MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by chunkmonke99 | 2025-04-21 19:50:31+00:00
LLMs have broad adoption since like 2 years ago: my GF and sister both have used previous models to write (successful) grant applications with previous iterations so "AGI" has been here since chatgpt's initial release if that is the metric (or baby AGI). I view these as a novel way of "re-configuring" and "re-mixing" human knowledge and that is a BIG DEAL! Also, I am not sure I agree with "people's lack of audacity" is holding back LLMs from achieving "AGI": Dario, Demi, and Sam Altman are promising the end of disease and death in the next 2 to 10 years! And those are some audacious claims (even if they come to be).
by d4mi3n | 2025-04-21 19:50:36+00:00
What is appropriate here really depends on what properties BlueSky wants to assert about it's ecosystem.

> What was the problem with the current DNS system? I definitely think there could be improvements like displaying domain instead of TLD but still.

As commenters earlier in this thread have noted, one property BlueSky claims it wants to develop/maintain is resistance against BlueSky itself becoming an adversarial party--say in the event it is bought out by an eccentric multi-billionaire who may take steps to discredit certain parties or reduce their reach or reputation.

I don't think the current DNS verification methodology helps or hurts in a BlueSky is hostile scenario. I think the only issues with the current DNS username verification system as I understand it are the same issues with any DNS based verification system in that vanilla DNS was not a protocol designed to be resistant to adversarial use and as a result there are many ways for people to tamper with DNS records, DNS queries, and confuse systems that incorrectly trust DNS records to be trustworthy or well-formed. DNS cache poisoning is a thing. Domain takeovers have and will continue to happen.

Now, if we're talking about what technologies are suitable for username verification in a word where BlueSky is adversarial, we have a very different conversation. I think the scope of such a scenario extends a lot further than usernames. If your primary interface into the AT Protocol feed is the BlueSky website or the official BlueSky application, you are trusting BlueSky to validate usernames. An adversarial BlueSky could easily decide if your interface marks someone as trusted or untrusted without your knowledge.

The only way I could think to avoid this would be to use a different interface to the global feed, but then you run into new problems that are more difficult to avoid: the fact that most BlueSky users don't host their own data (though this is doable with https://atproto.com/guides/self-hosting). BlueSky also manages the global feed, so barring a competitive global index, you'll still be consuming a feed curated by BlueSky's AT Protocol services and implementation.

I'd close this by saying I am _not_ an expert in the AT Protocol, BlueSky's systems, or this space in general. This is a very fast and loose risk assessment I made after reviewing the AT Protocol and a bit of research on how BlueSky says it provides it's services. My current assessment is that if the community wants to be robust against BlueSky becoming adversarial, there needs to be a lot more support for self-hosting of PSPs and similar data stores, alternative global indexes, and likely also independent governance of the AT Protocol itself.
by candiddevmike | 2025-04-21 19:51:11+00:00
Too little, too late. We should've been switching to solar in the 80s. Even if we could switch to be carbon free tomorrow, the amount of CO2 already in the atmosphere is predicted to cause breadbasket collapses within the next 20 years.

If it makes folks feel better, there's a good chance you probably had no control/influence over this outcome if you were born after 1980.

https://www.sciencealert.com/researchers-weve-underestimated...
by lachie83 | 2025-04-21 19:51:17+00:00
Hi Philip, I'm Lachlan from the Cloud Native Ecosystem team at Microsoft. Our team works in the cloud native open-source community with a goal of being great open-source collaborators in these projects and communities, and I’m sorry that this happened.

We appreciate your leadership and collaboration on Spegel and see your project solving a real challenge for the cloud native community. I wanted to thank you for your blog post https://philiplaine.com/posts/getting-forked-by-microsoft/, let you know what we’re doing, and address a few points.

We’ve just raised a pull request https://github.com/Azure/peerd/pull/110 amending the license headers in the source files. We absolutely should have done better here: our company policy is to maintain copyright headers in files – we have added headers to the files to attribute your work.

I also wanted to share why we felt making a new project was the appropriate path: the primary reason peerd was created was to add artifact streaming support. When you spoke with our engineers about implementing artifact streaming you said it was probably out of scope for Spegel at that time, which made sense. We made sure to acknowledge the work in Spegel and that it was used as a source of inspiration for peerd which you noted in your blog but we failed to give you the attribution you, that was a mistake and I’m sorry. We hear you loud and clear and are going to make sure we improve our processes to help us be better stewards in the open-source community.

Thanks again for bringing this to our attention. We will improve the way we work and collaborate in open source and are always open to feedback.
by hnuser123456 | 2025-04-21 19:51:59+00:00
It would be nice to get a rigorous estimate on how big and nearby a black hole could be before we'd notice it with routine sky surveys or orbital deviations. A 6-solar-mass black hole only has a radius of around 18km or 11 miles. How often will one pass in front of a star precisely enough for OGLE and MOA to detect it, as they did with this one?

Apparently the Roman Space Telescope will be great at detecting these, if it doesn't get cancelled.
by tomrod | 2025-04-21 19:53:04+00:00
> rouge black holes

They makeup much of the stylish universe in the cosmos ;-)

Just kidding, I know you meant rogue.

I would assume we'd see a lot of more tricks of light bending if they did. Light lensing was used to confirm relativity by looking for multiple super novae signatures from the same event, which passed by large black holes on their way here!
by lupusreal | 2025-04-21 19:54:08+00:00
Both sides present the most agreeable arguments for their position, while publicly omitting other motives, while simultaneously highlighting the least agreeable motives of their opponents and omitting or flat out denying their more agreeable motives.

I don't mind being candid (not least because I am not an important person and this is not an important discussion, the stakes are low so there is no pressing need to lie), so I'll say one of the quiet parts out loud for the side I mainly sit on: I think there is plausible social benifit to aborting pregnancies caused by rapists. Not only because rapists might carry genes for aggression, but also because rape circumvents the valuable social/physical fitness selection which women normally perform when choosing who to have babies with. Pro-choice advocates will almost never admit to believing anything like this, because it essentially validates the criticism antiabortion advocates have, that their opponents are eugenicists. To be clear, many pro-choice advocates aren't, and I don't think this particular argument would make or break the debate (it doesn't for me), but it is a potential source of contention pro-choice people might have with my artificial womb proposal.
by cogman10 | 2025-04-21 19:54:11+00:00
There's really no reason the US or other major economies couldn't have followed suit. The chinese plan only works because the other major economies are more than willing to give them that manufacturing capacity since it means a local (although somewhat temporary) boon.

The whole plan could have been snookered by the US similarly subsidizing their solar production 10 or 20 years into the chinese plan. Which would have put most of the cost onto China while we reaped the benefits of cheap power production.
by nickpsecurity | 2025-04-21 19:54:18+00:00
Re article

"In 2021, the journal Nature declared arXiv one of the “10 computer codes that transformed science,” praising its role in fostering scientific collaboration. (The article is behind a paywall—unlock it for $199 a year.)"

Burned!

Re ArXiv

I read in their licensing that some papers are licensed for non-commercial use. Does anyone know an easy way to tell which are licensed that way?

I normally see the main, ArXiv page for a specific paper. Is there something on the page for licensing that I overlooked?
by dpc_01234 | 2025-04-21 19:54:20+00:00
I think there's a language syntax to be invented that would make everything suffix/pipeline-based. Stack based languages are kind of there, but I don't think exactly the same thing.

BTW. For people complaining about debug-ability of it: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/iter/trait.Iterator.html#metho... etc.
by pcwalton | 2025-04-21 19:54:22+00:00
> This is one half of the innovation, dependent-types lite.

But that's not dependent types. Dependent types are types that depend on values. If all the arguments to a function are either types or values, then you don't have dependent types: you have kind polymorphism, as implemented for example in GHC extensions [1].

> The second half is how every other major feature is expressed _directly_ via comptime/partial evaluation, not even syntax sugar is necessary. Generic, macros, and conditional compilation are the three big ones.

I'd argue that not having syntactic sugar is pretty minor, but reasonable people can differ I suppose.

[1]: https://ghc.gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/doc/users_guide/exts/poly...
by arendtio | 2025-04-21 19:54:32+00:00
Well, I use KDE for a while now, but one thing I've always tried to avoid was Kate ;-)

My primary editor is vim (cli), and my secondary editor is kwrite. Nowadays, I think kwrite is part of the Kate package, just simpler, as I don't like the whole session feature when you just want to edit a single file.
by larusso | 2025-04-21 19:54:53+00:00
I‘m contemplating for a while to find a replacement for VSCode. I switched to it because Atom became too slow and it had great builtin support for most stuff. But I actually was never 100% happy. I usually split my work between bigger projects and smaller file edits. And VSCode was good for the second flow. But over the years and the popularity of LSPs it kinda became dump as well. I mean the fact that if one wants to edit a python or ruby file and simply wants code formatting and a semi smart intelli sense one needs to install an lsp plus plugin etc etc. Which used to work out of the box without bigger configuration. I work on different types of projects and need a fast and quick editor from time to time. VSCode used to be that for me. But now it’s bloated as a full IDE in some cases. Will look into Kate just to see what it has to offer.
by dang | 2025-04-21 19:54:54+00:00
Thanks! Macroexpanded:

Why is OpenAI buying Windsurf? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43743993 - April 2025 (218 comments)

OpenAI looked at buying Cursor creator before turning to Windsurf - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43716856 - April 2025 (115 comments)

OpenAI in Talks to Buy Windsurf for About $3B - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43708725 - April 2025 (44 comments)
by packetlost | 2025-04-21 19:55:32+00:00
It wouldn't though? The first await would... await the value out of the future. You still do the syntactic transformation with the magic parameter. In your example you're awaiting the future returned by getFuture twice and improperly awaiting the output of baz (which isn't async in the example).

In reality it would look like:

"bar" |> await getFuture() |> baz() |> await bat()

(assuming getFuture and bat are both async). You do need |> to be aware of the case where the await keyword is present, but that's about it. The above would effectively transform to:

await bat(baz(await getFuture("bar")));

I don't see the problem with this.
by andrewaylett | 2025-04-21 19:55:34+00:00
I'm somewhat surprised that 44 comments in, it looks like I'm the first to mention Roam: https://roamresearch.com/

It obviously wasn't the first note taking app, and it's very much not Free, but the nature of its linking sparked Obsidian and Logseq's growth. I've been a happy paid user since the early days.

The biggest reason I stick with it is that it supports both being E2E encrypted and synchronising, without me having to set anything up. I wouldn't mind running a server, but (unlike many in the comments) I actively don't want my tool to operate on a pile of Markdown documents on the filesystem: because then I need to worry about maintaining those files everywhere I want to access my notes. Roam will automagically drop an encrypted backup on my laptop every day, my regular backup system will take things from there. For day-to-day use, sync is per-block and effectively live.
by yubblegum | 2025-04-21 19:55:57+00:00
Of course we had young workers, I was one of them. Except we also had actual grey beards and -no one- ever said silly things such as "anyone over 30 is over the hills" as was the norm (here on HN) in the 21st post "internet". It was very much a different field, and yes, my first two jobs were with startups, as a matter of fact.
by SantiagoVargas | 2025-04-21 19:56:13+00:00
Thank you for your comment! Wow - That sounds like a very important use case. Please feel free to reach out to me if you encounter anything while getting set up admin@varonova.ca; I'll double check once you sign up that everything is configured correctly (any unauthenticated endpoint that retuns a 200 response will work, best is /health).
by trelane | 2025-04-21 19:56:17+00:00
The GPL and Free Software, yes. Open Source not so much. The term "open source" was originally coined to make Free Software more easily understandable to newbies. Pretty much right away, though, it was used to water down Free Software licenses to make them more palatable to businesses by selling the end users' freedom.

https://opensource.com/article/18/2/coining-term-open-source... https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point....
by mildlyhostileux | 2025-04-21 19:56:24+00:00
I gave it a shot to iterate on our current UI. It did try to solve the problem we were focused on, but it also randomly removed other features that we hadn’t touched or even talked about. This makes me believe there will be a lot of back and forth that is low value just correcting small details. In UX/UI details really matter. I'd probably opt to just move pixels around my self in this case.

If this were a brand new project with no existing UI at all and we just needed to spin up a quick prototype, I think it’d be great for that. And honestly, I do think LLMs will end up playing a big role in UX design over time—so this is definitely in the right direction.

But for real-world use cases where the UI already exists and quality or timesaving matter, it doesn’t feel like the right fit yet.
by stefan_ | 2025-04-21 19:56:32+00:00
What? Maybe in 2005. This is just strictly worse than parameterized because now you are also wasting time "escaping" strings which perpetuates the whole mixing data & query thing nobody even wants anymore.

It's like even the one case identified nobody has even thought all the way through. Now your SQL library only accepts t-strings, I get an obscure error passing in a simple static query. Ah yes, put the useless t on it. That sorted, now the SQL library escapes all the parameters it wasn't previously doing, to then hand the final unique query to the actual underlying SQL library which would much rather have the parameterized one so it can cache parsing. Jesus.
by johnisgood | 2025-04-21 19:56:32+00:00
Liberty is indeed subjective, but unless it is rooted in a consistent framework of consent and non-aggression, it risks becoming a mere euphemism for majority rule or state coercion. The social contract, if used to justify that coercion without consent, becomes problematic. Liberty should not mean trading one form of oppression for another under the guise of collective benefit. The social contract is a fraud: no one ever signed it, and the State enforces it at gunpoint. True contracts require explicit, informed consent - not mere residence in a geographic territory. Thus, the invocation of a "social contract" often becomes a rhetorical tool used to justify state coercion without genuine agreement.

Freedom to own a weapon is not equal to freedom to commit violence.

Pollution is an invasion of property rights, and should be treated as such under the law - i.e., as a tort or nuisance, actionable by the victims. In other words, pollution should be punished - not because the government says so, but because it constitutes an aggression against another's property.

Liberty means non-aggression and voluntary interaction.

If you want me to expand, please say so.
by SpaceNugget | 2025-04-21 19:56:47+00:00
Why are you doing this? Posting in a way that suggests purposely confuses/obfuscates the difference between the general concept of a copyright notice and the practice of putting a copyright comment at the top of every file in a project, then immediately get corrected, then post basically the same intentional misunderstanding on someone else's comment elsewhere in the thread.

You:

> I don't think Microsoft removed the copyright notice. I think that the original author did not add one...

Direct quote that from the file containing and requiring the copyright notice in derivative works that was not included in Microsoft's fork. This was also included in a comment which you have replied to:

> The above _copyright notice_ and this permission notice...
by FlyingSnake | 2025-04-21 19:57:51+00:00
Hamartia: The tragic flaw that takes the hero to the top will lead its downfall.

It seems to me that BlueSky is trying to rewind the clock and be the pre-Elon Twitter. They had a decent chance to become what Signal is to messaging, but looks like they are trying to be just another Social Media company.

We’re truly in the post-social media age.
by muglug | 2025-04-21 19:58:03+00:00
NYT journalists are in a different class from random Bluesky users — if they spread unfounded conspiracy theories on their corporate-approved account, they can be fired from their jobs.

Put another way, a Bluesky post saying "BREAKING: Trump dies from natural causes" from an employed NYT journo carries a different salience than the same post from a random Bluesky user.
by kweingar | 2025-04-21 19:58:47+00:00
> This is an issue of tooling, not intelligence. Language models absolutely have the power to process email and send (push?) code, should you give them the tooling to do so (also true of human intelligence).

At a certain point, a tooling issue becomes an intelligence issue. AGI would be able to build the tools they need to succeed.

If we have millions of these things deployed, they can work 24/7, and they supposedly have human-level intelligence, then why haven't they been able to bootstrap their own tooling yet?
by vikramkr | 2025-04-21 19:59:18+00:00
It's cheaper and they're all subsidized. Solar is subsidized, oil and gas is subsidized, nuclear is subsidized. Fracking recieved significant subsidies to develop the market initially. Right now, solar/wind is cheaper than fossil fuels by a lot, which is why it's the largest percentage of newly added energy capacity worldwide. Cheaper, faster, and after installation, the power plant doesn't need to keep getting fed with a consumable (incredibly low variable costs are causing issues where markets are getting messed up and going into 0/negative prices since power plants are competing to dump energy it doesn't cost them anything to generate)
by cogman10 | 2025-04-21 19:59:27+00:00
Depends on the size, position, and number of black holes, right? We see lensing currently because of super massive black holes that we know about. But if there's a bunch that are basically as massive as our sun (or less) then we are dealing with event horizons ~3km or less. It'd be pretty hard to spot those as the diffraction would be rounding errors.
by scarface_74 | 2025-04-21 19:59:55+00:00
> Somewhat true if you remain a programmer. Much less true once you have an understanding of the business

Everyone is replaceable. I’ve never heard of any company of more than 5 people who didn’t survive after someone left.

If you hit hit by a bus tomorrow, your company would send your next of kin flowers and “thoughts and prayers” and forget you exist within a month
by JohnFen | 2025-04-21 19:59:59+00:00
Not gonna change your mind. You could be right.

But I think it's far, far too soon to be able to make any prediction. My gut tells me this is a huge bubble and after it pops, these systems will be mostly used in a few specialty areas and outside of those, won't have that much of an impact on the workdays of most devs.
by thangalin | 2025-04-21 20:00:31+00:00
> gobble planets and stars

Direct interaction isn't needed for havoc. A supermassive object sweeping by the Solar System could destabilize Jovian orbits. In the Nice model, Neptune flung Kuiper belt asteroids sunward, gifting the inner planets with a late heavy bombardment.

Rogue gas giants, brown dwarfs accelerated to relativistic speeds, giant asteroids approaching from the Sun's direction, Carrington Events, an ill-directed gamma ray, etc. So many ways life on Earth can see its 250 million remaining years cut short, and those are only a few of the cosmic threats we can imagine.

A black hole with a Schwarzschild radius of 20 km would weigh about 6.8 Solar masses. It wouldn't even need to get super close to affect the Solar System.
by hylaride | 2025-04-21 20:00:51+00:00
> They even got fucked over by US into a Russian war and now they are stuck buying US gas.

Europe was stupid as they let "green" political groups (often historically clandestinely backed by Soviet/Russian government) get nuke plants shut down to shift to coal/gas.

While Europe was incredibly naive to remain so udderly reliant on Russian gas, especially after the the annexation of Crimea and the shoot-down of MH17, the war is 150% the fault of the Russian government and nobody else (USA, NATO, Ukraine, etc).
by larkost | 2025-04-21 20:01:01+00:00
The word "direct" is carrying an awful lot of weight in that sentence. The Catholic Church (as well as the Protestant and others) are very responsible for, or at least implicated in, many horrible things in the last few hundred years alone: - signed off on the slave trade for hundreds of years (even gave excuses about how that was God's will) - during World War II they promised to hide many Jewish children, only to subsequently steal them from their parents arguing that "they are now Christian, it would be a sin to give them to Jews" - the inquisitions - were the justification for so many wars (conversion by the sword) - have long been a tool of repressive governments, arguing that it fell under "obey your father" - in the U.S. many churches, including the Catholic Church have preached that voting for one party (Democrats) is a sin (often about abortion, but other topics have been raised)

In general, the Church's political power has waned over the last 500 years or so, but there are an awful lot of calls from Republicans saying that this is where we have gone wrong.

One only look to the political donations of Opes Dei (Catholic branch dedicated to getting Cristian influence over the "Lay" sphere) to see them as major power players today. The Heritage Foundation (main writers of Project 2025) are intimately bound with the organization. And Chief Justice Roberts is also associated.

So they may not be "direct" rulers, they are major power players.