MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by chrsw | 2025-04-16 22:42:44+00:00
I don't think we shift the goalposts for AGI. I'm not getting the sense that people are redefining what AGI is when a new model is released. I'm getting the sense that some people are thinking like me when a new model is released: we got a better transformer, and a more useful model trained on more or better data, but we didn't get closer to AGI. And people are saying this not because they've pushed out what AGI really means, they're saying this because the models still have the same basic use cases, the same flaws and the same limitations. They're just better at what they already do. Also, the better these models get at what they already do, the more starkly they contrast with human capabilities, for better or worse.
by Nick-W | 2025-04-16 22:43:40+00:00
Would love to. Honestly nobody has really shown any kind of technical interest in our network and we've been operating under the radar now for a few years. Now that I have some employees to help out, I might be ok with us becoming a little more known. We have had something between 400-500 install requests purely by word of mouth and without ever advertising anywhere, so I'm a little nervous for us to have a hard-launch, especially since we can technically serve a pretty good chunk of the city of Boulder (which has a population of 100k+).
by cube2222 | 2025-04-16 22:43:43+00:00
I was very unimpressed with their original AI assistance implementation, so I’m gonna wait to see some user stories / reviews before I put my time into that, and so far I have seen effectively no mention of Junie anywhere.

Moreover, there’s no way to bring your own key, with the highest subscription tier being $20 per month flat it seems, which is the cost of just 1-3 sessions with Claude Code. Thus, without evidence to the contrary, I’m not holding my breath for now.
by roskelld | 2025-04-16 22:44:30+00:00
After refreshing the browser I see that the old o3-mini-high has gone now so I continued my coding task conversation with o4-mini-high. In two separate conversations it butchered things in a way that I never saw o3-mini-high do. In one case it rewrote working code without reason, breaking it, in the other it took a function I asked it to apply a code fix to and it instead refactored it with a different and unrelated function that was part of an earlier bit of chat history.

I notice too that it employs a different style of code where it often puts assignment on a different line, which looks like it's trying to maintain an ~80 character line limit, but does so in places where the entire line of code is only about 40 characters.
by benoau | 2025-04-16 22:45:03+00:00
One of those things that we've always known but the longer-term possibilities integrating this with other treatments sounds fascinating.

> “An emerging body of research allows us to take what had been anecdotes and place music on an equal footing with prescription drugs, surgeries, medical procedures, psychotherapy, and various forms of treatment that are mainstream and evidence-based,” writes Levitin, recently summing up the current science of music for Wired.
by tristor | 2025-04-16 22:45:05+00:00
> misquote what I said and, ironically, just as often, what you said.

I haven't misquoted you, or myself, at all. Your original complaint was around the need for adapters and additional cables. I never even mentioned UVC in my reply, and you are now rejecting my clarification that you can do USB video (yes, with a driver not UVC) on pretty much any modern mirrorless camera.

Diffraction limits of the optics /alone/ are not the only thing that affects sharpness as it relates to aperture, which is why I pointed out the impact of stopping down on light gathering, and light gathering is most certainly affected by sensor surface area and pixel pitch. Additionally, as I pointed out sensor size also affects the diffraction limit because sensor size influences the size of the circle of confusion. I don't think either one of us has any misunderstanding of the basic physics of light in a digital camera, you're just being obtuse.

We cannot downvote each other because the system prevents it since we're replying. I wouldn't downvote you anyway, I don't consider a downvote to be a form of disagreement, nor an upvote a form of agreement. Even though I don't think you're interacting with me in good faith, you have made valuable contributions to the conversation for a 3rd party reader to learn more, and that's good enough that I upvoted your replies to me even while I disagree.
by neonbjb | 2025-04-16 22:45:12+00:00
I work for openai.

o4-mini gets much closer (but I'm pretty sure it fumbles at the last moment): https://chatgpt.com/share/680031fb-2bd0-8013-87ac-941fa91cea...

We're pretty bad at model naming and communicating capabilities (in our defense, it's hard!), but o4-mini is actually a _considerably_ better vision model than o3, despite the benchmarks. Similar to how o3-mini-high was a much better coding model than o1. I would recommend using o4-mini-high over o3 for any task involving vision.
by caseyy | 2025-04-16 22:46:14+00:00
The demo video is very impressive, and it shows what AI could be. Our current models are unreliable in research, but if they were reliable, then what's shown alone would be better than AGI.

There are 8 billion+ instances of general intelligence on the planet; there isn't a shortage. I'd rather see AI do data science and applied math at computer speeds. Those are the hard problems, a lot of the AGI problems (to human brains) are easy.
by mr_toad | 2025-04-16 22:46:33+00:00
Some people living in the 13th-14th century in Europe considered the people who lived prior to the fall of the Roman Empire to be more civilised and advanced, if not actually more intelligent than they were. From their perspective the world had gone through a a dark age of ignorance and sin, and was only starting to recover.

It wasn't until much later, in the 15th and 16th century onwards, that people began to think that they were more advanced and accomplished than the ancient Greeks and Romans.
by autoexec | 2025-04-16 22:46:44+00:00
> Those agency can do their security work as long as there are laws and mandates about that.

My understanding was that they routinely do their work far outside of the law. Because such agencies have demonstrated a willingness to violate the constitution of the US, lie to both congress and the president, overthrow the democratically elected leaders of sovereign nations, perform acts of torture, rape, human experimentation, assassination, etc. it seems odd that they'd suddenly shy away from taking any action now.
by vik0 | 2025-04-16 22:47:22+00:00
>in the year 1200 the average person would likely not have considered the people living 800 years before them to be all that different from them

How do you know this?

And does the average person today really think someone living in the year 1200 to be all that different from them living in 2025? If so, in what way does this person think people 800 years ago are different from us? (I'm asking because I don't share your assumptions if this hypothetical person were to think on this matter for more than 5 seconds)
by senderista | 2025-04-16 22:47:28+00:00
This article is both confused and confusing. What he's really talking about is not a hash function but a pseudorandom permutation (functionally the same as a block cipher), i.e. a pseudorandom bijective function on an integer domain. In the context of hash functions this is often called a "mixer" or "finalizer" (since it's applied as the final step before determining the bucket). Multiplication by the golden ratio is about the simplest such permutation, but it's far inferior to others (several of which I catalogued here, along with their inverses: https://github.com/senderista/hashtable-benchmarks/tree/mast...). The important thing to remember is that multiplication only mixes low bits into high bits, but you should also mix high bits into low bits (e.g. with XOR), as I do here with the "golden ratio" multiplier: https://github.com/senderista/hashtable-benchmarks/blob/mast....

One useful property of permutations is that they're reversible, so you can reconstruct a key from its hash code, which is useful for hash tables with integer keys. I used this technique here to avoid storing keys separately from hash codes: https://github.com/senderista/hashtable-benchmarks/blob/mast....

Applying a separate "mixer" function to the result of a user-supplied hash function makes sense only if the quality of the user's hash function is suspect. If you control the hash function yourself then there's no reason to use one (as I mentioned, a high-quality hash function will include a finalizer anyway). And if you do use a mixer, you should use a better one than this.
by dmayle | 2025-04-16 22:47:42+00:00
I think your math is a little off (or maybe mine is).

I'll take a short cut and imagine that you have an 8x8 square with no margins (68% of a borderless 8.5x11), then you have a grid of 600x600 bitmaps, which is 3.6e5. if each pixel is only black or white, than you have 1.8e19 possible bitmaps (64-bit), divide the two and you have 5e13, or about 50 trillion pages. Fix the equation, and you get a grid of 5.2e5, for 30 trillion pages instead of 50.

However, bring that up to 24-bit color or more (even 8-level greyscale is e154), and the exponentiality of the problem goes back to as described by the OP
by ActorNightly | 2025-04-16 22:48:22+00:00
The funny thing is that nobody stops to ask if that version of AGI is even possible. For example, it would have to run a simulation of reality with enough accuracy faster than reality happens, and also multiple simulations in parallel. For physical world interaction, this is doable, but when it comes to predicting human behavior with enough accuracy, its probably not.

So even if we manage to come up with an algorithm that self learns, self expands, and so on, it likely won't be without major flaws.
by breadwinner | 2025-04-16 22:48:40+00:00
Ultimately it is going to be Xi Jinping that rescues American democracy. How, you ask? By refusing to give in to Trump. When MAGA voters go to Walmart and find that everyday essentials have doubled in price, Trump will lose their support. When Trump loses MAGA support that's when GOP senators will be emboldened. We need 20 of them to convict and remove Trump from office.
by esaym | 2025-04-16 22:49:03+00:00
Growing up I had a cheap stereo that I think came from a garage sell. Can't remember the brand, but it had an am/fm tuner, an 8 track player, and rca jacks for the speakers to plug into. Later on, I guess for my birthday or something, I got this adapter thing that could plug into the 8 track player and then you could play cassettes with that.

That was my setup for many years until one day I made friends with this new kid at school and stopped by his house afterwards. They were, uh, not so hygienic and had trash and clothes laying all over the house. In the mess I found some 8tracks just laying around. He didn't even know what they were so I tossed one in my backpack and took it home to try on my stereo that had an actual 8track player.

I remember being shocked by the sound quality. To me, it sounded way better than a cassette. I was also amazed that you could push a button and hear a different song. That seemed way better than a cassette that you had to rewind and fast forward through to get the right spot. I ended up taking the 8track apart for fun and of course got tape everywhere so in the trash it went. And that was my first and only 8track experience.
by lolinder | 2025-04-16 22:49:31+00:00
See, but my point is that this is putting the cart before the horse. The "Open" in "Open Source" is what matters most by far, the same way that the "Free" in "Free Software" is the key word that qualifies the kind of software we're taking about.

Once we've resolved the problem of using the word "Open" incorrectly I'm happy to have a conversation about what should be the preferred form for modification (i.e. source) of an LLM. But that is the less important and far more esoteric discussion (and one about which reasonable people can and do disagree), to the point where it's merely a distraction from the incredibly meaningful and important problem of calling something "Open Source" while attaching an Acceptable Use policy to it.
by mdp2021 | 2025-04-16 22:49:40+00:00
> What's with the underscores

They were there as the original title is too long. The underscores indicated a place of elision - I had to make the edited title fit the slot. I could use the '…' (U+2026), but it's comfortable to just use the '_', and it is in general understandable (the underlines are typical to signify gaps).

Of course, if the admins prefer the string clean, without those marks - no problem, I was just sticking to the "don't editorialize" rule...

The title you suggest does not abridge the original, it changes it: it's not that "if exposed they get endangered", it's that "they are exposed, so they get endangered".
by leptons | 2025-04-16 22:50:18+00:00
This is the same llm-splaining that practically every enthusiast does. It's either "more hardware" or "more optimization" will solve all the problems and bring us into a new era of blah blah blah. But it won't. It won't solve LLM slop or hallucinations, which are inherent to how LLMs work, and why that bubble is already looking pretty unstable.
by daxfohl | 2025-04-16 22:50:42+00:00
I think it got started as AI tools for things like cancer detection based purely on deep learning started to outperform tools where humans guide the models what to look for. The expectation became that eventually this will happen for LLM agents too if only we can add more horsepower. But it seems like we've hit a bit of a ceiling there. The latest releases from OpenAI and Meta were largely duds despite their size, still very far from anything you'd trust for anything important, and there's nothing left to add to their training corpus that isn't already there.

Of course a new breakthrough could happen any day and get through that ceiling. Or "common sense" may be something that's out of reach for a machine without life experience. Until that shakes out, I'd be reluctant to make any big bets on any AI-for-everything solutions.
by jedberg | 2025-04-16 22:52:35+00:00
The 30th anniversary one is amazing:

https://archive.org/details/Kmart30thAnniversaryProgram

All the facts about 1962 from a perspective 30 years later, but 30+ years in the past to us!

For example the fact that when K-Mart opened no one could have predicted that it would be one of the biggest real outlets in the country. :)
by dextercd | 2025-04-16 22:54:25+00:00
Apple introduced this proposal. Why would they care about a CA's legal exposure?

Lower the lifetime of certs does mean that orgs will be better prepared to replace bad certs when they occur. That's a good thing.

More organisations will now take the time to configure ACME clients instead of trying to convince CA's that they're too special to have their certs revoked, or even start embarrassing court cases, which has only happened once as far as I know.

Theories that involve CAs, Google, Microsoft, Apple, and Mozilla having ulterior motives and not considering potential downsides of this change are silly.
by relic | 2025-04-16 22:54:49+00:00
You're getting downvoted, but I totally agree with you (except for the "it has every song ever" part, it doesn't). Spotify has an amazing discovery engine (maybe subjective, but me for it is the best one I've tried), and I don't even remember the last time Spotify went down. It went down for a few hours, people asking for their money back (opinions on here are more rational, but on Spotify support forums, it's unhinged...jeez, shit happens).

I love spotify and I hope they can quickly figure out their issue and put some blocks in place so it doesn't happen again, and I hope the engineers didn't have too bad of a day (although I'm sure it was terrible), but I appreciate them for their service and its a service I'd gladly pay for.

If we're going to hate on subscription services, Spotify is way at the bottom for me.
by sherdil2022 | 2025-04-16 22:55:11+00:00
I think this article brings out some very important points - we are mistakenly equating information to wisdom - and there is so much truth to that. I will indeed take a hiatus from me constantly checking HackerNews. I already cut down Instagram, TikTok and other social media (since there were constantly making me feel FOMO, inadequate and literally too much information)

As the article states, Information can be ... a simulation that, when consumed without limits, can weaken our ability to experience the real thing.

(I replace a word with ... so that the actual point is not missed or derailed).

Good bye for now.
by jpleger | 2025-04-16 22:56:00+00:00
Hahaha, CVE was created because industry refused to track and report on things in a consistent and transparent manner. When given the option, business will almost always choose the easy path, and things like vulnerability management programs will be set back years if not decades when the external accountability goes away.

In general, lawyers and CTOs would probably love to see CVE go away or be taken over by industry.

Source: been working in security for 20+ years.
by kumarm | 2025-04-16 22:57:21+00:00
First experience is not great. Here are the issues to start using codex:

1. Default model used doesn't work and you get error: system OpenAI rejected the request (request ID: req_06727eaf1c5d1e3f900760d10ca565a7). Please verify your settings and try again.

2. You have to switch to model o4-mini-2025-04-16 or some other model using /model. Now if you exit codex, you are back to default model and again have to switch everytime.

3. Crashed the first time with NodeJS error.

But after initial hickups seems to work and still checking how good/bad it is compared to claude code (which I love except for context size limits)
by leptons | 2025-04-16 22:57:38+00:00
"There are 1,335,000,000,000,000,000,000 liters of water in all the oceans."

"A large fusion power plant, generating 1,500 megawatts of electricity, would consume approximately 600 grams of tritium and 400 grams of deuterium each day. A 1,000 MW coal-fired power plant requires 2.7 million tonnes of coal per year, while a similar fusion plant would need only 250 kg of fuel per year (half deuterium, half tritium)."

You do the math. I'm personally not worried about running out of water due to fusion.
by autoexec | 2025-04-16 22:57:52+00:00
Right now ISPs are very concerned about the future of money they've already been promised and pessimistic about the future of such programs. It's possible that this could result in an increased unwillingness to expand into less profitable areas or even to maintain services there.

That said, some ISPs have been known to collect hundreds of billions in taxpayer money on the promise of providing service only to just pocket that money without providing it anyway so for consumers, the real world impact of ISPs losing that money isn't so clear.
Show HN: I made a game to help me learn Italian Vocab
by NullptrError | 2025-04-16 22:57:56+00:00
Recently I decided that I wanted to learn some basic Italian but I then realized that one of the major hurdles that came with that was needing to memorize a large quantity of vocabulary in order to hold a basic conversation. I could have just signed up for some flashcard website and used that to study but I decided that was a little boring and I also wanted to have a short but fun programming challenge.

This is where my inspiration for Astrocards came to mind: I remember there being a game like that on Quizlet (I think it was Quizlet?) some years back but I wasn't able to find it anymore but I remember liking that game so I decided it would be a fun project to re-implement it but as a desktop app (and with some fancier graphics). For extra fun I decided to write it in Rust.

The basic idea behind the game is that a stream of asteroids would fall down the screen and they would have flashcard terms on them and you would have to quickly type the answer to destroy that asteroid. You have to destroy the asteroids before they hit the bottom or else you suffer some damage. Five hits and it's game over! There are also red asteroids that damage you if you get them wrong and cause a game over if they hit the bottom of the screen.

I also made sure this game was somewhat customizable to allow for your own custom flashcard sets, if you wanted to create your own set simply create a file in the `sets/` folder that follows the following format:

# Comments look like this

"flashcard_set_name" {

"question" = "answer";

}

An example:

"math" {

# Addition "1 + 1" = "2"; "2 + 2" = "4"; # Multiplication "2 \* 2" = "4"; "3 \* 5" = "15";

}

This way you could create sets not just related to Italian (in fact I included some other flashcard sets not related to Italian in the release as well). I've also included a "Learn Mode" to help with reviewing the entire deck in a less "game-y" way.
by xp84 | 2025-04-16 22:57:56+00:00
The funny thing about Huddles for me is that the video and sound quality are quite excellent, and obviously it's more convenient to start one ad-hoc than any other platform since it's a single click/Cmd-Shift-H, but the in-call UI is so needlessly frustrating. I think mainly because of how they chose to have it be in-window with the Slack app by default.

Honestly I know their designers would pout if told to do something so boring, but if I was their head of product I'd have them just loosely clone the basic Zoom window layout.

Also it needs the same integration with Google Calendar that Zoom has so that it could be added as seamlessly as possible to new meeting invites, that's critical for those of us in remote teams.
by _DeadFred_ | 2025-04-16 22:58:19+00:00
Funny people keep saying the government should 'move fast and break things' like Facebook, and leave out that Facebook has committed to $60 billion to $65 billion in expenses to do that process this year. But somehow when it's government moving fast and breaking things that also somehow includes 'having minimal expense'. Something something "Fast, Cheap, or Good, pick two." something something.
by Heliodex | 2025-04-16 22:58:24+00:00
The wide (and growing, which is great) variety of fonts designed to be easily readable are so interesting to me because they all start with similar aims, use different metrics, and come up with wildly varying font designs.

Take Kermit, Inter, OpenDyslexic, Atkinson Hyperlegible, Bookerly, and my personal favourite Lexend. They are all expertly designed, do great work at improving readability and legibility, though have very different target readers. Some look hand-drawn/modern/geometric, are bold/thin, single/double storey a, I with/without crossbars, t/l/q/y with/without flick, 3 with/without flat top, are slanted/upright by default, or have `font-variation-settings` to control all of the aforementioned.

Searching "easily readable fonts" brings up even more choice, some of which seem awesome and I'll have to look into. It's a shame that good scientific evidence on font readability/legibility is so difficult to find, as at best there's a case study showing that the font is beneficial to a small, select group of readers, and at worst (Sans Forgetica-style) it's the same but there's a follow-up study a few years later showing that the improvements are negligible or nonexistent.
by eternityforest | 2025-04-16 22:59:42+00:00
That would be pretty cool!

It seems like it's really only missing a few things.

The big things needed for IoT, as I see them:

* The ability to use it as an Arduino library

* Global routing without preconfiguring the relays, as in Amazon Sidewalk or The Things Network

* Some more generic abstraction for telemetry and control, as in Mobus

* The ability for a firmware to define custom config options that the app can set(Something like a JSON schema, maybe local only because of bandwidth)

I actually started a few discussion threads on some of these, and did a few proofs of concept for the P2P global routing.

But I don't particularly want to spend much time on it unless it seems pretty clear it might actually get merged one day.