MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by johnatwork | 2025-04-07 18:14:28+00:00
I worked at a speed shop in my youth and at the time I was into Paintball so I had an idea.

We tried something similar to good effect, but we unfortunately had no good knowledge on how to refine it. It's hard to just shoot compressed air into the manifold and not have it blow back out of the intake. Either way we figured out a way to increase the volumetric efficiency as well as gains from running cool dense air. We were very close to pre-spinning the existing turbo/super setups and experimented with that as well. We gave up because Nitrous oxide at the time was much easier to work with and popular, and the tanks we had to experiment with was tiny compared to the large scuba tanks.

We also tried using compressed CO2 bottles to spray towards the intercooler to cool that down considerably, that worked decently as well, but no good data to support.
by antonvs | 2025-04-07 18:14:32+00:00
> In the confession of The Golden State Killer, he said that he would feel a force enter his being and do the raping and murdering.

In a modern mental health context, we generally call this mental illness.

Does describing it as some "other intelligent agent" have any meaningful explanatory power? People similarly talk about devils and angels, but such talk hasn't led to effective ways of dealing with such issues.

> not a single one of you can explain our tragic human situation.

We're evolved animals, and far from perfectly rational. Do you see some mystery needing explanation? The existence of good and bad impulses and behavior is hardly some sort of mystery.
by consumer451 | 2025-04-07 18:15:05+00:00
> Would be interesting to see some methods come out for individuals to measure their own personal success rate/ productivity / whatever with these different models. And then have a way for people to compare them with each other so we can figure out who is working well with these models and who isn't and figure out why the difference.

This would be so useful. I have thought about this missing piece a lot.

Different tools like Cursor vs. Windsurf likely have their own system prompts for each model, so the testing really needs to be done in the context of each tool.

This seems somewhat straightforward to do using a testing tool like Playwright, correct? Whoever first does this successfully with have a popular blog/site on their hands.
by gogurt2000 | 2025-04-07 18:15:44+00:00
Every sequence of bits can have meaning depending on how it's interpreted. If there are infinite universes, then in one them there's a hardware platform that will interpret 'xiHkv9m1twpb0alV5Vn85A95KGdvSsciA4x3V0bzocZeJ3mpbzsKppUnFmySjABp86dUvlgodUyRz8texwaZwbat9odWNJY5yO8S' as a Tetris program. And in another universe that same sequence will be interpreted as a still frame from the movie The Matrix. When you ponder the infinite, meaning kind of dissolves.

It sounds like your "quantum random number generator" would produce a different sequence of bits in every universe? I actually think this breaks things. If every universe gets a different sequence, then there's no promise that any given sequence will align with a universe where it can be interpreted. I also think this means most universes end up with a sequence so long they can't interpret it.

Another way to look at it: if every universe gets a different sequence, then only 1 universe will get any given sequence. As an example, let's take the byte code to print 'Hello world.' in an x86 linux binary. If that sequence is produced in this universe, okay. But if it's produced in a universe where the x86 instruction set is different, or doesn't exist or where the linux binary format is different or doesn't exist, or where English is different or doesn't exist... There's lots of reasons the string might be seen as random garbage. There's just as many reasons the string could be interpreted as a song or a poem or any number of things.

I think to get the outcome of "every possible program is generated," you need to generate the same sequence in every universe, or every sequence in one universe.
by graypegg | 2025-04-07 18:15:55+00:00
Honest feedback: if you're pitching this to a cohort of people specifically known to have trouble with focus, it might not be a good idea to lead with a video where you type out (with typos you go back and correct) the pitch for your application slowly over the course of a fake conversation...

The video controls are hidden on it too, and with no other details on the page, you will have trouble converting people.
by neonsunset | 2025-04-07 18:16:09+00:00
> I'd like everything to be F# with native compilation

This already works today (even with GUI applications) - just define non-unbound-reflection using replacements for printfn (2 LOC) and you're good to go: dotnet publish /p:PublishAot=true

To be clear, in .NET, both JIT runtime and ILC (IL AOT Compiler) drive the same back-end. The compiler itself is called RyuJIT but it really serves all kinds of scenarios today.

> makes F# a poor choice for producing the kinds of precise abstractions needed for an OS

You can do this in F# since it has access to all the same attributes for fine-grained memory layout and marshalling control C# does, but the experience of using C# for this is better (it is also, in general, better than using C). There are a couple areas where F# is less convenient to use than C# - it lacks C#'s lifetime analysis for refs and ref structs and its pattern matching does not work on spans and, again, is problematic with ref structs.
by bakkoting | 2025-04-07 18:16:59+00:00
New models suddenly doing much better isn't really surprising, especially for this sort of test: going from 98% accuracy to 99% accuracy can easily be the difference between having 1 fatal reasoning error and having 0 fatal reasoning errors on a problem with 50 reasoning steps, and a proof with 0 fatal reasoning errors gets ~full credit whereas a proof with 1 fatal reasoning error gets ~no credit.

And to be clear, that's pretty much all this was: there's six problems, it got almost-full credit on one and half credit on another and bombed the rest, whereas all the other models bombed all the problems.
by nofalsescotsman | 2025-04-07 18:17:05+00:00
So is the idea here, that you block access to the YouTube website directly, but allow watching through approved channels on https://maekitsafe.com?

If so, I'd like to see some detailed instructions for users on how they can actively block YouTube.com while still allowing embed to play on your site. I think that may trip a lot of non-tech people up.
by absolutelastone | 2025-04-07 18:17:23+00:00
Last time I visited a Chinese factory (which was before covid) it was heavily automated without much staff. They also did have a few foreign laborers who didn't speak the local language, ironically.

I visited a US factory more recently,o and it was all about A.I., automation, and engineers (who maintained and operated the robots). Availability of cheap unskilled labor was not a relevant factor in the business.
by mikestew | 2025-04-07 18:17:29+00:00
That's a long-winded way to say, "no, I've never tried it". If one has never tried a pursuit, I can understand how it might "seem dumb". What seems dumb to me, though, is doing track days for years on end, and never once trying to see how fast you could launch a bike down a drag strip, and then going on about how dumb drag racing is.
by blintz | 2025-04-07 18:18:00+00:00
I know this would be less fun, but given that the key space was only 36^4, why not just run the actual decryption functionality in QText? Like, even if it takes 1 second to decrypt, spin up 32 cores and wait a day. They allude to the idea that checking the key derivation is faster, but I wonder by how much.

(of course, it’s still interesting to read about 90s encryption, so I appreciate that they did it the fun way)
by momojo | 2025-04-07 18:18:13+00:00
This reminds me of a current problem facing the bio-imaging community; many microscopes, many formats.

My company specifically deals with one of the post-processing steps and we've had to build our own 'universal adapter'. Its frustrating because it feels like microscope companies are just re-inventing the wheel instead of using some common standard.

There has been an effort to standardize how these TB size datasets are distributed[1]. A different but still interesting issue.

[1] https://ngff.openmicroscopy.org/
by renewiltord | 2025-04-07 18:18:22+00:00
Oh I see. When you meant "very expensive" you meant "easily accessible for the median American" and when that guy said "wealthy people" you interpreted that to be "the median American". It's true that Europeans and so on are quite poor but the company is in the US. Yep, factually most Africans can't go to Disneyland either.
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 | 2025-04-07 18:19:12+00:00
"Photos of kids? Maybe that one will be The One that we end up framing? Miscellaneous business records? Maybe those will be the ones we have to dig out for a tax audit? Web pages on government sites? Maybe there will suddenly be an interest in obscure pages on public health policy if a global pandemic happens."

Perhaps I am missing something, but these examples all sound like candidates for _offline_ storage, for which no third party custodian or data center is required.

The price of large capacity NVMe SSDs continues to fall.

The amount of energy, the resource requirements, not to mention the environmental and community impact, of running a car insurance company are miniscule in comparison to that of running a data center.
by root_axis | 2025-04-07 18:19:18+00:00
If you're willing to torture the analogy you can find a way to describe literally anything as a system of outputs based on inputs. In the case of the brain to LLM comparison, people are inclined to do it because they're eager to anthropomorophize something that produces text they can interpret as a speaker, but it's totally incorrect to suggest that our brains are "essentially the same thing" as LLMs. The comparison is specious even on a surface level. It's like saying that birds and planes are "essentially the same thing" because flight was achieved by modeling planes after birds.
by creatonez | 2025-04-07 18:19:56+00:00
> Because code LLMs have been trained on the syntactic form of the program and not its execution

What makes you think this? It has been trained on plenty of logs and traces, discussion of the behavior of various code, REPL sessions, etc. Code LLMs are trained on all human language and wide swaths of whatever machine-generated text is available, they are not restricted to just code.
by MandieD | 2025-04-07 18:20:04+00:00
Lufthansa does in Germany. They've cut their flights from a lot of the regional airports to Munich and Frankfurt (I think the government made them if ground transport time is lower than a certain amount), and replaced the former mostly with shuttle buses (Munich airport is not on a major rail line) and the latter with "AiRail" (Frankfurt is, and it's a high speed line) which makes regional hub train stations look like airports to the booking systems.
by em3rgent0rdr | 2025-04-07 18:20:34+00:00
More precisely "pulse width" would be a time, while "duty cycle" would be a percent.

And while when going from 0% to 50% duty cycle it could be said that "a square wave with a low pulse width will sound thinner than one with a high pulse width", however, once you go past 50% duty cycle the situation reverses. So a 25% duty cycle would sound almost identical to a 75% duty cycle...the amplitudes of their Fourier transform components would be identical.
by andrewmcwatters | 2025-04-07 18:20:43+00:00
I don't see this listed here or the other associated sites, so I'll ask:

1. Does this integrate natively with `package.path` and `package.cpath`?

2. Does it detect non-standard, popular installations like through brew(1)?

3. Can you install by GitHub `:user/:repository`?

Also, neat project! Nice work.
by serviceberry | 2025-04-07 18:20:58+00:00
> The most hated companies [...] Johnson & Johnson, 3M

You're living in a serious bubble if you think people hate the company they most readily associate with shampoo or scotch tape.

Almost all "most hated company" rankings can be broken into two categories: the ones many consumers had direct negative experiences with (Equifax, Comcast) and the ones they were told by the media they should be upset with (Anheuser-Busch).
by pc86 | 2025-04-07 18:21:15+00:00
C-suite executives are "management" only insofar as they are someone's direct supervisor and that person wants to make them happy. And if you've got brand new managers with single-digit years of experience reporting to them, sure they probably do a fair bit of people management. But that's not the norm. If you're at a sufficiently large company you'll have Presidents reporting to the C-suite, 3-5+ levels of VPs below that, 1-3 levels of directors, and a level or two of individual contributors. So you're approaching double-digit numbers of people between C suite and the people who should theoretically actually need day-to-day performance management.

There is not a competent Executive Vice President or Division President in the world that needs to be managed by their boss.
by antonvs | 2025-04-07 18:21:26+00:00
There's a risk that someone uses such a library the wrong way. A big part of the goal of legal compliance and security at large enterprises is to protect staff from doing dumb things that could have bad consequences, and one of the easiest ways to do that is to ban things that are particularly prone to that. It's a blunt weapon, but a more targeted one requires much more work and care.
by superkuh | 2025-04-07 18:21:41+00:00
I read the logs with my human eyes manually because I am interested in learning about the web and internet. In fact today I found a whole new useful search engine because I saw it's spider in my logs.

64.62.202.82 "GET /library/Math/Mathematical%20Methods%20for%20Physicists_%20A%20concise%20introduction_%20Tai%20L%20Chow_%202000.pdf -" "Mozilla/5.0 AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko; compatible; Centurybot/1.0; +http://www.rightdao.com/bot.html) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36"

It turns out that http://www.rightdao.com/ is a great old-style search engine that actually returns many tens of pages and thousands of results. As opposed to google that only ever returns <400, bing <900, and kagi <200.

I guess I keep logs because I want to interact more directly with the internet as a whole and experience the serendipity that comes with that.
by uh_uh | 2025-04-07 18:22:19+00:00
We don't really have a clue what they are and aren't capable of. Prior to the LLM-boom, many people – and I include myself in this – thought it'd be impossible to get to the level of capability we have now purely from statistical methods and here we are. If you have a strong theory that proves some bounds on LLM-capability, then please put it forward. In the absence of that, your sceptical attitude is just as sus as the article's.
by Aurornis | 2025-04-07 18:22:21+00:00
It says "Prepared with AI" in the title, but the article is about someone who blatantly lied about their past experience in the interview.

The AI was used as a tool to generate false stories, but that's not what I assumed when I read the title. It's common for people to "prepare" with LLMs by having them review resumes and suggest changes, but asking an LLM to wholesale fabricate things for you is something else entirely.

I do think this experience will become more common, though. There's an attitude out there that cheating on interviews is fair or warranted as retaliation for companies being bad at interviewing. In my experience, the people who embrace cheating (with or without LLMs) either end up flaming out of interview processes or get disappointed when they land a job and realize the company that couldn't catch their lies was also not great at running a business.
by recursive | 2025-04-07 18:22:28+00:00
Adding more channels does nothing to the overtone information. From what I can find[1], it seems that the phase of the 25% and 75% waves are such that the two waves are actually inverse of each other. I don't know much about Gameboy hardware though. Do you actually know what the point of this is?

[1]: https://gbdev.gg8.se/wiki/articles/Gameboy_sound_hardware#Sq...
by seec | 2025-04-07 18:23:14+00:00
You are dead wrong. I have had both wireless and wired expensive gaming mice and the fact is, it makes very little difference for a whole lot of cost and trouble. You largely underestimate people susceptibility to fashion/trend and just going with what's supposed to be better.

I also have a Magic Mouse (the V2, my V1 broke) and I have a wired Mighty mouse before. Outside of the ball being replaced by tactile scrolling, the wired mouse was a better product.

And if you had done your research, you would know that there is very little correlation between gaming peripherals and gamer level/quality. It just doesn't matter that much and those who play a lot will have 2 wireless mouse or one of the pads to make up for the annoyance of battery management (but it has a cost and is just a waste generally).

I don't want to call you an idiot, but I have knowledge on the subject far deeper than you can imagine, so I would say you are the one out of touch.
by lkrubner | 2025-04-07 18:23:27+00:00
I agree with the emphasis on networking. At the risk of sounding like I am doing an advertisement, last month I gave away 5 free tickets to graduates of Fullstack Academy to come to my event, and one of those people found a part-time connection to a startup via the event. I'll do the same again, if you're in New York City, I offer 5 free tickets. Reach me at lawrence@krubner.com. Mention this Hacker News post. We will have entrepreneurs at this month's event who are hiring. Come join us. Details:

https://respectfulleadership.substack.com/p/april-28-the-inf...
by jraph | 2025-04-07 18:23:31+00:00
> Is the llama license open source as defined by the OSD? No

No indeed, full stop. I think that If one needs to express some idea, one should use clear and exact terms for this. I don't think "open source", which is widely recognized with a specific meaning, should be twisted. The shared definition of "open source" is the one defined by the OSD.

> But for the majority of people, they don't care

Maybe they should, but even if they don't, it's not an excuse. Especially in an article about the very topic at hand.

The open source definition seems constantly attacked for some reason, and that blurs the meaning of everything in the ecosystem. We need to fight back against this. If you care about open source, how are you supposed to spread the word if "open source" has lost its meaning?

It also matters because if one thinks that open source is the better thing to do, but everything and their dog is called open source, then everything is good and we don't need to bother with the principles anymore (not unlike the Overton window).

Now, in this case for this article, it's just an example that doesn't work, it's not something fundamentally wrong about it. I'm just pushing back on the idea that it doesn't matter if we misuse "open source" a bit which seems to spread fast these days.
by LordDragonfang | 2025-04-07 18:23:57+00:00
You are saying no while presenting nothing to contradict what GP said.

Judging someone's external "involuntary cues" is not interrogating their internal state. It is, as you said, judging their response (a synonym for "answer") - and that judgment is also highly imperfect.

(It's worth noting that focusing so much on the someone's body language and tone that you ignore the actual words they said is a communication issue associated with not being on the spectrum, or being too allistic)
by inertiatic | 2025-04-07 18:24:07+00:00
I don't know how this is something related to AI - you could polish and embellish your resume before LLMs too, I'm fairly sure. I guess this gets the clicks.

Not being to remember small details about certain projects is also perfectly fine for people who have worked for more than a couple of years. Unless you can discover a pattern of lying like the author supposedly did then I would just be perfectly fine moving on to another topic.
by mperham | 2025-04-07 18:24:08+00:00
When I look at a drag stripe, I see a gray, dirty rectangle of asphalt that generates huge amounts of noise and air pollution. Beyond the environmental destruction, it's a hobby that quickly destroys vehicle parts, engines, tires, brakes, etc. All of that destruction, for what? 5 seconds of extreme acceleration? To go one hundredth of a second faster this time?
by pc86 | 2025-04-07 18:24:16+00:00
Functionally 0% of companies are working on things as important or impactful as the atom bomb, and I include FAANG et al in that. Maybe a small handful of AI companies will actually put out something that important? But even most of them won't.

The vast majority of companies are putting web forms over a database. Letting one or two people hold all the technical knowledge for something like that is borderline fiduciary negligence.
by liendolucas | 2025-04-07 18:24:27+00:00
Problem is that no-one knows when that's going to happen and it can bounce back as fast as it went down, meaning in that situation you would be missing the opportunity too. The investor strategy as per Bogle is simple: buy regularly, regardless the market and hold it forever (until you retire). I don't want to speculate, because that is known to be a losers game. I read some time ago "The Little Book of Common Sense Investing" and to me that seems to be good enough advice to stick with. It's simple and as for what I read from other sources it works.

> Remember, the trick is to buy low and sell high, not buy high and hope it will somehow get higher.

If you take a look at the historical S&P500 (1926-2016) trend even taking into account market crashes the curve always goes up in the long term. That's why Bogle's strategy works.
by aadhavans | 2025-04-07 18:24:28+00:00
A very well-written piece. The section on funding open source is as relevant as it's ever been, and I don't think we've learnt much since last year.

As the proportion of younger engineers contributing to open-source decreases (a reasonable choice, given the state of the economy), I see only two future possibilities:

1. Big corporations take ownership of key open-source libraries in an effort to continue their development.

2. Said key open-source libraries die, and corporations develop proprietary replacements for their own use. The open source scene remains alive, but with a much smaller influence.
by Aurornis | 2025-04-07 18:25:34+00:00
> Another thing that I can take away from that is "take home project" is no longer a good idea in AI times

Take-home projects were never meant to be evaluated in isolation.

It was common for candidates to have their friends review the take-home or even do it for them.

You had to structure the take-home so the candidate could then explain their choices to you and walk you through their thought process. When you got a candidate who couldn't answer questions about their own submission, you thanked them for their time and sent the rejection later that evening.