MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Beubax | 2025-04-26 22:44:08+00:00
Websockets and observers. An observer monitors the current working directory, and when any file changes, it triggers an event. The websocket then broadcasts the updated code to all connected UIs. Any action performed in the UI modifies the codebase directly, never the UI state itself. These file changes trigger the observer, completing the loop. This architecture ensures the codebase remains the single source of truth, with UI changes always reflecting the actual code state rather than optimistic predictions.
by GeoAtreides | 2025-04-26 22:45:50+00:00
Scale, quality and the reliability make a difference.

There are, and always will be, _few_ humans with the talent and knowledge for geo guessing, their attention and time scarce and precious resources. Enter LLMs, which can process images at scale.

Someone might observe strict OPSEC when it comes with their presence online. But would their cousins do the same? Their elderly parents? Their friends? How about the myriad CCTV camera in the public spaces? Photos aside, no one can live off the grid in this age; our electronic reflection grows sharper, more focused every day. And so we generate data and LLMs can compile that data at scale, reliable and fast.

As a small aside: "The idea that authoritarian regimes had no way to place the location of photos before" it's not an argument I made or implied.
by bsaul | 2025-04-26 22:45:54+00:00
"enums represent a different and incompatible concept in every language I know."

Enums has always felt very natural in every modern languages i've tried (swift and rust, for example), even with associated values. The underlying "sum type" concept also is very intuitive, and seems very complementary to structs for example.

Can you expand a bit on what you mean ?
by walleeee | 2025-04-26 22:47:24+00:00
> If we don’t allow it to be studied because it is creepy, then we will never develop any understanding of the very real manipulation that is constantly, quietly happening.

What exactly do we gain from a study like this? It is beyond obvious that an llm can be persuasive on the internet. If the researchers want to understand how forum participants are convinced of opposing positions, this is not the experimental design for it.

The antidote to manipulation is not a new research program to affirm that manipulation may in fact take place but to take posts on these platforms with a large grain of salt, if not to disengage with them for political conversations and have those with people you know and in whose lives you have a stake instead
by SamPatt | 2025-04-26 22:47:25+00:00
Exactly - I've been posting a few comments with examples doing this.

I'm confused how so many people have such different outcomes. People seem to have fixated on the fact that the models use EXIF data if it's included, but it's trivially easy to run the test ensuring that isn't happening, and the results are still amazing.

I think some people really want to dismiss the capabilities of the models. I get that there's hype and it's annoying, but... look at what it's doing, right now, in front of you!
by minimaxir | 2025-04-26 22:47:48+00:00
Due to Poe's Law, it's hard to know if a bad/uncanny valley/implausible submission or comment is AI generated, and it tends to result in a lot of false positives. I've seen people throw accusations of AI just because an em-dash was used.

The only reliable way to identify AI bots on Reddit is if they use Markdown headers and numbered lists, as modern LLMs are more prone to that and it's culturally conspicuous for Reddit in particular.
by simonw | 2025-04-26 22:48:11+00:00
Personal identity and personal anecdotes have an outsized effect on how convincing an argument is. That's why politicians are always trying to tell personal stories that support their campaigns.

I did that myself on HN earlier today, using the fact that a friend of mine had been stalked to argue for why personal location privacy genuinely does matter.

Making up fake family members to take advantage of that human instinct for personal stories is a massive cheat.
by LightHugger | 2025-04-26 22:48:19+00:00
Then why are other language articles completely different? Have you gone and checked? Are all the other articles just wrong? Why is the "consensus" for the gamergate article citing direct primary sources that were involved and attacked by gamergate instead of reliable and impartial secondary sources? Nobody has even bothered addressing any of questions or points i brought up yet. Because they break the narrative.

The way the article is written is arguably biased and irrational on it's face, when reading it you should get the feeling of something being amiss and information being excluded. Sometimes you can just tell when writing is biased based on the language, it's a pattern that's good to learn.
by joe_the_user | 2025-04-26 22:48:45+00:00
"Bad behavior is going happen anyway so we should allow researchers to act badly in order to study it"

I don't have the time to fully explain why this is wrong if someone can't see it. But let just mention that if the public is going to both trust and fund scientific research, they have should expect researchers to be good people. One researcher acting unethically is going sabotage the ability of other researchers to recruit test subjects etc.
by camgunz | 2025-04-26 22:49:14+00:00
I'm pretty sympathetic to people who are hawkish on immigration: the right's been demagoguing it for... forever? You hear all kinds of total bullshit like they drive down wages or they eat fuckin dogs or whatever.

The real tragedy is that immigration is probably the reason we've outpaced other OECD nations in economic growth recently, and more to the point, immigrants almost always drive wages up. TL;DR: immigration is practically all upside.

The second part of this is that immigration and border enforcement is often pretty cruel, just by nature. You're talking about turning kids back into some Central/South American social system, breaking up families, etc. You only hear about it now because the Trump admin perversely rejoices in trumpeting the cruelty, but it's only slightly more gross now than it usually is. Until Trump, the right used to leave this part out.

https://www.ucdavis.edu/magazine/how-does-immigration-affect...
by sage92 | 2025-04-26 22:49:19+00:00
You’ve stated this so matter of factly that I imagine you have knowledge that somehow has alluded most people.

You mention gradients, which implies you can measure the delta/change of conscious, which implies you have a solid working definition, AND a static still point that does not change which this “consciousness” gradually changes.

From my perspective, which is first person pov, if I can detect changes in my “consciousness”, then where am I looking from to _notice_ this change? Is consciousness not the requirement of change detection?
by CFLAddLoader | 2025-04-26 22:51:24+00:00
Over time, people change the weapons they use to hurt each other with. What used to have nothing in common with words meant to hurt now demands mental energy to decide whether it is an attack.

Political correctness is about cleanly dividing ideas into ones obviously meant to hurt and ones obviously meant to be harmless. It is impossible to even come close to succeeding at this, but it is still worth trying.
by brewtide | 2025-04-26 22:51:24+00:00
Regardless of engineering background or not, I do believe this is a major different between men and women in general.

I know I'm guilty of the same thing and I'm positive many others here have had very similar experiences.

IN GENERAL, it seems when guys talk to someone else, they are likely looking for input into a situation. If we didn't want input, we would just sit and ruminate in our own personal thoughts processes.

Your story is also a great lesson in why communication is key - unfortunately it takes both parties to realize this!
by fuzzfactor | 2025-04-26 22:51:26+00:00
On early game systems, Atari computers and stuff, the physical two-position switch is usually for choosing which analog channel you want the analog-mode TV to be set for so the game display will show up when the TV is tuned to that particular legacy analog channel.

You would choose either channel 3 or 4 from the external RF adapter, or a switch on the game console itself.

There were not any recognized markets where different TV stations were broadcasting on both 3 & 4 within the same realistic radio range.

Remember, when Atari moved beyond mere game consoles to the more decently powerful home computers, it was a drop-in wiring replacement for the previous unit at home. They booted fast to ROM game cartridges, and plenty of people turned them off when they were done playing, but others tried to keep them powered at all times to maintain high scores in games that didn't support saving them.

One cartridge was not a game, it was for programming Basic, and booted to the immediate command line. This one didn't retain any code you would write so probably more people kept their Atari or Commodore on 24/7 then if possible, if they were doing some programming.

IOW your programming environment was always just one of many channels on your TV remote, it popped up instantly, and was right where you left it previously.

Unless of course an "Evil Maid" came along with bad intent, but it was usually an errant vacuum cleaner or rambunctious pet that did the deed :\
by SahAssar | 2025-04-26 22:51:38+00:00
Well, first of all I think if something is open source it will tend to be more privacy-focused since it will disclose what it tracks. People will either find that acceptable or fork and change.

> Does this mean that open source is more important than privacy to people of this mindset?

Not exactly, but I think the questions should really be something like "who is the guarantor of your privacy?"

If you are happy with it being a corporation like apple then you're fine. I'm not, and what we consider more secure would have to be a much deeper conversation in which we actually define our threat models.
by epage | 2025-04-26 22:52:39+00:00
Looking at some of the examples, I don't feel like I can interpret how some of the strings are suppose to work. I feel like this is a flaw with over-emphasizing Postel's Law.

Also, while indentation "works" for Python, the ratio of different levels per line is low while YAML it is high and I'm not a fan. I'd want to see a more complex example to have a real feel for this.
by atombender | 2025-04-26 22:52:56+00:00
The documentation site might be a little better: https://docs.nats.io/

NATS is mainly two things:

1. Core NATS, an ephemeral message broker. It's a lightweight pub/sub system where routing of messages is based on wildcard paths. All in memory, lightning fast, extremely lightweight. You can use it for RPC, queues, broadcasting, file transfer, anything.

2. JetStream, which is a Kafka/Pulsar-like log built on top of Core NATS. Streams are indexed, meaning there's no strong need for partitioning or consumer groups, since readers can efficiently filter the stream by interest (you can still partition for write performance). Supports both durable and ephemeral consumers, in-memory streams, ack/nack, priority groups, deduplication, exactly-once delivery, hierarchical clusters, offline clusters ("leaf clusters"), mirroring, etc.

I often find it difficult to explain the magic of NATS. It's a communication model that doesn't really exist anywhere else, as far as I've seen. The closest might be ZeroMQ.

JetStream could be explained as "Kafka for people who don't want to administer Kafka". It's very low-maintenance, very easy to use, feels super lightweight, and still offers much of the performance and reliability of Kafka, as well as a much richer feature set that maps better to what people may want from a streaming log.
by SR2Z | 2025-04-26 22:53:08+00:00
> When Google used its search monopoly to promote Chrome in a way that no other company is capable of (a link on the Google search main page), did that have some impact, or zero impact?

No more impact than bundling a default web browser which can then be used to download another one. That's pretty uncontroversial these days, seeing as how iOS bundles a default browser BUT STILL forces you into using WebKit regardless of if you wanted to switch or not :)

> When Google used its ad monopoly to give Chrome free ad placement…

Except it's not free. There is an opportunity cost to flogging your own product in space that you otherwise could sell more ads in. You said it yourself: if other browsers were willing to pay 5c/click, how is it possible for that space to be free to Google?
by SoleilAbsolu | 2025-04-26 22:53:21+00:00
My experience is different, I worked at a ~$20M company where I was told the incoming CEO came from a company close to $1 billion. Curious, I searched his name immediately and found that he was under active SEC investigation for withholding payments to suppliers to make the company appear to have more cash on hand for a potential buyout. I can't tell you how much the board was tripping over themselves to kiss his ass and "learn from a guy in the big leagues."

When he arrived, the exec parking lot changed from Toyotas and 5 year old Lexus to AMG Mercedes, M-Series BMWs, the white-label almost racecar Porsches, and I distinctly recall being told the company could "not afford" my request for a $1 to $2/hr raise.

People erroneously think that wealth is contagious (it's not!) so will do almost anything to court "big time players" regardless of their actions and ethics.
by gotoeleven | 2025-04-26 22:54:16+00:00
I'm making a normative statement--a statement about how things should be. You seem to be confusing this with a positive statement, which you then use to claim I'm ignorant of how things actually are. Of course identity does in fact matter in arguments, its about the only thing that does matter with some people apparently. I'm just saying it shouldn't.

The only reason that someone would think identity should matter in arguments, though, is that the identity of someone making an argument can lend credence to it if they hold themselves as an authority on the subject. But that's just literally appealing to authority, which can be fine for many things but if you're convinced by an appeal to authority you're just letting someone else do your thinking for you, not engaging in an argument.
by bogtog | 2025-04-26 22:54:47+00:00
> As far as IRB violations go, this seems pretty tame to me

Making this many people upset would be universally considered very bad and much more severe than any common "IRB violation"...

However, this isn't an IRB violation. The IRB seems to have explicitly given the researchers permission to this, viewing the value of the research to be worth the harm caused by the study. I suspect that the IRB and university may get in more hot water from this than the research team.

Maybe the IRB/university will try to shift responsibility to the team and claim that the team did not properly describe what they were doing, but I figure the IRB/university can't totally wash their hands clean
by ThrowawayR2 | 2025-04-26 22:55:10+00:00
> "Less than 30% of voter age Americans voted for this"

I'll point out again an article about a post-election analysis by David Shor posted on HN a few weeks ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43400172): "The reality is if all registered voters had turned out, then Donald Trump would’ve won the popular vote by 5 points [instead of 1.7 points]. So, I think that a 'we need to turn up the temperature and mobilize everyone' strategy would’ve made things worse."

Even as late as April 9, disapproval of the Democratic Party is higher than for the Republican Party according to Pew Research: https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2025/04/23/views-of-con...

There isn't a hidden wellspring of pro-Democratic voters to tap. The Dems are going to have to go out and fight to win people over.
by shadowgovt | 2025-04-26 22:55:10+00:00
The great irony of the American bigot arguing against "chain migration" is that their immediate forefathers not only allowed it as a compromise, but embraced it with open arms.

In the fifties and sixties, those in America who deeply concern themselves with average skin tone saw a darkening country. They believed that fast-tracking immigration for family members would allow Europeans escaping the aftermath of World War II to immigrate rapidly to America, which would bolster the numbers and tilt the national average a bit, if you will, caucasian.

... what they fundamentally failed to grasp is that after the war, America sent her fighting boys (and girls) out to enforce Democracy over Communism at the point of a sword. Sen them to countries where the average citizen was not, generally, bothered by intense direct sunlight. And those boys fell in love. With people who distinctly lacked a certain, shall we say, Innsmouth look that our bigot friends preferred in their fellow citizens. Plus, folks from geographically-adjacent countries who went through the arduous process of naturalization were able to bring their extended families in as well.

The final consequence was a policy that had been supported on one side for mostly economic and "melting pot" reasons that was also supported by bigots for decidedly bigot reasons... Turned out to make the country more diverse, not the less-diverse the bigots had hoped for.

It's a feel-good self-own story.
by forrestthewoods | 2025-04-26 22:55:20+00:00
Well there's two flavors to this. Building glibc and building a program that links against glibc. They're not entirely the same. And you'd think the latter is easier. But you'd be wrong!

It should be trivial to compile glibc with an arbitrary build system for any target Linux platform from any OS. For example if I'm on Windows and I want to build a program that targets glibc 2.23 for Ubuntu on x86_64 target that should be easy peasy. It is not.

glibc should have ONE set of .c and .h files for the entire universe. There should be a small number of #define macros that users need to specify to build whatever weird ass flavor they need. These macros should be plainly defined in a single header file that anyone can look at.

But glibc is a pile of garbage and has generated files for every damn permutation in the universe. This is not necessary. It's a function of bad design. Code should NEVER EVER EVER have a ./configure step that generates files for the local platform. EVER.

Read this blog post to understand the mountains that Zig moved to enable cross-compilation. It's insane. https://andrewkelley.me/post/zig-cc-powerful-drop-in-replace...
by chromanoid | 2025-04-26 22:55:33+00:00
Are you serious? With services like https://anti-captcha.com/ the bot free anonymous discourse is over for a long time now.

It's in bad faith when people seriously tell you they don't expect something when they make rules against it.

With LLMs anonymous discourse is just even more broken. When reading comments like this, I am convinced this study was a gift.

LLMs are practically shouting it from the rooftops, what should be a hard but well-known truth for anybody who engages in serious anonymous online discourse: We need new ways for online accountability and authenticity.
by LightHugger | 2025-04-26 22:55:43+00:00
You mean you watched people writing misinformation articles smearing people in realtime, or were you actually on the hubs where gamergate was organized? There is a big difference between these things, and no there were not people organizing for "misogyny campaigns" the discussion was 99% corruption and ethics focused. Especially in gaming circles of 2014 which were very progressive.

Quite frankly i find people who think there were actually some kind of organized misogyny campaigns in 2014 to be a form of insane, like something breaks inside a person because they need a bogeyman so badly that it becomes a core of their being even though it's incredibly irrational. At the time journalists would just take random twitter people who weren't affiliated with gamergate and hold them up as if they represented the movement. Reminds of me the tactics used against occupy wall street honestly. It's not a rational or reasonable belief.
by standardUser | 2025-04-26 22:56:02+00:00
> Do you think the "Institute for Research on Labor and Employment" at Berkley is without biases?

No, did I state or imply that? A private organization was paid by an industry to produce a report, and that report overwhelming supports the industry that paid for the report. How do weigh such data in your own decision-making? I give data from a public university, produced by individuals we could email right now if we wanted, individuals who presumably have reputations and career trajectories, a pretty hefty weight. Not above suspicion and not devoid of bias, but worth parsing. Is an industry report, by the industry for the industry, really worth parsing to you?
by bla3 | 2025-04-26 22:56:15+00:00
In my experience they're not great with mathy code for example. I had a function that did subdivision of certain splines and had some of the coefficients wrong. I pasted my function into these reasoning models and asked "does this look right?" and they all had a whole bunch of math formulas in their reasoning and said "this is correct" (which it wasn't).
by bee_rider | 2025-04-26 22:56:23+00:00
Argument 2 seems more like a thought-experiment or a question than an argument. (Unless maybe I missed the point?)

Anyway, isn’t a machine that “is absolutely sure” (of anything at all) having subjective experience (I think is the word, not a brainologist) by definition anyway?

We could clearly design a machine that asserts that it is self aware very strenuously

printf(“I *am* experiencing existence!”);

But whether or not it actually sure of anything or experiencing at all is the question in the first place.
by camgunz | 2025-04-26 22:58:21+00:00
I grew up working class in Indiana, and can confirm. My in-laws were reeling after the 2016 election and they just couldn't understand how people could vote for Trump, basically. My answer was "you're polite, highly educated, upper middle class people, most people everywhere are not like you. That doesn't make them bad or less than, but they make bad decisions basically constantly. This is just one in a long stream of them."
by jfengel | 2025-04-26 22:59:07+00:00
On what basis are we to judge the arguments? Have you done broad primary sociological and economic research? Have you even read the primary research?

In general forums like this we're all just expressing our opinions based on our personal anecdotes, combined with what we read in tertiary (or further) sources. The identity of the arguer is about as meaningful as anything else.

The best I think we can hope for is "thank you for telling me about your experiences and the values that you get from them. Let us compare and see what kind of livable compromise we can find that makes us both as confortable as is feasible." If we go in expecting an argument that can be won, it can only ever end badly because basically none of us have anywhere near enough information.
by shadowgovt | 2025-04-26 22:59:48+00:00
America has a bad track record of punishing leaders we elected who betray our values. There's some history as to why... But this experiment in democracy may not be able to continue to survive practice of that particular tradition.

It will make the office less desirable if people know that bad choices could send them to prison. That's probably okay. Hundreds of millions of people, surely we can find someone brave enough to still take the government roles knowing that once they leave office, it could be into a prison cell if they fuck up.
by astura | 2025-04-26 23:00:11+00:00
Yeah, I can't find the post again but they itemized it according to what they thought was normal basics.

I remember there was large car payments.

OI have been driving for more than 25 years, I've had a car payment for maybe 10 months in those 25 years. To me a car payment is a massive luxury, to this dude it's a minimum basic.