MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by MisterTea | 2025-04-16 19:52:26+00:00
> How hard would it be to boot a computer to this as an OS?

Unikernels aren't meant to run as a bare metal OS on a standard computer like a PC. Instead they are applications wrapped in thin libraries that allow them to boot in hardware VM's provided by Intel vmx or AMD svm, etc. A hypervisor provides mechanisms for communication with hardware and other resources. They boot fast because the underlying system and hardware is already initialized and running.

The main idea of unikernels is to get rid of costly system calls like brk/sbrk called by malloc, open/read/write, etc. between the OS and application. The system never has to switch protection rings which saves a lot of time. This gives the application full control of its compute and memory resources with the possibility of direct hardware access depending on the host hardware and hypervisor. So you can attach things like NVM storage directly to the VM and let the application handle the disk and fs operations.

So to answer your original question of using such a wrapper to boot chrome on a PC: you will need a much, much bigger wrapper library which adds in all the hardware access which is a LOT of code (The GPU code alone is scary enough). You must also realize the fast boot time will be obliterated by hardware init which usually takes time as you have to jiggle certain hardware registers to wait, then probe again to see if things are working as advertised. This can take several seconds or more. In the end, you save nothing.

If you wanted an OS based on a hypervisor which boots unikernel applications you are at the mercy of the hardware to multiplex access or delegate that to a hypervisor adding more overhead. Again, you saved nothing.

In the end, your OS is really a CPU multiplexer and does a great job of providing all the primitives and resources in a generalized, uniform manner. I highly recommend reading this book: https://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~remzi/OSTEP/
by crote | 2025-04-16 19:52:33+00:00
CAs fucking up every once in a while is inevitable. It is impossible to write guaranteed bug-free software or train guaranteed flawless humans.

The big question is what happens when (not "if") that happens. Companies have repeatedly shown that they are unable to rotate certs in time, to the point of even suing CAs to avoid revocation. They've been asked nicely to get their shit together, and it hasn't happened. Shortening cert lifetime to force automation is the inevitable next step.
by carlosjobim | 2025-04-16 19:52:39+00:00
This is something genius from the article:

"WYSIWYG Printing (PDF Saving)

When printing web pages, browsers typically use a default pagination algorithm that rearranges the content based on the printed paper size. This ensures images aren't cut off by page boundaries. However, this pagination isn't tailored to the user's current device screen size. Instead, it uses standard paper dimensions like A4, A3, or B5. As a result, when downloading a PDF on a small-screen device using A4 sizing, the text may appear too small to read comfortably in a PDF reader, requiring zooming. This leads to the same issues as general web page zooming: inability to view full lines of text and the need for constant horizontal scrolling.

In Eink mode, pressing the print button will produce a PDF that mirrors the screen's display. While the paper size might be larger, resulting in surrounding whitespace, using an E Ink device's native PDF reader (such as Onyx's Neoreader) to automatically crop the margins will create a PDF that exactly matches the on-screen view. All highlighted annotations and handwritten notes will be preserved in their original page positions, achieving a true 'What You See Is What You Get' experience. This allows users to conveniently save and later review content on the same device without text size issues."
by 1970-01-01 | 2025-04-16 19:52:40+00:00
Less than 24 hrs into it, and now we have two problems from this defunding fiasco:

All the original problems that exist within CVE.

"Let's just reinvent the wheel!"

Yes, you have a dev background, which entitles you to an opinion, and you also have good intentions. This road is noble. However, the crux of this disaster is not technical, it's political. Maybe reinventing the wheel will be a huge success. Maybe it can wear the crown of free and open source for a while. But it's much more likely this fails as things become difficult to maintain, and you become tired, or poor, and are forced to stop, with nobody, or even worse, an enemy (this is an internationally critical database) controlling the database. So let's focus on solving the original funding disaster without jumping to forking and fracturing as a knee-jerk solution.
by daxfohl | 2025-04-16 19:52:59+00:00
This old obscure blog post about framework patterns has resonated with me throughout my career and I think it applies here too. LLMs are best used as "libraries" rather than "frameworks", for all the reasons described in the article and more, especially now while everything is in such flux. "Frameworks" are sexier and easier to sell though, and lead to lock-in and add-on services, so that's what gets promoted.

https://tomasp.net/blog/2015/library-frameworks/
by sqw3rl | 2025-04-16 19:53:05+00:00
the argument in the paper seems to be that coding ability is what leads to the tipping point. Eventually human-level (then superhuman) coders augment the AI research process until an AI research agent is developed, and it's exponential from there.

We know they are developing more advanced models, and we know they're secretive about it, but how advanced?... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
by kragen | 2025-04-16 19:53:11+00:00
The interpreted BASIC on most home computers was Microsoft BASIC-80, which, as I remember it, was also painfully slow. There were lots of programs in it, and it was good enough for some games, but for the most part "real software" for those computers was written in assembly language. Even Turbo Pascal was written in assembly language, not Pascal.

I think now we know how to do better.
by trod1234 | 2025-04-16 19:53:30+00:00
"Solving issues through greater regulation."

Before you know, we'll have an Anti-dog-eat-dog bill, and equilization of opportunity acts. The high seas will be no longer be safe. Copper and other critical materials needed for infrastructure will no longer be available. Gasoline will go through the roof to something like $33/gallon.

Companies that once stood as steady as oak trees will vanish in the night.

Good ole rail will still be available. The only thing missing is Rearden metal.

When government forces banks to loan to people who can never pay it back. Where society becomes only about what you can do for others, and never what others can do for you. Where simply claiming you need more means you get paid more.

The inevitability of someone stopping the motor of the world is something we all must consider. It certainly won't be like in the books.
by croisillon | 2025-04-16 19:53:38+00:00
mmh ok thanks, i guess i need extra maths training ;)

i didn't mean knowing _that_ the range is between 4 and 6 but _why_, i thought the weighing would be explained by the reasoning, like: "we divide a €100 bill between possibly 4, rather 5 and most probably not 6 persons"
by roughly | 2025-04-16 19:54:16+00:00
The family example is a pat example, but take something like project planning - two tasks, each one takes between 2 and 4 weeks - except that they’re both reliant on Jim, and if Jim takes the “over” on task 1, what’s the odds he takes the “under” on task 2?

This is why I joked about it as the mortgage derivatives maxim - what happened in 2008 (mathematically, at least - the parts of the crisis that aren’t covered by the famous Upton Sinclair quote) was that the mortgage backed derivatives were modeled as an aggregate of a thousand uncorrelated outcomes (a mortgage going bust), without taking into account that at least a subset of the conditions leading to one mortgage going bust would also lead to a separate unrelated mortgage going bust - the results were not uncorrelated, and treating them as such meant the “1 in a million” outcome was substantially more likely in reality than the model allowed.

Re: negative feedback - that’s a separate point from the uncorrelated errors problem above, and a critique of using the normal distribution at all for modeling many different scenarios. Normal distributions rely on some kind of, well, normal scattering of the outcomes, which means there’s some reason why they’d tend to clump around a central value. We see it in natural systems because there’s some constraints on things like height and weight of an organism, etc, but without some form of constraint, you can’t rely on a normal distribution - the classic examples being wealth, income, sales, etc, where the outliers tend to be so much larger than average that they’re effectively precluded by a normal distribution, and yet there they are.

To be clear, I’m not saying there are not statistical methods for handling all of the above, I’m noting that the naive approach of modeling several different uncorrelated normally distributed outcomes, which is what the posted tool is doing, has severe flaws which are likely to lead to it underestimating the probability of outlier outcomes.
by skygazer | 2025-04-16 19:55:05+00:00
I think you're trying to re-contextualize the old Standards joke, but I actually think you're right -- if a front end model could dispatch as appropriate to the best backend model for a given prompt, and turn everything into a high level sort of mixture of models, I think that would be great, and a great simplifying step. Then they can specialize and optimize all they want, CPU goes down, responses get better and we only see one interface.
by carlita_express | 2025-04-16 19:55:28+00:00
I am aware of that, like I said:

> (Or at least because O(log) increases in model performance became unreasonably costly?)

But, yes, I left implicit in my comment that the trend might be “fleeting” because of its impracticality. RL is only a trend so long as it is fashionable, and only fashionable (i.e., practical) so long as OpenAI is fed an exponential amount of VC money to ensure linear improvements under O(log) conditions.

OpenAI is selling to VCs the idea that some hitherto unspecified amount of linear model improvement will kick off productivity gains greater than their exponentially increasing investment. These productivity gains would be no less than a sizeable percentage of American GDP, which Altman has publicly set as his target. But as the capital required increases exponentially, the gap between linearly increasing model capability (i.e., its productivity) and the breakeven ROI target widens. The bigger model would need to deliver a non-linear increase in productivity to justify the exponential price tag.
by Jugurtha | 2025-04-16 19:55:37+00:00
>* I have a trained ML model that solves a niche task really well — but turning it into a full-blown app seems like overkill.*

A RESTful API, either metered billing or otherwise with something like Lago[0]

>* I’ve written a CLI tool that processes log files better than anything else I’ve found, but it’s too specialized to justify making a company out of it.*

Enterprise. Find organizations that have this problem, know they have this problem, spent money to solve it, but aren't too satisfied with the solution.

>* I built a few small functions in different languages (Python, Go, Rust) that do neat things — data cleanup, API scraping, PDF generation — but none of them are “products” by themselves.*

A suite for organizations that need that.

All these can be your way into these organizations to get to know them, identify their problems, uncover patterns or segments, etc.

- [0]: https://www.getlago.com/
by freeone3000 | 2025-04-16 19:55:40+00:00
One of the key takeaways belies the entire premise: if you want to build a housing fix for the UK, build it in America?

After identifying a very real, pressing problem, they made a business to solve it. They were then more focused on building that business rather than fixing the actual problem. It seems like the takeaway is: don’t worry too much about the problems where you are, instead move to the US and write software.
by rsynnott | 2025-04-16 19:55:47+00:00
> Reading how Pepys arranged for his diary to be preserved makes me think that he would have enjoyed this more modern presentation.

I mean, he might not be too happy about the faux-Spanish bits, in which he wrote about his many affairs and other bad behaviour, being decoded...

It's a lot of fun, though, and the comments are usually quite good.
by seszett | 2025-04-16 19:56:21+00:00
> children have effectively no legal obligations to their parents in old age

I don't know which country you are talking about, but at least in France and Belgium they do.

Parents do not have an obligation to pay for their children's post-secondary education though (but they have to provide for them if they are not financially independent).

Single people in Belgium often complain that they are more taxed than families and that it's some kind of injustice.
by geye1234 | 2025-04-16 19:56:28+00:00
> Does it matter? Even if I plainly see it produce a chocolate bunny, for what reason would I need to make up my mind on that? I fail to see the utility. "I don't know" remains a sufficient state going forward.

That's a different question. I'm not asking whether you have a reason to make up your mind on the question, just whether it's rational to think one or the other.

Couple more questions:

Is math an area where you can make up your mind?

Do you know whether you know the answer to the question I posed above? Which was:

>> "Everything I know, I know with the certainty of math, or not at all". Which of the two does this statement itself fall into?
by jcynix | 2025-04-16 19:56:44+00:00
"Use a tool to verify the date if needed" that's a good idea, yes. And the answers I got are based on UTC, so 23:06 PDT should match the 23. for Europe.

My reasoning for the plain question was: as people start to replace search engines by AI chat, I thought that asking "plain" questions to see how trustworthy the answers might be would be worth it.
by jemmyw | 2025-04-16 19:56:55+00:00
Maybe ChatGPT told them it was a good idea? Considering the proliferation of these tools there's no way it's worth $3B. This functionality is going to be built into every IDE eventually: vscode just got an agent mode, it might not be great yet but it's only a matter of time until Windsurf is essentially just management tools because there won't be much editor value add available.
by boston_clone | 2025-04-16 19:57:03+00:00
I think that's a strawman about my use of the word "automatic"; my point is that it's not indicative of anything special as they were awarded without needing a qualifying event like you'd see with a V device, silver star, LoM, MoH, etc.

Him denigrating fellow soldiers and being grossly unqualified to even communicate properly in his role are also concerns, but somewhat off-topic.
by splimeproject | 2025-04-16 19:57:16+00:00
Just wanted to say thank you again for all the thoughtful input in this thread! It really helped shape the direction of a tool we're now building — something lightweight that lets you connect small functions (in any language) into reusable, swappable pipelines, with the option to share or monetize them.

We'll be posting updates here on HN, and also sharing progress via X/Twitter (@splime_proj), LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/sp-lime), and Telegram (https://t.me/+8ekv5cANUXllZDJi) if you'd like to follow along or try the prototype when it's ready.

Really appreciate the discussion — this thread was a huge inspiration!
by bigyabai | 2025-04-16 19:57:58+00:00
> Specifically, I sought an explanation for retracting a ‘hypothesis’, but I did not receive a response.

Consequentially, it would be nice if the OP presented some justification for reading into it. This reads like Frontiers covering their ass, which is hardly a new pattern new between the retraction of climate denialism and AI-generated illustrations.

Both of those were justified retractions, I have a hard time getting angry at this instance on principle alone.
by clpm4j | 2025-04-16 19:59:11+00:00
If a government truly wanted to fix a housing "crisis", wouldn't a ban on any type of corporate entity from buying single-family homes be an efficient solution? E.g., LLC's can no longer purchase single-family homes. Only real, live human individuals can purchase single-family homes. They could also try to implement some type of ban on any single individual person from purchasing more than 1 (or choose a number) single-family home.
Show HN: Planoramic – Simple, intuitive, drag and drop project planning
by Lexandros | 2025-04-16 19:59:11+00:00
Hey HN,

We just launched Planoramic, a lightweight, intuitive, drag-and-drop Gantt-style planning tool. We built it because most planning tools we tried were either too bloated or too complex. Planoramic is designed to be intuitive enough to master in minutes — no steep learning curve, no complex user interface.

It’s great for solo professionals, small teams, startups, or anyone who needs to visually map out timelines, product roadmaps, or event plans.

Would love your thoughts, especially around onboarding, UX, and what you'd expect from a tool like this.

Cheers! Alex
by makingstuffs | 2025-04-16 19:59:20+00:00
The email I received in case anyone is wondering:

Hi <makingstuffs>,

I'm Michael, the founder and CEO of Cursor. I noticed you recently canceled your subscription, and I wanted to check in. If we fell short for you, I want to learn why and make it right.

First, if you'd like me to refund your account, please just reply to this email to let me know. I'd be happy to.

Second, could you share a sentence or two on what you disliked about Cursor? Or perhaps a screenshot of where it performed poorly? This will help us improve the product for future users.

I'd be very grateful to understand your candid thoughts. I'm listening and eager to fix our experience for you. Wishing you the best in any case!

Best, Michael

And my reply which I never got a response to:

Hi Michael,

Thanks for reaching out. I have honestly found that recent updates to the app have been extremely detrimental to the DX and productivity. A couple big issues I have found:

1. Removing the floating component window and providing no way to get it back. As a dev who is often travelling and working from a laptop screen I found the floating window to be extremely handy and its removal essentially meant I just do not use the composer anymore.

2. Constantly overriding VSCode native shortcuts. This is the most detrimental thing I have experienced, personally. Shortcuts are crucial to productivity and are engrained in muscle memory over years. Overriding them is essentially removing years of learned behaviour (things like cmd + shift + l)

3. The floating completion windows. These often end up overlapping my code code and break my flow. I have to press escape to close it and the whole experience is just jarring

4. Making the cursor dance around the screen when suggesting completions. I get that completions can sometimes be handy but moving my cursor when I am in the flow just makes me rethink what I am doing so that I can read a guess as to what I want which is often incorrect.

5. Poor suggestions. In the past month (maybe two?) I have noticed the quality of prompts is not up to par. I often find that Cursor will do weird things like import `jest.Mock` in my unit tests when I have not used jest in any repo which I have been actively maintaining since using cursor.

As for the refund I will leave that decision for you. I knew I was entering beta software when I ordered accepted the terms so I wouldn't be annoyed as such. Though, saying that, I do find myself using cursor a lot less now and am going to most likely shift back to plain VSCode as a result of the above.

If I think of anything else I will let you know.

Thanks,

Love, Peace and Happiness,

<makingstuffs>
by taylodl | 2025-04-16 20:00:10+00:00
No, I was arguing the presence or not of a Y chromosome is insufficient in determining sex. Besides which, very few people have ever had a chromosome test. There are women in this world who have no idea they have an XY chromosome, yet they've been female their entire life. Legally calling that person 'male' is an affront to their person, and I would argue the Law has no power to make such a claim.
by Macha | 2025-04-16 20:00:27+00:00
Here's their "10 popular sites using Wordpress"

- microsoft.com - It's not wordpress, probably home grown

- wordpress.org - This one's a freebie

- digicert.com - Using Adobe Experience Manager, per script includes

- wordpress.com - Another freebie

- mozilla.org - No, using a homegrown CMS: https://github.com/mozilla/nucleus

- nih.gov - It's using Drupal, per a meta generator tag

- forbes.com - No real for or against evidence, though the lack of any wp- paths leans a little more against it being wordpress

- archive.org - It's some type of react app, not wordpress. Probably home grown

- nginx.org - Just... no.

- ebay.com - Would it surprise you, no.

I have serious questions about their methodology.

Similarly, just because sites like Techcrunch use Wordpress, doesn't mean they're doing it by having someone upload files over FTP to some cPanel managed Godaddy account.
by danenania | 2025-04-16 20:00:45+00:00
I think it depends a lot on how you value your time. I'm personally willing to spend hundreds or thousands per month happily if it saves me enough hours. I'd estimate that if I were to do consulting, I'd likely be charging in the $150-250 per hour range, so by my math, it's pretty easy to justify any tools that save me even a few hours per month.
by jMyles | 2025-04-16 20:01:02+00:00
> let's focus on solving the original funding disaster

The _original_ funding disaster is that this problem was delegated to the economic machinery of a nation-state, and humanity is presently in the process of evolving beyond nation-states.

Innovation in communication and information archival is an extremely long evolutionary process, persisting across aeons in the case of media like DNA and language, while the trivial shuffling through different varieties of state happens on comparatively extremely short (sometimes century or shorter) scales.

So, any solution that truly addresses the _original_ funding disaster must be future-compatible with an internet in which we've overcome the burden of nation-states.
by bluGill | 2025-04-16 20:01:28+00:00
Atari made a lot of bad decisions, but what you were asked is not something you should expect someone in marketing to understand in general. There is only so much someone can get good at in their lifetime and so eventually you will have to give up understanding everything - and then look like an idiot when you ask for something that is obviously unreasonable to someone who does know.

What was asked for is a reasonable ask. It just isn't possible to create.
by DemiGuru | 2025-04-16 20:01:47+00:00
What is new

rocks.nvim installation

snacks.picker support

blink.cmp support

healthcheck module

minimal reproduce script

self-documenting Makefile

many bug fixes from the community

What is planned: The eventual goal would be you only specify the short url to this plugin and a workspace on a brand new machine and get seamless experience without extra steps.

A builtin LSP server, phasing out builtin completion sources https://github.com/obsidian-nvim/obsidian.nvim/pull/52

Better coordination with render plugins like render-markdown.nvim markview.nvim, and eventually phase out builtin ui module once the planned neovim native presentation mode lands

Phase out reliance on plenary.nvim and rg

A simple fallback picker UI, so that no picker is required

Better support for Non-English characters A todo task system Moreeeeeee tests https://github.com/obsidian-nvim/obsidian.nvim/issues/53

Documentation site for users and contributers