects launch that complete against ours. So far all but one has fizzled out, with the same pattern each time: announcement, repo with 1 giant commit, 2-4 months of feature releases, loss of interest from the author, and finally abandonment.
I expect once users get burnt enough time, they'll stop adopting the new cool thing until it's been out long enough with consistent releases.
I'm gonna blow your mind a bit here, but this isn't just the fault of the people making the software, it's also the fault of the vast majority of the people here and on the internet in general. Quality doesn't get your attention.
The truth is building a project is like a lottery ticket, and there's hard diminishing returns on time invested in quality in terms of payoff. If I told you you could spend 10x more time for a 2x increase in probability of success, if you were trying to make a living from your creativity, you would be stupid to spend the extra time, it's a horrible investment.
The people spamming half baked projects that they quickly abandon if they don't get traction are being rational. People like me that grind on unsexy process bottlenecks and try to keep refining into something really nice are the irrational ones.
Ridiculous to say the technology, by itself, is evil somehow. It is not. It is just math at the end of the day. Yes you can question the moral/societal implications of said technology (if used in a negative way) but that does not make the technology itself evil.
For example, I hate vibe coding with a passion because it enables wrong usage (IMHO) of AI. I hate how easy it has become to scam people using AI. How easy it is to create disinformation with AI. Hate how violence/corruption etc could be enabled by using AI tools. Does not mean I hate the tech itself. The tech is really cool. You can use the tech for doing good as much as you can use it for destroying society (or at the very minimum enabling and spreading brainrot). You choose the path you want to tread.
Just do enough good that it dwarfs the evil uses of this awesome technology.
Well, at this moment, the evil things done with technology vastly surpass the good things done with technology.
Democratisation of tech has allowed for more good to happen, centralisation the opposite. AI is probably one of the most centralisation-happy tech we've had in ages.
Centralization of technology has been happening at a rapid pace, and is only a tiny bit the fault of technology itself.
Capitalism demands profits. Competition is bad for profits. Multiple factories are bad for profits. Multiple standards are bad for profits. Expensive workers are bad for profits.
>Nothing either good nor bad but thinking makes it so - Shakespeare
That said, their thinking is that this can remove labor from their production, all while stealing works under the very copyright they setup. So I'd call that "evil" in every conventional sense.
>Just do enough good that it dwarfs the evil uses of this awesome technology.
The evil is in the root of the training, though. And sadly money is not coming from "good". I don't see any models focusing on ensuring it trains only on CC0/FOSS works, so it's hard to argue of any good uses with evil roots.
If they could do that at the bare minimum, maybe they can make the argument over "horses vs cars". As it is now, this is a car powered by stolen horses. (also I work in games, and generative AI is simply trash in quality right now).
Even this has little to do with AI and points right at the capitalist society that already exists. HN really doesn't like to talk about their golden child that let's money flow, but the concentration of wealth and IP by the super wealthy occurred before GenAI was a thing.
This also ignores the broken fucking copyright system that ensures once you create something you get many lifetimes of fucking off without having to work, so if genAI kills that I won't shed a tear.
“Just do enough good...”, it is hard to define what is "good".
This tech has many dimensions and second-order effects, yet all the tech giants claim it a “net positive” without understanding fully what is unfolding.
Not really - it's math, plus a bazillion jigabytes of data to train that math, plus system prompts to guide that math, plus data centers to do that math, plus nice user interfaces and APIs to interface with that math, plus...
Anyway, it's just kind of a meaninglessly reductive thing to say. What is the atom bomb? It's just physics at the end of the day. Physics can wreck havoc on the world; so can math.
reply