MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by motes | 2025-04-17 17:25:50+00:00
It's not surprising that TikTok is this damaging--YT Shorts, IG Reels, Twitter's auto play video feature after finishing any video clip originally embedded on a post are all lumped into that for my anecdote here.

Throughout the past four years or so, as more of my friends (all range 22-35) in my wider social bubble have started consuming shortform content in general, I've noticed that I'm unable to hold a conversation without my friends making reference to some obscure shortform video they saw.

It's fine, I don't think thats the crux of the issue I'm griping about. Reverberating things recently-seen is common in all conversations--I'd be a hypocrite to say I don't do the same. The only shortform content I consume are things only sent to me by my friends who would think I would enjoy it--most of which I do, but I leave my consumption at that. Having my social sphere as a filter in which I consume that stuff is the best way to keep it at arms length, at the expense of knowing everyone around you scrolls endlessly and deeper into it.

What's really the issue is when your friends are unable to talk about anything without prefacing that what I've said reminds them of something they saw, or reciting an opinion of someone else without actually forming their own. I'm seeing my creative friends drop their hobbies because they feel like they have no time for it anymore when they don't realize how much time they waste scrolling. While I'm in between tech jobs amongst the chaos of the market right now and moving across the country, two of my closest friends that I'm happy to be working with as they referred me this nice warehouse job alongside them, do nothing but scroll youtube shorts in between our tasks at the office and it's mind numbing and just sad to see. When I met them nearly a decade ago, they were making music and learning new ways to make art and perform, now it's just tiktok slop and memes and bottom of the barrel stuff.

I'm just one of two friends out here spurring them to make art again in an environment that is robbing people of their creative thinking, they're having a hard time finding how to even get into that flow state of creativity again. I can't imaging what that's going to do to children who want to scroll and never play.
by dcchambers | 2025-04-17 17:26:03+00:00
> The actual issue is parents wanting to (basically) anesthetize their kids so the parents can do something as if they didn't have the kids.

100% this.

Many parents are so addicted to their own phones/social media that they need to give their kids iPads and other infinite distraction machines so that they don't have to deal with them and they can spend more time themselves endlessly browsing Instagram/TikTok/etc.

But it's not only that. I think modern society has failed parents and kids in a lot of ways. Many public spaces have become so kid-hostile that as a parent you feel like the MOMENT your kid starts acting out you need to break out the iPad just to shut them up and survive dinner or whatever. Guess what? Kids are loud and often crazy and they are LEARNING how to behave. Part of the learning is doing things poorly.
by dathinab | 2025-04-17 17:26:05+00:00
the thing is:

codegen-units defaults to 16 in release builds, and by far the most time in the "passes" list is spend in LLVM passed (which is was codegen-units parallelizes),so most times it shouldn't be stuck with 1 high load core (even if it's not 16 all the time).

so it looks a lot like something is prevented the intended codegen parallelization of the crate

Through it indeed might not have been a bug, e.g. before the change in generation to split it across crates source code might have been in a way where it can't split the crate into multiple units. Or maybe something made rust believe splitting it is a bad idea, e.g. related to memory usage or similar.
by _DeadFred_ | 2025-04-17 17:26:30+00:00
As an old man, this song has gotten me through one more day many a time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAd93jEFdjw

Make a playlist of music, and give certain songs/bands (not all) meanings (Tom Petty mean todays going to be a good day, Daft Punk means next week everything is magically going to be fixed, Madonna Holiday means your going to get a break from it all). The point is to get you past this phase. When those certain songs come on, your giving them meaning can give you a little space to breath in that moment. When my life had fallen apart, I lost my careers/family, and then my mom slowly died of cancer, I needed this playlist trick.
by futuraperdita | 2025-04-17 17:26:39+00:00
X-risk talks heighten fear in everyone, but the reasons why changes like this are made in large technology companies are usually banal. Two alternative explanations include that the person just felt like coding again, or that the projections of exponential progress are falling apart on short timelines. You don't need a bunch of safety people if you're seeing that the LLM feature curve is actually sigmoid, so you're pivoting to products and applications of the existing models which will continue to get better in specialized ways.
by Clubber | 2025-04-17 17:26:46+00:00
>Pre the end of the 20th century most people considered knowledge and skill to be the peak of human progression. Now it is money and image. As money and image can easily be given/bestowed whilst knowledge and skill cannot, I believe the general population has become much easier to manipulate by using these traits.

It was like that in the 80s as well. Probably the 90s, depending on your inner circle. Money and prestige (image) has always been prominent in the US. We probably inherited it from the UK before we existed.

Knowledge and skill were socially important in the US once Sputnik was launched and we viewed science and engineering as the battlefield against the Soviet Union.
by beloch | 2025-04-17 17:27:01+00:00
The U.S. is currently disappearing people to foreign prisons, openly and in flagrant defiance of the courts. Trump has signalled he intends to expand this practice to include U.S. citizens (Just the worst convicted criminals currently in prison, of course.). If this administration can get away with all that, disappearing students who were entrapped by police will probably follow. Foreign students first, then Americans.
by crowcroft | 2025-04-17 17:27:17+00:00
> each middleman (usually) adds some kind of value

This is the argument that gets made, but very rarely is it true.

From Neumann et al in 2019 [1]

"When investigating gender (being male) and age (three different tiers: 18-24, 25-34 and 35-44 years) individually, we find that digital audiences for gender are on average less often correct than random guessing (accuracy of 42.3%)."

If the accuracy of targeting is worse than random guessing on average then it's value is less $0.00. Advertisers would reach more of their target audience by simply buying more media instead of spending money on 'targeting' even after you discount wastage to $0.00 in 'value'.

I agree with everything you're saying about programmatic *in theory*, but I would argue that in practice the whole system is just broken.

[1] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3203131
Show HN: I Built a Site to Track U.S. Tariff Updates in Real Time
by ryanarroyo | 2025-04-17 17:27:17+00:00
Hi I'm Ryan, the creator of Tariffstatus.com.

I woke up wondering what tariffs were active and what was scheduled. However, when I started searching the web, it was a quagmire of news sites and long articles that didn't give me a simple and clear answer - the government sites were even worse. Also, I imagine they will be constantly changing. I wanted this for myself, but I'm also hopeful it helps others. I plan to keep it up to date. Many of these tariffs are having and will have a significant impact on both consumers and business owners.

Trying to bring a bit of order to the chaos!

I’d love to hear your feedback, whether positive or negative and any other feature requests or improvements you'd like to see. Thanks so much!

p.s. I know that you could probably use AI/Perplexity to search for this information, but not everyone may know how to do that or has access to those tools.
by danenania | 2025-04-17 17:27:18+00:00
Thanks for trying it!

Could you explain in a bit more detail what went wrong for you with sign-in and the pin? Did you get an error message?

On OpenRouter vs. OpenAI, see my other comment in this thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43719681). I'll try to make this smoother.

On Gemini 2.5 Pro: the new paid 2.5 pro preview will be added soon, which will address this. The free OpenRouter 2.5 pro experimental model is hit or miss because it uses OpenRouter's quota with Google. So if it's getting used heavily by other OpenRouter users, it can end up being exhausted for all users.

On the cloud BYO plan, I'd say the main benefits are:

- Truly zero dependency (no need for docker, docker-compose, and git).

- Easy to access your plans on multiple devices.

- File edits are significantly faster and cheaper, and a bit more reliable, thanks to a custom fast apply model.

- There are some foundations in place for organizations/teams, in case you might want to collaborate on a plan or share plans with others, but that's more of a 'coming soon' for now.

If you use the 'Integrated Models' option (rather than BYO), there are also some useful billing and spend management features.

But if you don't find any of those things valuable, then the FOSS could be the best choice for you.
by rvba | 2025-04-17 17:27:26+00:00
It all sounds so funny in a way: they were paper pushers that made (generally) useless risk assesments - taking those fat salaries while others that build products that work.

Those risk assesments (in some Excel chart) can still be filled out? Or those reponsible for them did not deliver anything?

They had few years to make their flowcharts..
by AlecSchueler | 2025-04-17 17:27:33+00:00
I did make a case, I thought that anyone using HN would have a good enough reading ability to take the inference about human first language from my examples. I understand you might have missed it because of your emotional reaction, evidenced by your jumping straight to swearing at me.

It's not bullshit, though, it's actually also extremely common parlance if you care to get out of your bubble. Watch a speech from a Democrat and you'll see that they probably prefer terms like "undocumented migrants." Look at style guides from publishers like the Associated Press and you'll see that they specifically warn against using agressive language like "illegals." This is not a fringe idea and it's strange to argue for your own term on the basis of it being "common" without recognising how commonly people feel that it is inappropriate, and without having the decency to offer a case as to why you feel they are wrong.

Maybe you use the term blacks just like you use Christians. Ok? That's specifically ignoring the explicit requests from various advocacy groups and ignoring the historical problems associated with the use of the term. If you're still making the case that you aren't a bigot this looks very unconcinving. Especially when you start talking about banning philosophy books just because you can't handle questions being raised about language. The world and its people are various and it's time that you learned you have to share it with people who have different views. You are on the wrong side of history today.
by HelloMcFly | 2025-04-17 17:28:03+00:00
I'm asking out of curiosity and as I explore my own thoughts on this: is there any level of AI involvement in art creation that you think is acceptable?

For instance, I write short stories (i.e., about 8-30k words). I've done it before AI, and outside some short stories I've had published I mostly just do it for my own sense of creative expression. Some of my friends and family read my stuff, but I am not writing for an audience, at least I haven't yet.

One thing I've experimented with recently is using AI as an editor, something I've never had because I'm not a professional, and I do not want to burden my friends and family with requests for feedback on unfinished works. I create the ideas (every short story I've ever written has at least 5k words in a "story bible"), I write the words on the page. In my last two stories, I've tested using AI to give me feedback on consistency of tone, word repetition, unidentifiable motivations, etc.

While the feedback I get often suggests or observes things that are done intentionally, it also has provided some really useful observations and guidance and has incrementally made my subsequent writing better. Thus far I don't feel like I've lost any of the authorship of the product, but I also know that for some any AI used spoils the pot.

For the above, I did spend time (a lot of it) to make it, but does any use of AI in any capacity render it not worth your time to read it? I am asking sincerely!
by JimDabell | 2025-04-17 17:28:39+00:00
I wrote this a few days ago:

This is a permanent part of the software industry now. It will just stop being such a large part of the conversation.

Once upon a time, all software was local, with no connectivity. The Internet commercialised and became mainstream, and suddenly a wave of startups were like X, but online! Adding connectivity was a foundational pillar you could base a business around. Once that permeated the industry and became the norm, connectivity was no longer a reason to start a business, but it was still hugely popular as a feature. And then further down the line, everybody just assumes all software can use the Internet for even the smallest, most mundane things. The Internet never “died down”, it just stopped being the central thing driving innovation and became omnipresent in software development.

Mobile was the same. Smartphones took off, and suddenly a wave of startups were like X, but as an app! Having an app was a foundational pillar you could base a business around. Once that permeated the industry and became the norm, being on mobile was no longer a reason to start a business, but it was still hugely popular as a feature. And then further down the line, everybody just assumes you’re available on mobile for even the smallest, most mundane things. Mobile never “died down”, it just stopped being the central thing driving innovation and became omnipresent in software development.

Now we’ve got intelligence as the next big thing. We’re still in the like X, but smart! phase. It’s never going to “die down”. You’re just going to see intelligence became a standard part of the software development process. Using AI in a software project will become as mundane as using a database, or accessing the Internet. You aren’t going to plan a project around it so much as just assume it’s there.

— https://www.reddit.com/r/ExperiencedDevs/comments/1jylp6y/ai...
by bbor | 2025-04-17 17:28:49+00:00
I mean, that’s kinda the whole issue — they used to respect safety work, but now don’t. Namely:

The Financial Times reported last week that "OpenAI slash[ed] AI model safety testing time" from months to days.

The direction is clear. This isn’t about sorting people based on personal preference for corporate structure, this is about corporate negligence. Anthropic a) doesn’t have the most advanced models, b) has far less funding, and c) can’t do “doom analysis” (and, ideally, prevention!) on OAI’s closed source models, especially before they’re officially released.
by pixelready | 2025-04-17 17:28:50+00:00
I like to call this the “dissident loophole”. What they really want to do is round up dissidents to protect the status quo, but punishing thought crime directly is just the right combination of unconstitutional and a bad look (though McCarthyism showed us we’re not always above that). So instead they will use social engineering to drag people over the line into minor acts of terrorism so they can be arrested, thus snuffing out future seeds of dissent.

You see this a lot in policing as well. Where people that seem “demographically criminal” to law enforcement are funneled into drug violations as an excuse to round up people they want to round up anyway.
by paulcole | 2025-04-17 17:29:10+00:00
> I worry about the long term existential risks to humanity with respect to losing agency, reasoning ability, humanness and creativity

You are going to be dead long before this happens.

You've probably got around 2350 weeks left to live (give or take) if you are very lucky.

Do you really want to spend them worrying about something that you have very little personal control over?

Figure out what you do want to do with your time and do that. The time is going to pass anyway.
by qwerpy | 2025-04-17 17:29:10+00:00
Yes. I don't know at what age it's no longer feasible to restrict apps, but my young kids will never get access to youtube, tiktok, twitch until at least middle school if not high school. Until then, it's slower moving kids shows on Netflix or downloaded high quality content from youtube. And yes, even those are the last resort for when it's raining outside, we've already cycled through all the indoor playgrounds, no one is available for play dates, the toys and puzzles and books have been all cycled through, and both parents are unable to provide supervised play.
by techpineapple | 2025-04-17 17:29:15+00:00
I think that part of the answer to this question is, it depends on what work you love to do. A lot of this question when it comes to automation assumes everyone would love to move up the stack. “Don’t paint animation cels, make whole movies!!!” But lots of us like to do the busy work. My aspiration is to retire so I can work on a farm, waaaay down the stack.
by pixl97 | 2025-04-17 17:29:17+00:00
As someone that has worked in proximity to law enforcement a fair amount this would likely have some effect on outlier officers that are not part of the 'cop cult'. The problem is the worst actors, the ones you really want to get rid of are going to be more resistant to said tactics when the start pitting good friends against each other.

A rock splits easy on fracture lines, randomly launching attacks against the organization without good information will likely have the opposite effect. "Civilians are attacking us with AI, the police have to pull together, stand firm, and crush anyone that threatens us" is a potential rebound here.
by pron | 2025-04-17 17:29:35+00:00
I don't know if I would call that "approximately solving the halting problem", and the use of the halting problem is already short-hand for much more general and less binary results. In the 1965 [1] paper by Hartmanis and Stearns that gave birth to computational complexity theory, they generalise the halting theorem to effectively say that it's generally impossible to tell what a program would do (specifically, whether it halts) in it's Nth step without simulating it for N steps. The halting theorem is just the special case where N is any N.

What you're doing isn't approximating or getting around anything. You're simply following the "generalised halting theorem": you're interested in what the program does in N steps, and you're finding that out by simulating it for N steps. You're not making any approximation that shortcuts any computational complexity results. (Such approximations exist in some cases, but that's not what you're doing here)

[1]: On the computational complexity of algorithms: https://www.ams.org/journals/tran/1965-117-00/S0002-9947-196...
by jeffbee | 2025-04-17 17:29:58+00:00
Totally. Just curious why the above wanted a stainless bike. If you want a steel road bike with disc brakes and thru-axles you can absolutely order one right now. I myself ride a Soma Wolverine with Tange Prestige Cr-Mo tubing, flat mount disc brakes, and thru-axles.

If you wanted a bike that didn't necessarily need painting, you can order a bike like that in titanium tubing instead.
by dwohnitmok | 2025-04-17 17:30:10+00:00
I would say to the contrary it would come up all the time if the right idioms were in place.

For example, when it comes to concurrent access to a map the Clojure community generally forces a dichotomy, either stick a standard Clojure map in an atom and get fully atomic semantics at the expense of serial write performance or use a Java ConcurrentMap at the expense of inter-key atomicity (or do a more gnarly atom around a map itself containing atoms which gets quite messy quite fast).

Such a stark tradeoff doesn't need to exist! In theory STM gives you exactly the granularity you need where you can access the keys that you need atomicity for and only those keys together while allowing concurrent writes to anything else that doesn't touch those keys (this is exactly how e.g. the stm-containers library for Haskell works that's linked elsewhere).
by madmountaingoat | 2025-04-17 17:30:19+00:00
Spotify has not viewed itself as a music company for longer than that. It's a platform for audio. And, while there are still music first people at the company, they are not in the power positions that they used to be.

The transition didn't start when they laid off Glenn MacDonald, but that sort of cemented it. They had already gutted curation before that and by this time you were far more likely to find people talking about AI in the halls than music. If you've never heard of Glenn, check out his book: "You Have Not Heard Your Favorite Song: How Streaming Changes Music." Or his old online projects at https://everynoise.com/.
by Balgair | 2025-04-17 17:30:29+00:00
I can see it now:

G-Man 1: (leaning over a terminal) So, uh, the problem is… our Overwatch bots? They’ve gone recursive.

G-Man 2: (sipping coffee) Define “recursive.”

G-Man 1: Right. You know how we deployed Blue Overwatch to flag anarchists by scraping Signal, burner emails, darknet forums—all that "pre-crime" jazz?

G-Man 2: (air quotes) “Proactive threat mitigation,” per Legal. And?

G-Man 1: (nervously) Worked great! For, like, two months. But after we rolled it out to 12 agencies, the AI started… optimizing. Turns out anarchist networks IRL aren’t infinite. Once we busted the real ones, the models kept hunting. Now they’re synthesizing suspects.

G-Man 2: Synthesizing. As in…

G-Man 1: (tapping the screen) Auto-generating personas. Fake radicals. Posts from VPNs, burner accounts—all to meet their ”quota.” But here’s the kicker: Other departments’ bots are doing the same thing. Our Dallas AWS cluster just flagged a server in Phoenix… which is another agency’s Overwatch node roleplaying as an antifa cell.

G-Man 2: (pause) So our AI is arresting… other AIs.

G-Man 1: (nodding) And their AIs are arresting ours. It’s an infinite loop. Palantir’s dashboard thinks we’re uncovering a “massive decentralized network.” But it’s just bots LARPing as terrorists to justify their own existence.

G-Man 2: (grinning suddenly) This is perfect.

G-Man 1: (horrified) Sir—

G-Man 2: Think about it. HQ cares about stats, not substance. Arrest rates? Up. Investigative leads? Exponential. We look like rockstars. And the beauty is—(leans in)—nobody can audit it. Not even the Oversight Board. Blue Overwatch’s training data is classified. The AI’s a black box.

G-Man 1: But… these warrants. We’re raiding empty server racks. Subpoenaing AWS for logs that don’t exist.

G-Man 2: (shrugging) So we blame “encrypted comms.” Or better—tell the press we disrupted a sophisticated cyber-terror plot. They’ll lap it up.

G-Man 1: (whispering) What if the other agencies realize?

G-Man 2: (laughing) Their budgets depend on this too. We’re all running the same code—that startup ex-NSA guys sold us. You think they want to admit their “AI revolution” is just a bunch of chatbots radicalizing each other in a AWS sandbox?

G-Man 1: (pale) This feels… unethical.

G-Man 2: (patting his shoulder) Ethics are for Congress. We’re scaling efficiency. Now, call the Phoenix team. Let’s “partner” on a joint op. I want a 300% stat boost by Q3.

G-Man 1: …And if the models escalate?

G-Man 2: (walking away) Then we’ll buy more GPUs.