MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by kelipso | 2025-04-03 22:08:10+00:00
Interesting, so basically no growth since 2007 if you exclude computers, even with increased productivity. And the drop in employment is insane and it's no wonder that there is a huge political movement with fixing that as a pillar. Not even to mention regional problems that have been going on longer in the Rust Belt. Yeah I find it pretty disgusting when workers in service based industries like here have no sympathy for the workers in these industries.
by bigyabai | 2025-04-03 22:08:17+00:00
> The integrative cases I noted are something different. For example, the Continuity support between Mac and iPad/iPhone/Apple Watch.

I own a Mac, and I've owned an iPhone too. There isn't a single good Continuity feature that I used that isn't covered by KDE Connect. The few missing features aren't a big enough convenience to really matter, Linux users are never going to come together to replace Find My or Apple Music.

> So, someone could do exactly what I'm advocating for in the article and not detract from the Linux experience

Then by all means, they should. I read these articles on a regular basis and nothing seems to change besides the argument. People are always discontent with Linux, they always express a solemn hope for commercial operating systems, then they go back to using the desktop system they hate. This feels like exactly the sort of tribalism that emerged from the competition of the early 2000s.
by imhoguy | 2025-04-03 22:08:51+00:00
Actually LLMs help me to start coding at all, where without it I would procrastinate to not even start. I don't enjoy project bootstraping, and they help greatly with setup. Once a project gets a nice and quick development feedback loop I can drop LLMs and as they slow me down really, esp with deeper or newer abstractions. I may have undiagnosed ADHD.
by kmeisthax | 2025-04-03 22:09:11+00:00
> The agenda that gets the most resources is faithful chain of thought: force individual AI systems to “think in English” like the AIs of 2025, and don’t optimize the “thoughts” to look nice. The result is a new model, Safer-1.

Oh hey, it's the errant thought I had in my head this morning when I read the paper from Anthropic about CoT models lying about their thought processes.

While I'm on my soapbox, I will point out that if your goal is preservation of democracy (itself an instrumental goal for human control), then you want to decentralize and distribute as much as possible. Centralization is the path to dictatorship. A significant tension in the Slowdown ending is the fact that, while we've avoided AI coups, we've given a handful of people the ability to do a perfectly ordinary human coup, and humans are very, very good at coups.

Your best bet is smaller models that don't have as many unused weights to hide misalignment in; along with interperability and faithful CoT research. Make a model that satisfies your safety criteria and then make sure everyone gets a copy so subgroups of humans get no advantage from hoarding it.
by dragonwriter | 2025-04-03 22:10:05+00:00
> According to some of the replies in this discussion, even "artist trying to paint from memory" is guilty of infringement

Yes, making a copy or derivative work of something under copyright from memory is infringement, unless it falls under an exception in copyright law such as fair use (which does not categorically apply to everything with "memory" as an intermediary between the original work and the copy/derivative, otherwise, copyright law would never have had any effect other than on mechanical duplication.)
by OgsyedIE | 2025-04-03 22:10:28+00:00
Similar criticisms that outsiders need to do their own research to acquire foundational-level understanding before they start on the topic can be made about other popular topics on Hn that frequently use abbreviations, such as TLS, BSDs, URL and MCP, but somehow those get a pass.

Is it unfair to make such demands for the inclusion of 101-level stuff in non-programming content, or is it unfair to give IT topics a pass? Which approach fosters a community of winners and which one does the opposite? I'm confident that you can work it out.
by cassepipe | 2025-04-03 22:11:29+00:00
Well I have had to replace hinges, upgrade RAM, replace the battery, change HDD to SSD, replace a broken keyboard, an entire enclosure and finally a dying motherboard after 11 years of use. The laptop is still working but it could have really used a screen upgrade.

Maybe standard screen definition is now good enough, RAM big enough, SSD more durable, shell more durable (although I have to say that's a disappointment with the fw) and hinges longer lasting, and maybe Framework is fighting the last war but that's the reason I went for one anyways.

This is a long run bet and if it doesn't pan out to be an amazing deal, it will still a better experience than the previous one.

It costed more than my previous laptop but no more or less what I have had to pay to maintain the previous one. If it had been a framework, it would still be my workhorse.

Future will tell
by petsfed | 2025-04-03 22:11:34+00:00
Broadly speaking, all existentialism was leftist in character because its core tenet was a rejection of old ways. Definitionally, you cannot reject the old order without being liberal/progressive/leftist/etc. Which, again, was in response to the 15-20 million killed during WWI, the most deadly 4 years in Europe since the plague years.

Again, I think you're inverting causality by blaming Marxism for post-modernism, when they are instead related results of the same overall trend, that was simply catalyzed by WWI (there's definitely a read on e.g. the 1917 Russian Revolution that it happens at least wildly differently without Tsarist Russia entering the war).
by silisili | 2025-04-03 22:11:57+00:00
Not at all - I'm not really taking a solid stance one way or another because I'm not an economist.

My only point was that Philco was being used as an unknown crappy Brazilian brand example. It used to be an American company that actually made quality things, and through outsourcing and general 'physical and financial enshittification' is pretty much an unknown to Americans now.

If you're in favor of quality things being made in the US, it's an argument for said policy.
by 9rx | 2025-04-03 22:12:04+00:00
> Does the author not know other nations have been engaged in charging tariffs for a very long time?

And, unlike the US, none of them the envy of the world because of it. It is fascinating that the US has decided it wants to give up what it has to be become like them. It is akin to watching a supermodel get surgery to make themselves uglier because everyone they saw around them wasn't nearly as beautiful as they were. Likewise, we no doubt would come up with some kind of catchphrase to recognize that surprising event.
by kokanee | 2025-04-03 22:12:11+00:00
The idea of open sourcing everything and nullifying patents would benefit corporations like Disney and OpenAI vastly more than it would benefit the people. The first thing that would happen is that BigCorp would eat up every interesting or useful piece of art, technology, and culture that has ever been created and monetize the life out of it.

These legal protections are needed by the people. To the Pirate Party's credit, undoing corporate personhood would be a good first step, so that we can focus on enforcing protections for the works of humans. Still, attributing those works to CEOs instead of corporations wouldn't result in much change.
by giraffe_lady | 2025-04-03 22:12:14+00:00
The tech-right of musk, thiel, vance, andreessen etc are enacting the "reboot" envisioned by curtis yarvin, he wrote about it calling it "the butterfly revolution" iirc. The rest are just trying to roll back 80 years of social change along with reestablishing segregation but as national policy this time.

And yeah I think your read on how they'll manage the fallout of this is correct.
by fragmede | 2025-04-03 22:12:15+00:00
Because it's self indulgent wankery. If I, as writer and an artist, have just the most absolutely brilliant thoughts, and write them down into a book or draw the most beautiful artwork, I can earn money off that well into my afterlife with copyright. Meanwhile the carpenter who is no less bright, can only sell the chair he's built once. In order to make money off of it, he must labor to produce a second or even a third chair. Why does one person have to work harder than the other because of the medium they chose?

Meanwhile in China, just because you invented a thing, you don't get to sit back and rest on your laurels. sipping champagne in hot tubs, because your competitor isn't staying put. He's grinding and innovating off your innovation so you'd also better keep innovating.
by meatmanek | 2025-04-03 22:12:22+00:00
This is similar to my experience trying to get Stable Diffusion to denoise a photo for me. (AIUI, under the hood they're trained to turn noise into an image that matches the prompt.) It would either do nothing (with settings turned way down) or take massive creative liberties (such as replacing my friend's face with a cartoon caricature while leaving the rest of the photo looking realistic).

I've had much better luck with models specifically trained for denoising. For denoising, the SCUNet model run via chaiNNer works well for me most of the time. (Occasionally SCUNet likes to leave noise alone in areas that are full of background blur, which I assume has to do with the way the image gets processed as tiles. It would make sense for the model to get confused with a tile that only has background blur, like maybe it assumes that the input image should contain nonzero high-frequency data.)

For your use case, you might want to use something like Real-ESRGAN or another superresolution / image restoration model, but I haven't played much in that space so I can't make concrete recommendations.
by Denzel | 2025-04-03 22:12:32+00:00
Can you talk through specifically what sprint goals you’ve completed in an afternoon? Hopefully multiple examples.

Grounding these conversations in an actual reality affords more context for people to evaluate your claims. Otherwise it’s just “trust me bro”.

And I say this as a Senior SWE who’s successfully worked with ChatGPT to code up some prototype stuff, but haven’t been able to dedicate 100+ hours to work through all the minutia of learning how to drive daily with it.
by nolist_policy | 2025-04-03 22:13:26+00:00
Wait what?

Android phones are more open than ever with the recent EU laws and Google anti-trust rulings. Android and iOS are not at all comparable in that aspect.

Android phones receive longer updates than ever.

Android phones are more innovative than ever with all these foldables.

Android phones consistently have better specs than iPhones at the same price point.
by yathern | 2025-04-03 22:13:29+00:00
> Maybe get rid of 1-2 character words in the word counter? Seems easy for it to hit things like i or ie etc. I would love to see a counter that ignores those at least

I'm considering that as well, if only to calm my database down a bit

> Also the report card section on the Shakespeare progress panel wasn’t scrollable on iOS.

Second time I've heard that! I have no iOS devices so I can't fix it too easily, but I'll take another look.
by dragonwriter | 2025-04-03 22:13:53+00:00
Or treat AI training as within the coverage of the current fair use regime (which is certainly defensible within the current copyright regime), while prosecuting the use of AI models to create infringing copies and derivative works that do not themselves have permission or a reasonable claim to be within the scope of fair use as a violation (and prosecuted hosted AI firms for contributory infringement where their actions with regard to such created infringements fit the existing law on that.)
by breadwinner | 2025-04-03 22:14:02+00:00
Microsoft got its start by Bill Gates doing some dumpster diving. Back then software wasn't seen as valuable thing, only hardware was. Source code wasn't something to be protected, so printouts of code would be thrown in trash. And that's where Bill Gates found the source code for Basic interpreter, which he ported and it became the first Microsoft product.

https://americanhistory.si.edu/comphist/gates.htm

https://paulallen.com/Futurist/Microsoft.aspx
by 0xbadcafebee | 2025-04-03 22:15:14+00:00
For me power draw is about battery life. If you occasionally need to work without a power plug, or carrying your laptop from meeting to meeting all over the office, you really appreciate when the power lasts all day. My T14s battery draw of ~6.5W on the 57Wh battery will last me ~8 hours, good enough for a day unplugged at the office. (I'd love a bigger battery, but it is what it is...)
by rtkwe | 2025-04-03 22:15:17+00:00
Even if we did keep the tariffs long enough to reshore there's so many problems:

1) The resulting industries are only viable under the tariff regime so we have to keep it forever or until the production costs somehow equalize.

2) Who's going to work all these new jobs with the plan of reducing immigration drastically or practically eliminating it? We're only at 4.1% unemployment today. Are we supposed to baby boom our way to enough workers? While costs are jacked through the roof due to the tariffs?
by travisjungroth | 2025-04-03 22:17:30+00:00
I’ve realized while reading these comments my opinions on LLMs being intelligent has significantly increased. Rather than argue any specific test, I believe no one can come up with a text-based intelligence test that 90% of literate adults can pass but the top LLMs fail.

This would mean there’s no definition of intelligence you could tie to a test where humans would be intelligent but LLMs wouldn’t.

A maybe more palatable idea is that having “intelligence” as a binary is insufficient. I think it’s more of an extremely skewed distribution. With how humans are above the rest, you didn’t have to nail the cutoff point to get us on one side and everything else on the other. Maybe chimpanzees and dolphins slip in. But now, the LLMs are much closer to humans. That line is harder to draw. Actually not possible to draw it so people are on one side and LLMs on the other.
by palmotea | 2025-04-03 22:17:31+00:00
> That's not why they're targeting conservative voters. They're targeting the states & districts of senators and congressmen who are voting for Trump's agenda in an effort to get them to change their vote.

No. The post I was responding to literally was talking about personally taking advantage of conservative voters, not their representatives. The post above that talked about "punishing everyone involved in this tax hike to the maximum extent. It's pretty clear it's just a "fuck you," aimed at regular people.

No introspection, no proposals for solving the problems that would cause people to give tariffs a chance, just punishment. It's neoliberals saying, "we don't give two shit about you, if you resist our beatings, we'll just beat your harder for being uppity."
by lolinder | 2025-04-03 22:17:56+00:00
> The last period of peace is as much an exception for one as it is for the other given a significant part of the history of the continents.

But... it's not. 160 years of straight uninterrupted time without total war out of 250 makes no-total-war the norm, not the exception. >50% of the last 250 years have been spent in one continuous period of people not having to wonder if bombs would be falling on their heads today.

That's totally different than Europe, whose longest gap between total war was the 100-year gap between Napoleon and WW1.

> Also, if we think of countries, ... some of those did not have a war on their soil for similar as USA

Yes, but those are each the size of a US state, so unsurprisingly didn't lead to them taking the place of world superpower.

If you're going to be criticizing my argument it would be helpful to keep in mind that I was replying to this:

> But a large degree of the exception was being excepted from being blown to smithereens during WW2, which is the kind of opportunity that doesn't usually come around twice.

You're taking things in totally different directions that aren't relevant to the question of how often the US will continue to be the largest Western country with no threat of total war on domestic soil.
by HenryBemis | 2025-04-03 22:18:03+00:00
Buy a second hand phone just for the trip. Don't log-in into anything (an Android), and install no apps. Just remember your password. Once you get to the hotel go ahead and install whatever you need for your trip (navigation etc.) You can check most things via the phone's browser, your email through Firefox/webmail, etc. You can install signal and text to your 'other account' at you PC at home any photos/zips/etc. If you are really afraid, you can reset the phone before you get to the airport to leave. Your photos will be waiting for you on the Singal at your home.
by makeitdouble | 2025-04-03 22:18:19+00:00
I'd put the spotlight on the repair prices to fix a MacBook screen: a full replacement will cost more that half the machine price, and basically the same as a motherboard replacement for low-middle range models.

It's akin to asking if you prefer to lose your right or left arm.

Apple would get out of that issue altogether if they gave up on the ultrathin screen. Again, the iPad doesn't have this issue for instance.
by darkteflon | 2025-04-03 22:18:24+00:00
Hatchet looks very cool! As an interested dilettante in this space, I’d love to read a comparison with Dagster.

Re DBOS: I understood that part of the value proposition there is bundling transactions into logical units that can all be undone if a critical step in the workflow fails - the example given in their docs being a failed payment flow. Does Hatchet have a solution for those scenarios?
by pixl97 | 2025-04-03 22:18:55+00:00
> or operate heavy machinery

What exactly do you mean by this one?

In large mining operations we already have human assisted teleoperation AI equipment. Was watching one recently where the human got 5 or so push dozers lined up with a (admittedly simple) task of cutting a hill down and then just got them back in line if they ran into anything outside of their training. The push and backup operations along with blade control were done by the AI/dozer itself.

Now, this isn't long term planning, but it is operating in the real world.
by flats | 2025-04-03 22:20:28+00:00
Very well put. I’m open to a future in which nothing is copyrighted & everything is in the public domain, but the byproduct of that public domain material should _also_ be owned by the public.

Otherwise, we’re making the judgement that the originators of the IP should not be compensated for their labor, while the AI labs should be. Of course, training & running the models take compute resources, but the ultimate aim of these companies is to profit above & beyond those costs, just as artists hope to be compensated above & beyond the training & resources required to make the art in the first place.
by jMyles | 2025-04-03 22:21:24+00:00
> why should we require human artists to be held to the same standards as automated software?

Isn't this the same question as, "why should we allow general purpose computing?" If the technology of our age is our birthright, don't we have the right to engage whatever mathematics we find inspiring with its aid?

> If I draw a picture that in some way resembles Buzz Lightyear I am much less of a threat to Disney than an always-available computer program with a marginal cost of zero.

...that sounds like a good argument in favor of the always-available computer program.
by gwd | 2025-04-03 22:21:36+00:00
I don't think those are actually showing different things. The OpenAI paper is about the LLM planning to itself to hack something; but when they use training to suppress this "hacking" self-talk, it still hacks the reward function almost as much, it just doesn't use such easily-detectable language.

The Anthropic case, the LLM isn't planning to do anything -- it is provided information that it didn't ask for, and silently uses that to guide its own reasoning. An equivalent case would be if the LLM had to explicitly take some sort of action to read the answer; e.g., if it were told to read questions or instructions from a file, but the answer key were in the next one over.

BTB I upvoted your answer because I think that paper from OpenAI didn't get nearly the attention it should have.
by dist-epoch | 2025-04-03 22:21:42+00:00
> you can observe what CPU instructions it uses to sign the challenge, and replicate the operations yourself.

No you can't, that's the whole thing with homomorphic encryption. Ask GPT to explain it to you why it's so.

You have no way of knowing the bounds of the code I will access from the inside the homomorphic code. Depending on the challenge I can query parts of the binary and hash that in the response. So you will need to replicate the whole binary.

Similar techniques are already used today by various copy-protection/anti-cheat game protectors. Most of them remain unbroken.
by necovek | 2025-04-03 22:21:45+00:00
You've missed my entire point which is still not addressed at all with any of the examples you mention.

Please note that I never once claimed traditional engineering is predictable — you seem to be stressing a point out of your pre-conviction what a software engineer would believe and not what I am stating plainly.

I am talking about a fully "finished" project (say, an apartment building, with people living in those apartments), needing to have a floor inserted in the middle.

This is not about "changing requirements", this is about evolving a project that was initially built to be an apartment building into a stadium or an airport without messing up any of the apartment dwellers.

Again, this does not mean that the agility and creativity actual engineering needs to posess is at all smaller (in fact, some of the examples that are hard with large physical structures, are trivial with software — like that "moving a bridge" example), but I stay unconvinced that the methods that work for engineering would work as well for software.

As I believe most technical debt comes from attempting to predict the future and not rushing, I don't see the parallel there either.

Basically, they are arguing points I didn't make and don't believe, and not addressing points I do make and do believe.
by notfed | 2025-04-03 22:22:13+00:00
For a single player game, that might be a good explanation.

For a multiplayer game, though, it's not hard at all to see what's happening. If a cheater cheats and gets away with it, then they rationally should expect to receive social reputational credit, which I want to believe is something that instinctively makes most of us feel good, us being social creatures.
by b0bben | 2025-04-03 22:22:22+00:00
thx! it's not open-source, but you can get awesome inspiration and UI elements from here: https://www.figma.com/design/OVz4DoinEzP2Rj5pnNY15A/%E2%8F%B...

(not mine, just something i found and use a lot for inspo)
by duskwuff | 2025-04-03 22:23:00+00:00
> The list of dropped components is quite large. The cryptsetup, cryptenroll, unified kernel images, kernel signing and systemd-boot work nicely together.

These are also all components which would be extremely difficult to make portable - they require tight integration with the kernel and its boot process. I can't imagine how you'd implement them in a portable fashion, short of either making changes to the kernel on one or both operating systems, or implementing a complex set of shims to make them present similar interfaces. Either one of those options would be a sizable project on its own - I can't fault the developer from shying away.
by creddit | 2025-04-03 22:23:18+00:00
How does this differ from the reference Github MCP server?

https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/servers/tree/main/sr...

EDIT: Oh wait, lol, I looked closer and it seems that the difference is that the server runs on your server instead which is like the single most insane thing I can think of someone choosing to do when the reference Github MCP server exists.