MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by retrorangular | 2025-04-03 17:39:56+00:00
To what benefit though? People in the US currently provide advanced services such as software sold to people everyplace, and people in developing nations are manufacturing cheap goods, sold to people everyplace.

After tariffs, people in the US are (maybe) manufacturing cheap goods, sold mostly only here, and developing nations continue to manufacture cheap goods for the rest of the world, and fewer people are providing advanced services such as software.

Overall, the world just becomes poorer and has fewer useful services provided. Yes, the US becomes less dependent on the rest of the world, but the rest of the world also becomes less dependent on the US. Material wellbeing of everyone is worse off.

But that's assuming all went to plan. In practice, it's hard to see how they would even achieve bringing manufacturing here through tariffs. Crashing the stock market is a sure-fire way to ensure the next administration (3.5 years away) will revoke them. You could install a dictatorship, but that makes it even less likely for companies to invest in the US. In practice, this will likely just make Americans poorer, but not bring any meaningful amount of manufacturing jobs back. Pretty much the epitome of "cutting off your nose to spite your face."
by ryanackley | 2025-04-03 17:40:02+00:00
I consider this type of thinking to be a form of tribalism because you're essentially saying there are two tribes. Each tribe has specific values.

A person's values are not a dichotomy (i.e. republican or democrat). You simply cannot put people into two buckets that define their overarching moral compass.

A person can be transphobic but support abortion so they have always voted Democrat...or hate everything about Republican values except they got burned by Obamacare so they vote Republican. There is virtually an infinite level of nuance that can be a deciding factor in why someone votes for someone.
by lapcat | 2025-04-03 17:40:16+00:00
> You should study the economic history.

> You should read the primary sources from the civil war.

Please refrain from this type of comment. You should know as longtime, prolific HN commenter that they are against the guidelines.

> The gap has closed almost completely.

I don't think that's true. Some random links: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/Map_of_s... https://www.cnbc.com/select/average-net-worth-by-state/

In any case, it's a red herring, because again, "the political correlation you're implying simply doesn't exist."

> For most of the 20th century, that was exactly the political dichotomy. Democrats were the party of the urban and rural poor, and urban social liberals. Republicans were the party of business and industry, plus religious conservatives.

This is merely a stereotype, an overgeneralization. The reality is much more complex, and inconstant.

But there's an interesting overlap in your claim: "plus religious conservatives". So what happens when "the urban and rural poor" happen to be religious conservatives?

> In states like Georgia, the first places to turn red where affluent educated collar counties around Atlanta, which were benefitting from metro Atlanta’s economic growth.

Given my skepticism of everything else you've already said, I'm not inclined to take anything without proof, but that's not really the issue here. My objection to your theory is not whether it can explain the political situation in the south but rather whether it can explain the political situation in the rest of the country, and I don't see any evidence that it can. Otherwise it's just cherry-picking.

> Abolition was driven by fundamentalist Christians, especially in the midwest.

Not all religion is socially conservative. There are various sects of Christianity in various parts of the country, each with their own social and political tendencies. The civil rights movement also came out of the church, e.g., the Reverend Martin Luther King, the Reverend Jesse Jackson.

> Remember that we didn’t have DNA in the 1850s, so the notion that the races were equal was a moral assertion, not a scientific one.

It's still a moral assertion.
by burningion | 2025-04-03 17:40:17+00:00
So I think there's an assumption you've made here, that the models are currently "60-80% as good as human programmers".

If you look at code being generated by non-programmers (where you would expect to see these results!), you don't see output that is 60-80% of the output of domain experts (programmers) steering the models.

I think we're extremely imprecise when we communicate in natural language, and this is part of the discrepancy between belief systems.

Will an LLM model read a person's mind about what they want to build better than they can communicate?

That's already what recommender systems (like the TikTok algorithm) do.

But will LLMs be able to orchestrate and fill in the blanks of imprecision in our requests on their own, or will they need human steering?

I think that's where there's a gap in (basically) belief systems of the future.

If we truly get post human-level intelligence everywhere, there is no amount of "preparing" or "working with" the LLMs ahead of time that will save you from being rendered economically useless.

This is mostly a question about how long the moat of human judgement lasts. I think there's an opportunity to work together to make things better than before, using these LLMs as tools that work _with_ us.
by do_not_redeem | 2025-04-03 17:41:02+00:00
Siblings are being more charitable about this, but I just don't think what you're suggesting is even possible.

An HTTP client sends a request. The server sends a response. The request and response are made of bytes. Any bytes Chrome can send, curl-impersonate could also send.

Chromium is open source. If there was some super secret handshake, anyone could copy that code to curl-impersonate. And if it's only in closed-source Chrome, someone will disassemble it and copy it over anyway.
by duxup | 2025-04-03 17:41:04+00:00
I think if you prompt any AI with some generic "make trade imbalance go away" type request you'll get this response. Same goes if you just roughly mathed it out yourself.

Of course these trade numbers aren't sports game scores and just "make this different" ... anyone with a clue knows that the end results economical could be very unpredictable and potentially very much not desirable.

It's striking that the administration explanation for all this is, to just not explain how they did anything.
by overfeed | 2025-04-03 17:41:06+00:00
> If the tariffs remained in effect for three decades, or more, there may have been incentive to move

In 3 decades, the US won't be the biggest market for most products - sooner if the harebrained economic decisions somehow persist.

Capital knows no borders, and American companies will "do the needful" to maximize profits wherever they may be found.
by egypturnash | 2025-04-03 17:41:20+00:00
It is 1973.

You go to your hi-fi setup, a veritable temple of sound reproduction.

You peruse your library and select an album. Or perhaps you have a new one that you have carefully carried home from the store. Whichever.

You lift up the cover of your turntable.

Carefully, you extract the vinyl disc from its cardboard and paper sleeves. Taking care not to touch it by its surface, you place it on the turntable. Perhaps you clean its surface with a special lint-catcher designed for this.

You lift up the needle by its little handle. Delicately, you place it on the disc, in the space between the very edge and the visible band of the first track.

There is an anticipatory crackle. A fuzzy pop. The sounds of the needle skidding across the smooth surface of the disc, and dropping into the groove.

A pause.

And then the music begins.

Perhaps the music begins loud and fast. Perhaps it doesn't. Perhaps it's a few words from the bandleader, welcoming you to their new album. Perhaps it's a collage of natural sounds that gradually gives way to music.

When, precisely, did you begin the experience of "listening to music"?

----

It is 2025.

You take out your phone. You turn off its notifications.

You find your headphones and put them on. Perhaps they give off a beep complaining of being out of power, and you have to put them on the charger, and dig up your backup pair, possibly along with an adaptor to plug them into the headphone jack that no longer exists on your new phone.

You open up Spotify, Youtube, whatever you use to stream music. You type in the name of what you want to listen to.

You hit 'play'.

Your phone begins downloading music off the internet. Perhaps first there's an ad. Perhaps several ads. Perhaps not. Perhaps it takes a while to buffer. It's an indeterminate thing.

And then the music begins. As before, perhaps it hits the ground running immediately; perhaps there's some collection of anticipatory sounds, some pause, before the music really gets into gear. Perhaps it's interrupted five seconds in by your discovery that this is actually just the first five seconds of the track followed by an ad for Bitcoin, or the discovery that this is a track with a name similar to what you asked to be played, and you get to go back a few steps. Perhaps you actually get what you wanted.

At what point did you begin the experience of "listening to music"?
by packetlost | 2025-04-03 17:41:32+00:00
Web servers are notoriously easy to implement with message passing / fork. Threading is a particularly bad model for that case.

Games on the other hand? Oh yeah, you definitely need threads for that.

It's important to note that "multithreading" specifically means shared-memory model of parallel processing. Games are more of an exception than the rule when it comes to being well suited to shared memory.
by kristjansson | 2025-04-03 17:41:57+00:00
> Why should common people care

because, like Yishan is saying, they don't even realize the 'empire' _is_ working for them. We sit around in absolute physical security, awash in cheap goods, able to travel anywhere, finding our cultural and technological products in demand across most of the world, ...

We only feel want in areas like medicine and education where protectionism and prejudice have prevented us from fully enjoying the benefits of that position.
by acd10j | 2025-04-03 17:42:19+00:00
Number one rule of combat is that you need a very good homegrown industrial base. In order to be great country it needs to be combat-ready. If you apply that lens, what Trump is doing will start making sense. He is trying to revert globalisation and free trade in order to make the USA manufacturing superpower again. Not sure whether this will be successful or not, as China already has an order of magnitude advantage in manufacturing.
by rexpop | 2025-04-03 17:43:26+00:00
I feel like "tribal relations in central Africa" is a defeatist exaggeration of the requisite nuance necessary to engage meaningfully with socioeconomic power dynamics in one's own society. It's an extremist viewpoint, and unworthy of a "nuance enjoyer."

Remember the Pareto Principle! The principal aspect of Central African Politics is probably, still, colonialism/imperialism and the game of Hungry, Hungry Hippos played between US/Russia/China.

Do you really need to grok the unique reactions to neo-colonialism in every affected African, South American, and Asian country to form a principled, independent outlook?
by api | 2025-04-03 17:43:36+00:00
> for the government to lower the cost of high-quality education

Devils advocate point, and one nobody wants to talk about: what if everyone can't be a high-skill employee?

Imagine if the highest earning jobs required immense physical endurance and strength. Nobody would argue that everyone can do that. It would be obvious that only a subset of people are capable of doing those jobs. For some reason, with intellectual labor, we are able to pretend that there is no threshold and everyone can do it. It's an idea that makes people feel good but what if it's just not true? Can everyone be made above average in something with enough education?

If we're creating an economy where decent jobs only exist for people in the top ~20% of the ability curve, how do we handle that? How do we maintain a democracy? Sometimes people float the idea of UBI, but that could turn out extremely dystopian with a huge underclass of UBI-collecting people in a state of hopelessness and boredom. That doesn't work much better for democracy than a huge underclass of under-employed and unemployed people.

To make matters worse: the fact that our past strategy works so well for increasing GDP means it it tends to inflate assets, including things like housing prices. The end result is a country that looks, to more than half its inhabitants, like a vacation town where outside capital inflates the cost of everything way above what local wages can support. It might not be a coincidence that San Francisco, New York, and other capitals of high margin high skill industries have real estate prices that lock ordinary people out of even "starter homes."

I absolutely do not support Trump's execution here -- it's ham-fisted, reckless, and badly thought out. If we are exiting this neoliberal model, Trump's exit from it is a little bit like Biden's exit from Afghanistan. Still it is obvious to me that the current system is not working for more than half of Americans. It's fantastic for the top ~20% or so and leaves everyone else behind.

We can't keep doing that if we want a democracy. If we exclude 50-80% of the population from anything meaningful or any economic stability, we will get one of two things. Either we'll get the kind of totalitarian state that is required to maintain that kind of inequality in perpetuity, or we will get a string of revolutions or a failed state. People will not just sit around in hopelessness forever. Eventually they will be recruited by demagogues. Ironically Trump has been one of the most effective at this. I'm sure more will eventually show up though. There's a big market for them.
by jajuuka | 2025-04-03 17:43:58+00:00
Agreed, this article feels like ego stroking. Especially with language like "truth seeking". It creates this fantasy that there is this level of consciousness that we can evolve to where we achieve complete knowledge of all subjects. There is a reason we have a democracy with multiple groups and multiple departments. Because no one person has all the answers or is right. We all bring our unique experiences and expertise together to create a better whole. At least that's the idea.
by monkburger | 2025-04-03 17:44:14+00:00
There’s an important caveat to keep in mind when it comes to food databases, especially those relying on branded or restaurant items:

U.S. law does not require food manufacturers to disclose everything that goes into their products. Under the Code of Federal Regulations (21 CFR § 101.100), there are exemptions to ingredient labeling... An example: flavorings, spices, and incidental additives (like processing aids or anti-caking agents) are not always listed explicitly. Also: proprietary blends and "natural flavors" can legally conceal dozens of chemicals (some synthetic), which consumers have no way of identifying.

Micronutrient data is often estimated or missing from labels and restaurant menus, which limits the accuracy of even the best-intentioned databases. Studies show that the nutritional information provided by restaurants and brands is frequently incomplete or inaccurate, especially when it comes to sodium, sugar, and actual serving sizes. (Urban et al. "The Energy Content of Restaurant Foods Without Stated Calorie Information" ; Labuza et al., 2008 and others)

IMO Food databases are only as accurate as the source data allows. Until food labeling laws mandate full disclosure and third-party verification, apps like this can support health awareness. Still, they shouldn't be treated as precise medical or dietary guidance—particularly for people with allergies, sensitivities, or chronic health conditions that require strict tracking.
by nipah | 2025-04-03 17:44:14+00:00
This is actually not that true, what exactly are you saying with "replaced certain circtuits in the brain with man-made equivalents and it continues to work"? I'm certain I never saw something "man-made" like that used to "replace circuits in the brain" and it "continuing to work", in fact this would probably get a nobel for the creator if this was really proven.

Also, we don't have evidence that the processes in the brain are replicable at all, if for example Penrose's theories are correct (or any other non-reductionist that accepts the need for local identity and/or metaphysical properties for the consciousness). You need to assume A LOT of things in order to get this theory some credit, and many things we are literally unable to explain (like consciousness itself) should be reduced to those assumptions in order to make it work (for example, you must assume that is not the gooey stuff that gives rise to the consciousness in the first place, that it does not need very extremely specific conditions to exist, and so on). This line of thinking is kinda dangerous.
by csdvrx | 2025-04-03 17:44:26+00:00
> Route53 handles this already, health checks, geo routing for pennies. If pointing to AWS services can use alias records.

That would use AWS and insulate you from the details.

The fun part is learning how to do that, which gives you a better idea of how it works and full control of the solution.

You can then think about anycast or getting your own IP blocks
by PathOfEclipse | 2025-04-03 17:45:07+00:00
An honest seeker of truth wouldn't just say Jay's estimate was off, but compare it to other estimates of the time. Bhattacharya's IFP estimate was .2%. The WHO's IFP estimate was 3.0%. Which of the two had the more accurate estimate? The WHO, with billions in funding, or Jay operating by himself on a shoestring budget, all while the CDC in its bureaucratic incompetence couldn't be bothered to do any real studies? In fact, a positive outcome of Jay's study was to help understand just how bad the initial estimates were!

And as far as the great Barrington declaration is concerned, it is widely accepted now that the lockdown strategy failed, and that focused protection would have saved far more lives and caused far less economic harm and educational harm, which by the way, correlate with loss of life and loss of years of life. Even far left news outlets admit this now: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/covid-lockdowns-big-...
by losvedir | 2025-04-03 17:45:16+00:00
As a software engineer dealing with bits and bytes all day, it's easy to lose sight of the hard and sharp parts of reality. My wife is a chemical engineer who actually goes into a factory and is constantly dealing with production issues in actually making soap, ice cream, chemicals flow (different factories over her career).

JD Vance had an interview somewhere (I think in the NYTimes?) where he claimed that national prosperity is downstream of military might which is downstream of industrial base. It made me stop and think, because that does line up with what I was taught about how the Allies won WW2, and the US beat the Soviets in the Cold War: we outproduced them. I'm not sure if this is "fighting the last war", though, since I imagine a lot of warfare going forward is going to be technological and with things like drones, etc.

It's just so easy to deal with our economic abstraction, of dollars flying around, and computer work, and services and so on, that I sometimes do wonder about your point here about the actual physical, production of goods, and how important that is. Can you have a long term, stable, healthy, successful country that doesn't (and can't) produce anything physical?

We clearly can still make some stuff. I have a great squat rack and barbell set from Rogue Fitness, which makes stuff here in the USA (captured in this beautiful advertisement video[0]), and it's awesome. But I also have a made-in-the-USA wood pellet smoker which is garbage, and which I kind of wish I had just bought from China.

All to say, yeah, I think there's the potential for there to be something along the lines of what you're saying. That said, the implementation is maybe not great. Even taking the Tesla Texas Gigafactory, which was built in warp speed (construction to first cars in about 1.5 years), that's only leaving 2 years before a potential next administration could roll back the tariffs if they wanted.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aCMGqA6_XY
by no_wizard | 2025-04-03 17:45:28+00:00
As I recall, Hollande decided to ignore all the advice around him[0]

>Mr Piketty’s second criticism touches on Mr Hollande’s tax policy. For years the French economist has argued for a more progressive tax system, which would merge both income tax, currently paid by only half of French households, and the “contribution sociale généralisée”, a non-progressive social charge paid by all. This too was one of Mr Hollande’s campaign promises. Yet the president has shelved any plans to overhaul the tax structure, preferring instead simply to increase taxes on the middle-classes and the rich.

[0]: https://www.economist.com/europe/2015/01/02/pikettys-snub
by vhodges | 2025-04-03 17:45:35+00:00
FW asked AMD about lpcamm memory and AMD looked into it (assigned an engineer and everything) but came back and said no it couldn't be done (I am guessing without crippling performance).

I would be in the market for the MB only but I think I can build a 9950 based system cheaper, but I am not running AI models locally.
by amathew | 2025-04-03 17:45:40+00:00
Hi all, I'm an analytics professional looking for a role as an analyst, data scientist, or analytics engineer

Location: Arizona Remote: Yes Willing to relocate: Yes Technologies: SQL, R, Python Résumé/CV: https://www.linkedin.com/in/abraham-mathew-21221b29/ Email: mathewanalytics@gmail.com
by amarshall | 2025-04-03 17:46:00+00:00
launchd’s ergonomics as a user are quite terrible, though. `start`? No…`kickstart`? No…`enable`? No…`load`? No…`bootstrap`? Maybe. I honestly don’t know. But either way, now is it the file path, the service name, or the fully-qualified name I need…?
by evrimoztamur | 2025-04-03 17:46:07+00:00
Sounds like LLMs short-circuit without necessarily testing their context assumptions.

I also recognize this from whenever I ask it a question in a field I'm semi-comfortable in, I guide the question in a manner which already includes my expected answer. As I probe it, I often find then that it decided to take my implied answer as granted and decide on an explanation to it after the fact.

I think this also explains a common issue with LLMs where people get the answer they're looking for, regardless of whether it's true or there's a CoT in place.
by ViewTrick1002 | 2025-04-03 17:46:11+00:00
And the US has a 25% tariff on F150s (light duty vehicles).

You can go tit for tat down the line, but all in all the numbers I gave you are the sum of everything.

Heavy tariffs won’t bring an equilibrium. It will only make imported goods expensive and allow the existing domestic producers to become laze and uncompetitive, all in all zeroing their export value.