MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by OgsyedIE | 2025-04-12 09:44:20+00:00
I think this particular anxiety was explored rather well in the anonymous short story 'The End of Creative Scarcity':

https://www.fictionpress.com/s/3353977/1/The-End-of-Creative...

Some existential objections occur; how sure are we that there isn't an infinite regress of ever deeper games to explore? Can we claim that every game has an enjoyment-nullifying hack yet to discover with no exceptions? If pampered pet animals don't appear to experience the boredom we anticipate is coming for us, is the expectation completely wrong?
by subscribed | 2025-04-12 09:44:31+00:00
But Zionism is not Judaism.

Most of the pro-Palestine or anti-Zionist content I see is denouncing Israeli war crimes and genocide. No one is bashing Jews because of their ethnicity or religion.

Also a lot of this comes from the Jews (who are then attacked for being confused or..... antisemitic)

We're not at the point of people hunting Jews because they're Jews. We are at the point when opposing targeting/killing medics, press, children or hospitals may result in being kidnapped from the street and either locked up without charges or trafficked to the torture camp.

I do not disagree with your comment in general, I disagree with you putting "Judaism" while the almost all the critique and rebuke is aimed at the Israeli war crimes or the Zionist supremacy ideology.
by CSMastermind | 2025-04-12 09:45:40+00:00
I run every query I do through all the major models, up to 10 of them at this point.

Benchmarks aside Gemini 2.5 Pro is a great model and now often produces the best code for me but it's not notably better than any of the other frontier models in my testing each of which tends to have their own strengths and weaknesses.

And Google's wrapper around Gemini is easily the most frustrating of any of the major AI companies. It's content guardrails are annoying and I just learned yesterday it won't let you upload json files for whatever reason (change the extension to txt without modifying the contents in any way and it works just fine).
by freb3n | 2025-04-12 09:46:28+00:00
The financial barrier point is really great.

I feel the same with a lot of points made here, but hadn't yet thought about the financial one.

When I started out with web development that was one of the things I really loved. Anyone can just read about html, css and Javascript and get started with any kind of free to use code editor.

Though you can still do just that, it seems like you would always drag behind the 'cool guys' using AI.
by tmtvl | 2025-04-12 09:46:33+00:00
Who paid: programmers switching to FP.

What was the price: two things:

- The programmers must stop using for-loops and [i]ndexes.

- The programmers must start using maps/folds/filters/et cetera.

What was the expected reward: the knowledge that their functions' outputs will only depend on their inputs.

In short: programmers who change their behaviour get the benefit of certainty about specific properties of their programs.
by generic92034 | 2025-04-12 09:46:59+00:00
In my eyes a critical discussion does not mean that the disagreements went underground. If the team is doing its best to resolve the issue, what else are you going to do? I certainly do not believe that yelling at each other is helpful.

A toxic consensus culture usually does not even allow for a serious, critical discussion, but dissenters are just ignored or verbally patted on the head.
by milesrout | 2025-04-12 09:47:24+00:00
This is a baffling criticism. Why would you expect a niche not to have its own jargon? Not that "bespoke" is (it is an older usage than "custom" and is used widely).

>people invent for things perfectly well described by expressions anyone can use like "high precision timekeeping"

What is "high precision"? Why are you using engineering jargon when you could say something simple like "accurate"? Why are you using such lofty elitist language?
by ramraj07 | 2025-04-12 09:48:06+00:00
I don't know what you did there, but clearly being ex OpenAI isn't the intellectual or product flex it is: I and every other smart person I know still use ChatGPT (paid) because even now it's the best at what it does and we keep trying Google and Claude and keep coming back.

They got and as of now continue to get things right for the most part. If you still aren'ĥt seeing it maybe you should introspect what you're missing.
by pixelfarmer | 2025-04-12 09:49:34+00:00
If I see something like "At least on Linux, long and long long are both 64 bits in size." my skin starts to crawl. Not only that, but GCC defines __builtin_popcount() with unsigned int / long / long long, respective, i.e. even in the text it should be mentioned correctly (unless a different compiler uses signed types there ... ugh). The call is done with unsigned, using uint64_t as a type-cast, but using a fixed __builtin_popcountl() which translates to unsigned long. There are systems where this will fail, i.e. the only safe bet to use here is __builtin_popcountll() as this will cover at least 64 bit wide arguments.

Also, if a * b overflows within the result type, it is an undefined behavior according to the C standard, so this overflow check is at least not properly portable, either, and the shown code for that is actually buggy because the last A1 has to be A0.

No idea why all that gets me so grumpy today ...
by dep_b | 2025-04-12 09:49:34+00:00
I’ve been running Windows 2000 Pro as my main machine from I think the second beta until it was completely dropped from support.

It ran all of my games, stable as hell, quite light with none of the bullshit added later, none of the graphical bullshit added by XP but still classic Chicago.

The only thing that could make it better were the UI rendering engine introduced with Vista and its enhanced driver and security model.
by p0w3n3d | 2025-04-12 09:49:48+00:00
I recently had to check some legal thing - I gave the pdf with law to both - chatgpt and Gemini, and I was able to convince the Gemini that my interpretation is right, but chatgpt was constantly opposing me. Later I checked and found out that my interpretation was wrong, so I'd say that chatgpt was better and moreover it spared me some problems with "Polish IRS"
by enlyth | 2025-04-12 09:51:52+00:00
Gemini 2.5 Pro does this annoying thing where it decides to refactor every part of your code even if you didn't ask, and also it outputs way too many damn comments on almost every line in the style of:

// Increment variable by 1

I find Claude 3.7 better at following instructions, even though the solutions it comes up with may not be the best at times
by pornel | 2025-04-12 09:52:18+00:00
It could fail if the generated C code triggered Undefined Behavior.

For example, signed overflow is UB in C, but defined in Rust. Generated code can't simply use the + operator.

C has type-based alias analysis that makes some type casts illegal. Rust handles alias analysis through borrowing, so it's more forgiving about type casts.

Rust has an UnsafeCell wrapper type for hacks that break the safe memory model and would be UB otherwise. C doesn't have such thing, so only uses of UnsafeCell that are already allowed by C are safe.
by rvz | 2025-04-12 09:52:35+00:00
> The Pelosis' trades are public knowledge.

That happens after they are disclosed and this delay benefits them. Not you.

How did the Pelosis' know that the DOJ was going to file a lawsuit against Visa and as soon as it was filed, that would cause the stock to drop? [0]

The DOJ could have filed it at any time before the trade was publicly disclosed.

> Pelosi and her husband have outperformed the market by being tech-optimistic Californians.

People who trade on the advantage of insider (political, economic, etc) knowledge can easily outperform the market.

> One of their most lucrative investments was investing in Nvidia after ChatGPT was released triggering the AI boom. Did that require any particular political "insider knowledge"? No.

So you do admit that for most of the Pelosis' trades, they did use political insider knowledge then?

The level of people here defending politicians and family members of them, benefiting from insider trading loopholes is amusing to see.

[0] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/nancy-pelosi-husband-sold-vis...
by jillesvangurp | 2025-04-12 09:52:42+00:00
I'm CTO in a startup in Germany. We've applied for and gotten various grants. It's not a big deal. And there are agencies that can help with this. I know various people in different companies that benefit from this as well. There is money at the state level, at the federal level, and the European level that can be unlocked via grants.

Germany has got a well deserved reputation for its bureaucracy and lack of flexibility. We were dealing with the tax office at the same time we were dealing with grants. One part of the government trying to give us money, another taking it away. We had our first deal with not enough revenue to even pay ourselves. That was calculated as "profit". As a bootstrapped company, we got very close to emptying our accounts a few times. And stuff like this isn't helpful. But we survived and we're still around. Partially thanks to these grants.

I think this incoming government is saying the right things and looks like they are planning to do things that sound like they are good ideas. Making the process of founding a company easier, incentivizing R&D, etc. There's a lot of potential in this country in terms of companies that are very specialized and high tech, well educated people, etc. They are definitely over dependent on older companies that are a bit past their prime, e.g. in automotive.

Germany mainly needs to deal with it's risk averse bureaucracy and culture. People that want to take risk here need to move more freely and faster. It shouldn't take months to found a company. Or thousands of euros to deal with all the bureaucracy (which it does if you add it all up).

Germany tends to stifle innovation by bureaucracy, restrictive & complex rules, and a finance climate that actively discourages investment and taking risk. Especially foreign investment. If you look at a lot of big name scale ups in Germany, you'll find that they have headquarters in places like Dublin, London, or Amsterdam. There's a good reason for this: if you want foreign investors to invest, a Gmbh is simply a somewhat toxic legal construction. These companies are German in all but name. That's about more than just taxes.

That needs to change. I think people are well aware. Merz certainly seems to be. But bureaucracies have a way of pushing back and this country is run by bureaucrats, politicians, lawyers, notaries, etc. that all benefit financially from the system being the way it is. They actively resist change and insist how crucial they are to the whole thing. Everything they touch tends to get more complex and convoluted. My worry is that they'll just end up adding to the problem instead of solving it.
by okr | 2025-04-12 09:52:43+00:00
I disagree. Lets say i own 100 percent of my money. Just that i have to write it down, makes me shiver, what we as people accept to happen.

Am i interested in progress? Of course. Am i not smart enough to see or think long term, most likely. Give me a robo advisor, that helps me distribute my money. Give me best practises. I do not need a bloated government and their politics and interest groups for a simple decision, what i do with MY money that I have earned by working. Govt is the middle management that everyone complains about. A black hole.
by Archelaos | 2025-04-12 09:52:47+00:00
> I'm also not yet sure what to think about splitting education and research. It goes against the Humboldtian Ideal, especially in the universitys both topics are connected.

According to the German constitution (Grundgesetz), schools and universities are (mainly) the responsibility of the individual German states, not the federal government.[1] (A hybrid is the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology that has a university branch under the supervision of the state of Baden-Württemberg and a research centre branch under federal supervision.) The educational tasks of the federal government therefore basically relate to extracurricular and non-university education, such as early childhood education or adult further education.

At the level of the individual states, higher education and research are generally combined in one ministry and school education in another.

[1] Actually the Grundgesetz states in Art. 30: "The exercise of state powers and the performance of state duties shall be a matter for the individual states (Länder), unless otherwise provided for or permitted by this Basic Law." The authority of the federal government in education policy is therefore derived from what is explicitly mentioned in various places in the Basic Law. A short overview what that involves can be found here: https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/416682/db04b405a48dbe... (PDF, 2009, in German).
by nicbou | 2025-04-12 09:53:01+00:00
My experience was a bit different. For example, the immigration office accepts almost all applications in the end (over 95% according to their stats). They make all sorts of exceptions in the applicants' favour. The Bürgeramt, the Ordnungsamt and the Arbeitsagentur are the same. They huff and puff and make an exception "just this time", every time. The inflexibility is an act, unless you're being difficult (from their point of view). Then you get the least charitable interpretation of their directives.

Against all expectations, German bureaucracy is very "vibes-based", specifically because it's full of humans. It's predictably unpredictable. You rarely get the downside of digitalisation where "computer says no", because a human is deciding your fate and can be convinced to give you leeway.

The bigger issue at least for me is speed. The uncertainty of human decisions is magnified by the weeks-long delays. A missing document is a big issue when bureaucracy has a 4-8 week ping. That is of course if the case worker doesn't shrug and give you what you want anyway.
by tifik | 2025-04-12 09:55:20+00:00
Would/does that actually work? Its been a while since I watched SED Destins video about it, so I dont remember if they experiment with that. But intuitively, heating the glass so non-uniformly that the tail would melt and the bulb remained solid enough to keep the internal stresses intact, wouldnt that steep temperature gradient within the crystaline structure cause the entire drop to break?
by anovikov | 2025-04-12 09:56:13+00:00
Because products almost always fail regardless of whether they were tried by devs or non-devs. I think in reality, a lot more devs tried it than those who'd admit it - i tried too, and failed - several times. But more importantly, i did custom coding for 100+ startups and they all failed. Over 90% without ever getting the thing out of the door - just by realising that the idea was lunatic halfway through the process, or by running out of money, or by switching to the next shiny object, and the remaining by ending up with zero (literally not a single sale or even a single free user, ever), or extremely little demand. No one ever even repaid back development costs, and the only two who came somewhat close, were spam apps launched on jvzoo.com - a vehicle for aggressive spam marketing where "JVs" push useless nothing mostly to grandmas and children.

It's a struggle because it is meant to be a struggle and i think actual success rate (as in, "made more money than a full time job would make in the same time") are so exceedingly rare, you can do it all your life and will never even meet a person who made it. Basically a myth.

Selection bias makes us perceive the startup thing as a lot more realistic than it is, just because those who failed in their overwhelming majority never speak out, out of shame.
by greggsy | 2025-04-12 09:57:58+00:00
I’m confused and not sure what you mean.

Are you implying that Google will sell a product that is designed to ‘sabotage’ their own customer’s business? The legal and reputational damage far outweigh the value of stolen information.

Or do you mean that it could be a vector of attack? That can happen with literally any piece of software, hardware, or appliance you install in or out of your datacentre.
by mdp2021 | 2025-04-12 09:58:20+00:00
It seems, from your other post, that your understanding of "autistic" is "non paranoid" - somebody who does not read in other's intentions what his own mind, calibrated on his own use and language, would suggest.

Now, we have more problems there: * your disrespectful attitude towards those who have to deal with dire conditions, and * your belief in what your mind tells you, and * your idea that you believing your perceptions would be good practice...

Re-read the guidelines, because your reading of people's speech is undesirable in general and here in particular.
by aussieguy1234 | 2025-04-12 09:58:23+00:00
Actually it's the other way around. Fascists in Israel and the US worked very hard to make it so that anyone seen to be sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians is seen as pro Hamas, or pro terrorist.

Apparently there are some that even say the Palestinian flag itself is a "terrorist flag" and anyone flying it is also a terrorist.
by lazide | 2025-04-12 09:58:34+00:00
The part here too is ‘valuable to whom’. If they can saddle the middle manager or director with the same responsibilities/expectations, while cutting 10% (say) of the costs - guess what they are going to do.

Is it ultimately short sighted? Probably. But good luck connecting point A and point B in these situations when everyone is thinking quarter to quarter.
by logicchains | 2025-04-12 09:58:34+00:00
>A very asymmetric setup exposing the underbelly of free speech cultures

As opposed to non-free-speech cultures like Russia and China where people have absolutely no say in whatever their leaders do? Because that's inevitably what happens when you give people in power the power to restrict speech: they restrict any speech critical of them. We're even seeing this in developed democracies like Germany where a journalist was recently fined for posting a meme online of a politician holding a sign saying "I hate free speech".
by barotalomey | 2025-04-12 09:59:01+00:00
> If anything, LLMs have surprised at much better they are than humans in understanding instructions for text based activities.

That's demonstrateably false, as proven by both OpenAI's own research [1] and endless independent studies by now.

What is fascinating is how some people cling on false ideas about what LLM is and isnt.

Its a recurring fallacy that's bound to get it's own name any time soon.

1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43155825
by koakuma-chan | 2025-04-12 10:00:23+00:00
Common sense tells me there should be some kind of limit, but I don't know what it is, whether it's standardized and whether it exists. I just tested and Firefox _buffered_ (according to the time range) the first 27_000~ seconds, but in the dev tools the request appeared as though still loading. Chrome downloaded the first 10.2 MB (according to dev tools) and stopped (but meanwhile the time range was growing from zero approximately by one second every second, even though the browser already stopped downloading). After it played for a bit, Chrome downloaded 2.6 more MB _using the same request_. In both cases the browser requested the whole file, but not necessarily downloaded the whole file.
by DisjointedHunt | 2025-04-12 10:00:54+00:00
Not on cars, not in robotics, not in commercially deployed AI, not in enterprise investments in their cloud business.

They've got immense potential, sure. But to say that they're winning is a bit far from reality. Right now, their Cloud AI offerings to the enterprise are technologically superior to anything else out there from AWS, but guess what? AWS seems to have significantly more %age sales growth in this space with their larger base compared to GCP with their smaller market share.

The same can be said across turn based chat and physical AI. OpenAI continues to be the growth leader in the consumer space and a collection of Claude + self hosted + Gemini now in the enterprise / API space.

They need to be measuring themselves on moving the needle in adoption now. I'd hate for such amazing progress to stall out in a niche.
by lifestyleguru | 2025-04-12 10:01:31+00:00
> Case in point, German fiber optic infrastructure is still lightyears behind Romania despite much higher costs. Means, somebody in Germany is making good money form that, even if there's nothing to show for.

Apartment I stayed in while in Germany had annual Kabelgebühr of 100 EUR. It was not related with the ISP internet subscription of course. Any negotiations or questions were responded with "IT'S KABELGEBÜHR YOU HAVE TO PAY IT".
by xg15 | 2025-04-12 10:02:49+00:00
Aaand, full-on "Rationalist" cult territory right ahead. This particular one seems like inspired by Longtermism, but I'm not quite sure.

I also don't quite understand the mathematical certainty with which they assert that "everything you know and love will be gone in the next decades". Yes, the world is a scary place right now with some fundamental changes going on - and a lot if the trajectory seems to be distinctly in the wrong direction. But to see a definitive, unavoidable end if all things in a few decades seems more like a classical doomsday cult for me.

(...ah, OK, and of course the certain doom isn't about trivialities like the reemergence of fascism, impending WWIII or unchecked climate change but about the mathematically inevitable rise of godlike super-AIs that will wipe out humanity. Got it.)

But on the chance of catching an actual Longtermist here, I'd like to ask a question that I'd never understood so far:

> One's approach to living, deep down if not at the surface level algorithms, should cash out to trying to accumulate as much value as you can. That doesn't change just because doom is likely.

We can split the value one pursues into the value one is accruing right now (I like to call this "harvesting") and the value one is preparing to harvest in the future (I call this "sowing").

Most of the value, or expected value, would likely be in the future (because there's so much of it!) but for two reasons it makes sense to harvest now and not just sow for the future.

... followed by three relatively circumstantial and mostly psychological reasons that feel like they are more "exceptions to the rule" for practical reasons and shouldnt exist in an ideal world.

But just approaching this from a theoretical perspective: If we ignored our messy, imperfect human desires for a moment and assumed we'd all be perfect AIs or whatever, the logical conclusion would be we should "accumulate" all our value in the future? (As, in the limit, the present vanishes compared to the future, I guess). So 100% sowing, 0% harvesting? But the problem is if course that there will always be a future and it will never be the present. So wouldn't this actually lead to a world full of suffering, because no value at all is ever realized, as all of it would be stashed away for an eternal future that by definition can never arrive?
by hobofan | 2025-04-12 10:03:21+00:00
With the current AI/LLM wave SSE have received a lot of attention again, and most LLM chat frontends use them. At least from my perception as a result of this, support for SSEs in major HTTP server frameworks has improved a lot in the last few years.

It is a bit of a shame though, that in order to do most useful things with SSEs you have to resort to doing non-spec-compliant things (e.g. send initial payload with POST).
by M4v3R | 2025-04-12 10:03:38+00:00
You still don’t need AI to write software, but investing in it will make you more productive. More money enables you to buy better tools, that was always true for any trade. My friend is a woodworker and his tools are 5-10x more expensive than what I have in my shack, but are also more precise, more reliable and easier to use. AI is the same, I would even argue it gives you a bigger productivity boost with less money (especially given that local models are getting better literally every week).