MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by dylan604 | 2025-04-14 17:16:46+00:00
> Once drugs lose patent protection, it's difficult for them to gain approval for new indications, because drug approval procedures are extremely expensive and there's no patent holder left for whom it would make economic sense to spend all that money.

This is precisely why I think a gov't run research effort is the right way to handle this. You don't want to grant a new patent on the existing drug just because of new use of it. That would prevent the generics being used for the original purpose. So if the bigPharma company that created it for original purposes does not want to spend money researching alternate uses, then allow the gov't direct the research in the name of keeping its citizens healthy.

Unfortunately, that doesn't really stand up as a great solution with using the current administration as an example of what happens when you get anti-science mindsets in charge of things. It also helps to have a gov't that is empathetic for its citizens which does not always happen.
by tomrod | 2025-04-14 17:16:51+00:00
Hmm

I use NewPipe for mobile access, works okay

I use PlayLet for Roku, which syncs well using Chromecast protocol, and yeah, the front end on mobile is unhinged. I can't tell what is a game, an advertisement, a solicitation for locals near me, a money grab, a weird A/B tested image advertising a video with eyes larger as saucers and mouth agape like they are choking.

All in dark mode though, so that is nice.

YouTube on desktop with adblocking is usually fine despite Shorts being dumbly pushed.
by croemer | 2025-04-14 17:17:15+00:00
Testing against unspecified other "leading" models allows for shenanigangs:

> Qodo tested GPT‑4.1 head-to-head against other leading models [...] they found that GPT‑4.1 produced the better suggestion in 55% of cases

The linked blog post goes 404: https://www.qodo.ai/blog/benchmarked-gpt-4-1/
by Mystery-Machine | 2025-04-14 17:17:26+00:00
The fact that you cannot wrap your head around something doesn't mean that it's not possible. I do not claim that it is surely possible nor that it isn't. But it sure as hell looks possible. You also probably don't have kids. For example: how do you teach a child to speak? Or someone a new language? You show them some objects and their pronunciation. The same with the seagrass and/or a scarf. That's one way. Dolphins can also see (divers with) some objects and name them. We can also guess what they are saying from the sounds plus the actions they do. That's probably how we got "seagrass" in the first place.

For all the word that they don't have in their language, we/they can invent them. Just like we do all the time: artificial intelligence, social network, skyscraper, surfboard, tuxedo, black hole, whatever...

It might also be possible that dolphins' language uses the same patterns as our language(s) and that an LLM that knows both can manage to translate between the two.

I suggest a bit more optimistic look on the world, especially on something that's pretty-much impossible to have any negative consequences for humanity.
by sjsdaiuasgdia | 2025-04-14 17:17:27+00:00
This is an even worse intentionally created jurisdictional black hole than Guantanamo Bay.

Abduct someone. Move them faster than their family, friends, and legal counsel can possibly follow. Get them on a plane to El Salvador. Put them in the CECOT hole. And then say "Aw geez, they're in Salvadorian jurisdiction now, nothing we can do."

Yes, Abrego Garcia is a Salvadorian citizen. He also had been explicitly granted protected status to remain in the US.

Nothing about this process prevents its application against US citizens. The detainee is pushed through a one-way valve faster than due process can be applied. If we do not protect the rule of law for immigrants who have been granted the right to stay here, we will also lose the rule of law for citizens.
by neltnerb | 2025-04-14 17:17:36+00:00
I remember at the time being frustrated that, after in person interviewing, they left me hanging for four months. I had a NSF grant that had been approved and if Google X had offered me a role I would have turned down the grant, but after months of silence I had to tell Google that I needed an answer or the decision would be made for me.

It was incredibly inconsiderate, the only thing I could guess is that they're intentionally horrible to applicants in order to filter out the ones that won't tolerate it.
by CharlieDigital | 2025-04-14 17:17:43+00:00
Very cool seeing this show up on HN. FDA has a bunch of interested datasets like this that are full of interesting data points.

During COVID, I actually wrote a small sample app that pulls info from this DB: https://www.covidcureid.com/

And gave a talk on it: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/shows/azure-serverless-con...
by tsimionescu | 2025-04-14 17:17:56+00:00
The amount of information transmitted from one generation to the next is potentially much more than the contents of DNA. DNA is not an encoding of every detail of a living body, it is a set of instructions for a living body to create an approximate copy of itself. You can't use DNA, as far as we know, to create a new organism from scratch to create a new organism without having the parent organism around to build it. We do know for certain that many parts of a cell divide separately from the nucleus and have no relation to the DNA of the cell - most well known being the mitochondria, which have their own DNA, but also many organelles just split off and migrate to the new cell quasi-independently. And this is just the simplest layer in some of the simplest organisms - we have no idea whatsoever how much other information is transmitted from the parent organism to the child in ways other than DNA.

In particular in mammals, we have no idea how actively the mother's body helps shape the child. Of course, there's no direct neuron to neuron contact, but that doesn't mean that the mother's body can't contribute to aspects of even the fetal brain development in other ways.
by josefresco | 2025-04-14 17:18:20+00:00
> You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. (Laughter/applause) Right? (Laughter/applause) They're racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic – you name it. And unfortunately, there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people – now have 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks – they are irredeemable, but thankfully, they are not America.

Hilary was only wrong about two things: It's not half of his supporters it's 100% and they're not "deplorables", they're monsters.
by eestrada | 2025-04-14 17:18:30+00:00
My understanding is that TIOBE is primarily based on number of search engine results. Other results like number of active (a commit within the last 6-12 months) open source repos or number of new repos in a given language are other metrics worth considering. The project you linked seems to be one like this.

A high search rate doesn't necessarily mean high rate of real world usage. Correlating across multiple metrics would be a better way to measure popularity.

Although popularity itself may still be a weak signal depending on your purposes.
by JakeAl | 2025-04-14 17:19:58+00:00
This is misleading when you dig into the data. For starters every state and nation does not record deaths and causes of death consistently, so there's a lot of apples and oranges comparisons going on. Second, in the US depending on the state, any death within 90 days of giving birth is labeled as a pregnancy-related death. The person could be hit by a car, or die of a drug-overdose, and it would be still be identified as a pregnancy related death.
by overfeed | 2025-04-14 17:20:14+00:00
> That fails to understand how power in exceptional situations persists

I was describing how dictators concentrate power to themselves using reasonable-sounding pretexts during the initial stages of self-coups, not how the regimes use the acquired powers to self-sustain.

> ...suddenly they'd lose the support of citizens, one of the key pillars keeping them in power.

Dictators, and political incumbents in general don't need support (in a positive, active sense) to go about the business of exercising political power they already wield.

On the flip side, they need a lack of unified opposition to avoid being voted out/toppled, hence dictators lean on corrupting the courts, use the secret police to disappear opposition, and the like. Autocrats will be very happy with a 0.05% approval/99.9% disapproval ratings, as long as their physical security is not threatened by riotous mobs, and their political power unchallenged.
by bananapub | 2025-04-14 17:20:15+00:00
for the people having trouble keeping track, this is the end of due process for everyone, including US Citizens who might imagine they're immune - even if a slightly better US government didn't want to kidnap US Citizens, if there's no process, there's no chance to demonstrate your US Citizenness before you're in a slave labour camp in South America, where the US Government will lie and say they can't get you back from even if they wanted to.
by tialaramex | 2025-04-14 17:20:34+00:00
Having spent many, many years paid to write C, and with no wish to write any more now than I learned Rust, I would suggest a rewording:

"C assumes you know what you're doing, which is only a problem because you don't know what you're doing."

Periodically, especially in r/cpp I run into people who are apparently faultless and so don't make the mistakes that make these languages dangerous, weirdly none of these people seem to have written any software I can inspect to see for myself what that looks like, and furthermore the universe I live in doesn't seem to have any of the resulting software. I choose to interpret this mystery as: People are idiots and liars, but of course there could be other interpretations.
by zoogeny | 2025-04-14 17:20:51+00:00
Sure, at first, until the users demand a "always allow this ..." kind of prompt and we are back in the same place.

A lot of these issues seem trivial when we consider having a dozen agents running on tens of thousands of tokens of context. You can envision UIs that take these security concerns into account. I think a lot of the UI solutions will break down if we have hundreds of agents each injecting 10k+ tokens into a 1m+ context. The problems we are solving for today won't hold as LLMs continue to increase in size and complexity.
by UncleMeat | 2025-04-14 17:20:57+00:00
Guantanamo is indeed a horrible authoritarian injustice but it is not the same. Gitmo is operated by the US government and people detained there can still have access to legal representation to challenge their detainment.

What is happening here is the US government sending people to a gulag operated by a foreign nation and then insisting that that's the end of it. There can be no meaningful challenge of your unlawful detainment. With CECOT your only opportunity to vindicate your rights is at the literal moment that you are grabbed off the street.
by Nicholas_C | 2025-04-14 17:21:01+00:00
Pretty cool, reminds me of content from SeekingAlpha.

I'm trying to do something unrelated with public companies, where did you get a list of all companies filing with the SEC? Or was it built based on whoever filed 8-Ks? A google search leads me to this list [0] but it's missing a few companies.

[0] https://www.sec.gov/files/rules/other/4-460list.htm
by femiagbabiaka | 2025-04-14 17:21:08+00:00
I mean, hypothetically, Bukele could be arrested if he was a defendant in such a suit... except for the fact that ICC member states regularly let wanted war criminals pass through their airspace, or withdraw from the ICC entirely in order to harbor wanted war criminals. In effect the ICC is the USCC, and therefore limited to doing/enforcing things in the interest of the U.S. at any given time.
by runako | 2025-04-14 17:21:20+00:00
ChatGPT currently recommends I use o3-mini-high ("great at coding and logic") when I start a code conversation with 4o.

I don't understand why the comparison in the announcement talks so much about comparing with 4o's coding abilities to 4.1. Wouldn't the relevant comparison be to o3-mini-high?

4.1 costs a lot more than o3-mini-high, so this seems like a pertinent thing for them to have addressed here. Maybe I am misunderstanding the relationship between the models?
by stego-tech | 2025-04-14 17:21:27+00:00
That's correct. The Constitution as-written gives the Judiciary no ability to implement its own orders, forcing it to rely on the Legislative or Executive Branches to enforce compliance. With the Legislature abdicating its own checks and balances, it effectively gives the Executive complete control.

The only remaining options aren't pleasant, but the short-list:

* The Legislative Branch turns on the Executive and begins stripping its power through laws or impeachment (unlikely, given the sycophants in both parties who championed this outcome)

* States secede from the USA, citing the lack of legitimacy of the current Federal Government in its flouting of the Constitution (unlikely, given the spineless cowards in most State Governments more preoccupied with becoming the next President or Senator themselves)

* The people revolt, waging a civil war against themselves and finding a new path forward

I really don't think most folks understand how bad this is. People like me are accused of being hyperbolic or alarmist, but the current situation really is equivalent to a CEO firing his Board (Congress), locking out auditors (the Judiciary), and jailing dissident workers or contractors (this case), all while letting his buddies raid the accounts under the guise of reducing inefficiencies (DOGE and Technoligarchs). The closest parallels really are Nazi Germany, Maoist China, and Stalin's Russia, and none of those had a "happy ending".

In the short term, trust is obliterated. In the long term, we're a crumbling empire who has to sacrifice far more than we will ever benefit, just to get an equivalent seat at the table again. For the next several generations (inclusive of the current ones), times are going to be bleak.
by Tiberium | 2025-04-14 17:21:49+00:00
Very important note:

>Note that GPT‑4.1 will only be available via the API. In ChatGPT, many of the improvements in instruction following, coding, and intelligence have been gradually incorporated into the latest version

If anyone here doesn't know, OpenAI does offer the ChatGPT model version in the API as chatgpt-4o-latest, but it's bad because they continuously update it so businesses can't reliably rely on it being stable, that's why OpenAI made GPT 4.1.
by themanmaran | 2025-04-14 17:21:53+00:00
I disagree. From the average user perspective, it's quite confusing to see half a dozen models to choose from in the UI. In an ideal world, ChatGPT would just abstract away the decision. So I don't need to be an expert in the relatively minor differences between each model to have a good experience.

Vs in the API, I want to have very strict versioning of the models I'm using. And so letting me run by own evals and pick the model that works best.
by bko | 2025-04-14 17:21:53+00:00
I remember being moved by behavioral science. Seemed like a cheat code. Simple tricks in life, backed by science, that could make a world of difference. This was pretty new popular topic when I was studying finance. Get a job, win arguments and get the girl to fall in love with you.

I started to notice some inconsistencies. It seemed like you had an arsenal of explanations to explain anything.

Stock rallies and then falls? Mean reversion! Anchoring!

Stock rallies two days in a row? Herd mentality! Fear of missing out! Recency bias!

And then came "Thinking Fast and Slow". Much of it was based on "priming":

> In this experiment, participants were asked to create four-word sentences from sets of five words. One group was given words associated with elderly stereotypes (like "Florida," "bald," "wrinkle"), while the control group received neutral words. Afterward, researchers measured how long it took participants to walk down a hallway, finding that those exposed to elderly-related words walked significantly slower—supposedly without conscious awareness of the influence.

Much of the book, and behavioral science took this as a bedrock study. They can just say "we primed the participants to ..." and of course the effect of priming was taken as given. And somehow you had more results!

Only problem is priming had difficulty being replicated. Which is kind of weird since it's so simple to replicate. So does no one care if its true? What does this say about the field?
by bee_rider | 2025-04-14 17:21:56+00:00
The phrasing “from start to end” got me thinking—tangential, but—they were an extremely cool company when Millenials were in school and looking to join the workforce. Anybody would have jumped at the opportunity to work for them.

Actually, I can’t even think of a similar company nowadays.

Anyway, it wouldn’t surprise me if they had a really bad hiring pipeline as a result. Why work on the skill of hiring, if people will jump through flaming hoops to work for you.

As MS converts into IBM, and Google converts into MS, I guess they will have to figure that out.
by wahern | 2025-04-14 17:21:58+00:00
Depends on your definition of arena. They vary, but IME an arena usually implies you can free objects in ad hoc order back to the arena for reuse. In which case interim lifetimes get mixed. Stack allocator or bump allocator are better terms for what you're describing. Here's how I understand the terminology to best fit actual practice and literature, notwithstanding significant variance in terminology usage:

* arena: 1 or more contiguous blocks of memory kept for allocation of ad hoc object sizes; a heap. Usually supports ad hoc free'ing and reuse.

* pool allocator: A collection of discrete-sized (smallish) blocks for fast--typically O(1)--allocation and free'ing in ad hoc ordering. May utilize 1 or more discrete arenas as its backing store, or may just use the process heap directly.

* slab allocator: Typed pool allocator.

* stack/bump allocator: For allocating and free'ing objects in LIFO order. May use 1 or more arenas or pools as backing stores for intermediate "pages" of objects. Object sizes are typically ad hoc, but often up to a (smallish) maximum size.

Your typical libc malloc implementation is a collection of arenas and pools.
by psunavy03 | 2025-04-14 17:22:04+00:00
> Periodically, especially in r/cpp I run into people who are apparently faultless and so don't make the mistakes that make these languages dangerous, weirdly none of these people seem to have written any software I can inspect to see for myself what that looks like, and furthermore the universe I live in doesn't seem to have any of the resulting software.

So basically Jeff Sutherland ever since he started talking about AI. "My AI agents have formed a Scrum team that's 30 times faster than any human developer!" Great, Jeff. Working in which company's production codebase?
by hyperman1 | 2025-04-14 17:22:10+00:00
I wonder how Rust + C++ style OO + GC would look as a language.

Rust is just a little bit too hard for people who want to just continue working without learning much. Go is slightly too oversimplified. Java and dotNet have a VM with their cost. Swift is overly apple centrish. C and C++ have the whole security mess to solve. I feel there is a gap inbetween these languages.

Now Rust+GC is probably reachable, e.g. with the Boehm GC. But web of pointers OO is harder to throw in the mix. I wonder how a language would look to take this space.
by shadowgovt | 2025-04-14 17:22:42+00:00
It's employment law.

Germans are so expensive to hire and maintain that companies have offshored German manufacturing to the United States.

(... And God bless Germany for it. Trickle-down theory doesn't work in general in capitalism but it does work in labor negotiations: every right Germans secure for themselves is a right an American company employing Germans and other countries has to abide by when doing business, and it incentivizes the company to minimize their paperwork by treating everyone to the German standard).
by jellicle | 2025-04-14 17:22:45+00:00
Trump to Bukele, 2025-04-14:

Trump: they demand you, they love you, they love what you do...

Bukele: {something about supporters}

Trump: you know what I want to do? Home-grown criminals are next. {louder, to his senior staff in the room} I said HOME-GROWNS are next. The home-growns. You've got to build about five more places.

Bukele, laughing: Yeah, that's fair! Alright.

{big burst of laughter from Trump's staff}

Trump: It's not big enough!
by ty6853 | 2025-04-14 17:22:59+00:00
But forcing him to join by surrounding him with gang members who would otherwise harm him, might be effective in killing his withholding of removal order, even if they have to drag him back to get it done.

1) "This guy is gang member."

2) Toss in jail, surrounded by the gang members he tried to escape. (Even if El Salvador thing gets stopped, same plan works in US)

3) Gang forces him to join

4) Now part of terrorist organization

5) "Terrorists are ineligible for orders of withholding."
by nottorp | 2025-04-14 17:23:05+00:00
That's the good outcome.

The bad outcome is the "AI" will translate our hellos as an insult, the dolphins will drop the masquerade, reveal themselves as our superiors and pound us into dust once and forever.

Picture the last surviving human surrounded by dolphins floating in the air with frickin laser beams coming out of their heads... all angrily asking "why did you say that about our mother?".

And in the background, ChatGPT is saying "I apologize if my previous response was not helpful".
by vintagedave | 2025-04-14 17:23:12+00:00
I really empathised with this part:

> Codebase Divergence: Our engine is based on an early fork of vLLM from over a year ago. Although structurally similar, we’ve heavily customized it for DeepSeek models, making it difficult to extend for broader use cases.

I've been there. Probably a few of us have.

Their approach of working on splitting out maintainable sublibraries and sharing info directly even if not integrated seems a really nice way of working with the community -- ie, they have obstacles, but they're not letting the obstacles cause them to take the easy route of not contributing at all. And while it might seem better to someone wanting to use their techniques to share only working code, not info on the techniques, at least it's still knowledge sharing. And again I think it'd be easier for them not to do it. So kudos to them.
by Tiberium | 2025-04-14 17:23:13+00:00
There's a HUGE difference that you are not mentioning: there are "gpt-4o" and "chatgpt-4o-latest" on the API. The former is the stable version (there are a few snapshot but the newest snapshot has been there for a while), and the latter is the fine-tuned version that they often update on ChatGPT. All those benchmarks were done for the API stable version of GPT-4o, since that's what businesses rely on, not on "chatgpt-4o-latest".
by square_usual | 2025-04-14 17:23:21+00:00
I'm not GP, but I thought I'd weigh in given I basically started this thread. I watch Balatro University who has the longest gold stake streak in Balatro, and while I respect that, I don't think that counters the point that the genre is heavily dependent on RNG. Winning isn't fun by default, and neither is losing boring. But you can win in ways that are boring (e.g. by getting a "broken" start and crushing through all stages) and lose in ways that are boring (e.g. by getting terrible rng that makes each round a slog until you finally lose.) With a rogue{like, lite} you are always at the mercy of RNG to see which of the {win, lose} x {fun, boring} combos you're in for, which when you're busy and have limited time to play games is extremely discouraging.