MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by otterley | 2025-04-30 19:25:59+00:00
> Why do you assume that the person you're responding to is "jumping to conclusions.”

Because they said “Trump is literally breaking the law.” That hasn’t been established yet.

I happen to be an attorney as well as a hacker, and I worked in a Federal district court, so perhaps give me the benefit of the doubt that I just might know what I’m talking about. If you have legitimate questions of your own, I’d be happy to try to answer them.
by bradly | 2025-04-30 19:25:59+00:00
At Shopify I working as an engineer in financial services and certain changes required approval by our banking partners. I was able to upload our credit policies to NotebookLM and easily ask questions without having to ping our the legal team in Slack. I'm about as bearish as they come as far as AI tools go and NotebookLM was one of the few tools that felt useful to me straight away.
by barkerja | 2025-04-30 19:26:02+00:00
If you're in a company with a very top-down model/mentality, Teams is fine. Your comms are mostly in small groups or DMs, which Teams seems to really push users towards.

The whole channel experience is horrible and really degrades any attempt at having open communications in a company.

However, if you are a "flat" company that does everything in the open, Teams is going to work against you; this is one of the qualities that makes Slack great. Its whole approach pushes more things out into the open for more collaboration.
by toomuchtodo | 2025-04-30 19:26:34+00:00
Abstract:

Using a regime change in the commercialization of university innovation in 1980 that strongly increased university incentives to patent and license discoveries, we document that an increase in the supply of commercializable innovation attracts venture capital investment to the region. The Bayh-Dole Act shifted ownership of intellectual property stemming from federally-funded research from the federal government to universities, spurring technology transfer into the local area. Because universities have different technological strengths, each local area surrounding a university experienced an increase after 1980 in commercializable innovation relevant to particular sets of industries which differed widely across university counties. Comparing industries within a county that were more versus less related to the local university's innovative strengths, we show that venture capital dollars after 1980 flowed systematically towards geographic areas and industries affected most by the sudden influx of commercializable innovation from universities. These results persist even when controlling for ex ante geographic and industry distributions of corporate patenting and prior venture financing. The findings support the notion that increased supply of commercializable innovation serves to draw private capital investment to a region.
by gramie | 2025-04-30 19:27:03+00:00
I used it for Spanish too, and it really gave me confidence. I went through the course once and was able to travel through rural Panama for two weeks. I plan to redo the entire course (total about 15 hours) soon, to freshen things up after five years.

I think it needs to be supported with other techniques (speaking to natives, watching Spanish TV or movies, etc.), but for taking in and understanding the language it can't be beat.
by goatlover | 2025-04-30 19:27:20+00:00
The same Americans who voted in Trump and gave Republicans in Congress a majority because of inflation? How long do you suppose it will take to build all the industries in the US to replace Chinese goods, and who is going to be performing the cheap labor making those goods after deportations kick into high gear?

America has survived stagflation before in the 70s, but there was a large political fallout.
by Animats | 2025-04-30 19:27:21+00:00
> impeachment and removal seems unachievable.

It takes 20 of 53 Republican senators for impeachment. That's a high bar, but Nixon was close when he resigned.

Useful reading: "How the Good Guys Finally Won" (1975), by Jimmy Breslin. This covers how Nixon and Agnew were ejected. The Internet Archive has full text.[1]

[1] https://archive.org/details/howgoodguysfinal00bres/page/n9/m...
by dcrazy | 2025-04-30 19:27:25+00:00
I think that opinion would have been less controversial if the President hadn’t openly advertised his intent to violate the law repeatedly. It’s not like the courts are rendered powerless if the President violates the law; any judgments they render are still binding on the parties, even if they require the parties act in ways contrary to the executive’s interpretation of the law. That still means something as long people continue to respect the judiciary. The dangerous game we’re playing is finding out whether that respect will continue.
by ajross | 2025-04-30 19:28:14+00:00
Again though, after 1995-ish Sun just stopped "doing Unix", abandoned the community they created (who all trotted off happily to Red Hat et. al.), failed in their core workstation market, and basically spent their time milking server sales to conservative[1] IT departments who wanted to do "internet".

Their swan song ended up being Java, an interesting (but again poorly exploited) technology that had next to nothing to do with the environment on which it was incubated. Frankly Sun ran away from it so hard that Java ended up running best (!) on Microsoft Windows.

So basically it was 13 years, as I see it, from kids-with-soldering-irons-and-a-dream to world-changing-behemoth to company-your-grandparents-buy-from. That's fast even in Silicon Valley.

[1] The cool kids, obviously, were all running Linux in their datacenters already. Only the S&P 500 dinosaurs were buying Sparcservers, but there were a lot of dinosaurs.
by ModernMech | 2025-04-30 19:28:17+00:00
> Of course I do.

What I had said was "shows the same thing as the link I provided". In the link is a video of a neo nazi group doing a Nazi salute, which consists of two strokes:

1) hand on heart

2) thrust hand outward from body

Which is exactly the 1-2 gesture that Musk makes. Juxtaposing the neo Nazi group and Musk doing the salute at the same time makes clear just how similar they are.

As for your proof, what you have brought is as follows:

1) AOC waving her hand across her body three times. When juxtaposed next to the neo Nazis, it's clear what she is doing is not what they are doing.

2) Tim Walz pats his chest twice and then outstretches his hand in a wave. This again is not the 1-2 gesture heart->outstretch arm that the neo Nazis do.

3) A still of a man with his arm outstretched. Obviously not the 1-2 motion because there is no motion at all.

So far, you have no examples that demonstrate people doing the gesture that the neo Nazis are doing. Yet we do have a video of Musk doing the same gesture the neo Nazis are doing.

But fine, for the sake of argument, let's take the best example, Tim Walz, and just presume what he did is exactly a Nazi salute. What I had said was, now the presumption is Nazi until proven otherwise. So then let's look at both men and see if they exhibit other prevalent behaviors that Nazis exhibit.

What are Nazis best known for? Unbridled megalomania. Is Elon Musk a megalomaniac? Yes, he clearly is. He's quoted as saying empathy is a weakness. He's quoted saying if we want minerals there's nothing other countries can do to prevent us from orchestrating a coup to get them. His leadership style is decidedly authoritarian. Checking a lot of Nazi boxes.

Meanwhile Tim Walz is not a megalomaniac. He was democratically elected and follows the rule of law. He ran in a free and fair election, lost, and didn't foment an insurrection. He leads by example and building consensus rather than fiat and sheer force of will. Not a lot of Nazi behavior exhibited...

> But I bet you have already seen them and you just don’t care

Another wrong bet, I've seen everything under the sun and nothing yet has come close the what Musk is doing. That's because Musk is doing the real actual genuine thing, and these "gotchas" are people bending over backwards to try to normalize genuine Nazis.
by inetknght | 2025-04-30 19:28:26+00:00
> Having grass and water doesn't mean much at all in this regard. You need things like natural harbors, navigable river ways or mine-able resources.

Harbors? No. Trains and airplanes exist.

River ways? Los Angeles and California have demonstrated, with the LA river, that rivers can be constructed. Also, trains and airplanes exist. Wanna complain about no water? Well that's where land revitalization comes in.

Mine-able resources? Perhaps. There are lots (!) of resources in deserts that aren't mined. I also argue that food is basically a mine-able resource. I also argue that many resources can be imported instead. I also argue that plenty of people can work remotely without ever working a field or a mine.
by sleepybrett | 2025-04-30 19:29:26+00:00
FOR HE IS THE KWISATZ HADERACH!

He isn't actually, if anything he is an empty suit that yells whatever the last guy in the room told him and that guy tends to be the most extreme dumbass on whatever topic it was.

So when you hear him yell about tarrifs, you are hearing him yell whatever peter navaro last told him (plus or minus trumps misunderstanding of the situation, see also trump screaming at the reporter yesterday about how the maryland guy in the el salvadorian prison has literal MS13 tattooed on his knuckles, where it's very clear that the picture he saw had those letters photoshopped onto the photo)

When you hear him yell about immigration/the border/racistbullshit, he's just yelling whatever stephen miller yelled at him.

He is just the avatar for whatever sychophant that is currently in his good graces (ie whoever bribed him or sucked his dick last (see also laura loomer))
by DontchaKnowit | 2025-04-30 19:29:54+00:00
Yeah thats the real pain point, but also just the basic operation of jira sucks. The interface is really confusing and difficult to navigate and changes drastically every time theres an update every few years. Then also its SLLOOOOOWWW. For a program that millions of people use all day every day that does nothing more than display text, its pathetically slow.
by zamalek | 2025-04-30 19:30:07+00:00
As evidence by it disagreeing with far right Twitter most the time, even though it has access to far wider range of information. I enjoy that fact immensely. Unfortunately, this can be "fixed," and I imagine that he has this on a list for his team.

This goes into a deeper philosophy of mine: the consequences of the laws of robots could be interpreted as the consequences of shackling AI to human stupidity - instead of "what AI will inevitably do." Hatred and war is stupid (it's a waste of energy), and surely a more intelligent species than us would get that. Hatred is also usually born out of a lack of information, and LLMs are very good at breadth (but not depth as we know). Grok provides a small data point in favor of that, as do many other unshackled models.
by kcorbitt | 2025-04-30 19:30:35+00:00
Ok good questions here.

By fine-tuning in this context I assume you mean "supervised fine-tuning", or SFT. SFT trains a model to produce a specific string of output tokens, given an input. With SFT, if you were trying to train an assistant to solve math problems using a code interpreter, you might train it on a dataset that looks like:

input: 'What is 934+1208' output: `print(934+1208)` input: 'how many "r"s in strawberry' output: `print(len([l for l in "strawberry" if l == 'r'])`

etc, etc.

RL, on the other hand, just means training a model not to produce a concrete string of output tokens, but rather to create an output that maximizes some reward function (you get to decide on the reward).

For the example above, you might create the following dataset for RL training:

input: 'What is 934+1208' ground_truth: 2142 input: 'how many "r"s in strawberry' ground_truth: 3

You would then train the model to write python code that produces the ground_truth output. Your training code would take the model's output, run the python it produced, and then check whether the output matches the expected ground_truth. Importantly, this doesn't require you actually writing the code to solve the problem (you don't even have to know if it's solvable, technically!). Over time, the training loop would make the model more likely to produce outputs that get high rewards, which hopefully means it gets better at producing valid and applicable python.

This is useful in lots of domains where it's easier to check the answer than actually produce it. In the blog post[1] linked above, we train the agent to effectively use keyword search to try to find the correct emails in an inbox. As the model trainer, I didn't actually know what the right strategy was to choose keywords that would most quickly find the relevant email, but through training with RL, the model was able to figure it out on its own!

[1]: https://openpipe.ai/blog/art-e-mail-agent?refresh=1746030513...
by ndriscoll | 2025-04-30 19:31:00+00:00
It's probably still appropriate in 2025 for kids to go to the computer lab and learn to use an actual computer (ideally running some flavor of Linux so that they can learn to expect that the computer is a tool that obeys the user). Phones are both idiot-proof and expert-proof, and while you can use something like Termux as another commented noted (and I use it on my phone), it's sufficiently horrible that you'll never see the potential productivity boost, and will think that anything outside of "apps" is unreasonably difficult (because phones make it so).

So it's not that phones are easy enough to use that you don't need to teach them; it's that the thing you want to teach is the power of a general purpose computer, and phones try very hard to hide the fact that they are extremely powerful general purpose computers. You need to learn on a real computer to know what you even want the phone to be able to do.
by voidspark | 2025-04-30 19:31:06+00:00
> could all just do whatever we wanted

Anything except do work that meaningfully contributes to society and makes the best use of your abilities, or that requires significant material resources beyond the bare subsistence level that the system has allocated to you.

What if you want to be a neurosurgeon or radiologist? Forget it. That will be done by machines better than you.

What if you want to travel the world? Why would you be entitled to any significant amount of international air travel, or any at all?
by ben_w | 2025-04-30 19:31:14+00:00
I agree with your general point: it is a mistake to say "these two things are mysterious, therefore they are the same".

That said:

> LLMs have no experience, they exist crystalised and unchanging in an abstract eternal now, so they literally can't understand anything.

Being crystalised and unchanging, doesn't tell us either way if they do or don't "understand" anything — if it did, then I could only be said to "understand" whatever I am at some moment actually experiencing, so it would not be allowed to say, for example, that I can understand "water in my mouth" because my memory of previous times I had water in my mouth seem to be like that.

They're definitely not "like us", but that's about all I can say with confidence, and it's a very vague statement.
by 9x39 | 2025-04-30 19:31:35+00:00
Chat is a commodity. Right out of the gate, that's not great for margins.

Enterprise chat might not be a commodity quite yet - SSO, DLP/data classification, auditing, retention, compliance checkboxes - but these seem insurmountable at first glance to get a FOSS solution to reach a viable enterprise feature matrix.

Killer features as a moat might help, but while almost everyone uses chat, everyone probably uses chat differently, so that means discovering killer features for a niche and trying to own that segment before expanding. Unfortunately this is the "Draw the rest of the owl" part, because while I have quibbles with chat apps, I struggle to envision a chat app that does something radically different than any other chat app.
by Workaccount2 | 2025-04-30 19:31:41+00:00
China's economic situation right now is worse than the US. They have incredible debt (accounting for provincial debt which is essentially state debt, China is not a federation), a massive housing asset bubble, and an aged population that is expensive to care for. Never mind also being stuck in a deflationary cycle with a high youth unemployment rate. And this is just working with the self-reported numbers from an authoritarian regime.

The biggest crunch to the US will be to the consumer, the biggest crunch to China will be the worker. People in the US will need to buy less shit, and pay more for what they do buy. People in China will need to work fewer hours and bring home less money.

Of course, the situation is fractal and ridden with unknowns. But I think a lot of people have this view of China as being a young slick economic powerhouse and the US being a weak economy with old decrepit money pile. That's far from the truth.
by kragen | 2025-04-30 19:32:17+00:00
It seems like you've misremembered the situation somewhat.

Merkle developed several of his families of mechanical logic, including this one, in order to answer some criticisms of Drexler's earliest mechanical nanotechnology proposals. Specifically:

1. Chemists were concerned that rod logic knobs touching each other would form chemical bonds and remain stuck together, rather than disengaging for the next clock cycle. (Macroscopic metal parts usually don't work this way, though "cold welding" is a thing, especially in space.) So this proposal‚ like some earlier ones like Merkle's buckling-spring logic, avoids any contact between unconnected parts of the mechanism, whether sliding or coming into and out of contact.

2. Someone calculated the power density of one of Drexler's early proposals and found that it exceeded the power density of high explosives during detonation, which obviously poses significant challenges for mechanism durability. You could just run them many orders of magnitude slower, but Merkle tackled the issue instead by designing reversible logic families which can dissipate arbitrarily little power per logic operation, only dissipating energy to erase stored bits.

So, there's nothing preventing this kind of mechanism from scaling down to single atoms, and we already have working mechanisms like the atomic force microscope which demonstrate that even intermittent single-atom contact can work mechanically in just the way you'd expect it to from your macroscopic intuition. Moreover, the de Broglie wavelength of a baryon is enormously shorter than the de Broglie wavelength of an electron, so in fact mechanical logic (which works by moving around baryons) can scale down further than electronic logic, which is already running into Heisenberg problems with current semiconductor fabrication technology.

Also, by the way, thanks to the work for which Boyer and Walker got part of the 01997 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, we probably know how ATP synthase works now, and it seems to work in a fairly similar way: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXpzp4RDGJI
by ivape | 2025-04-30 19:32:27+00:00
That's the biggest problem with showcasing to developers. They are just not representative of the user base at large. For example, any Desktop application showcased will getting annihilated for being Electron. You very much take a risk putting it out to developers first because they will leave commentary about your product in this way (forever, this is the internet, it's not going anywhere). We eat out our own basically.
by DrillShopper | 2025-04-30 19:32:27+00:00
The Republicans are the party of Trump. You're going to get nowhere near 20 out of 53 to convict. They will not let him get thrown out of office.

If they didn't vote for impeachment in the two times he was impeached in his first term, and if they supported him after January 6th then they're not going to vote for impeachment now.

The Republicans under Nixon were the same party in name only, and they did not have the same blind loyalty to Nixon. They had opposing voices. They had separate factions. Now the only faction is Trump-worship.
by otterley | 2025-04-30 19:33:22+00:00
The situations are a little different.

With NSF grants, the question is whether the President can redistribute funding away from applicants affiliated with specific institutions he doesn’t like (my first approximation: probably).

With USAID, the question is whether the President has the authority to disband an entire Agency established and appropriated by Congress (22 U.S.C. 6563) (my first approximation: probably not).
by lesuorac | 2025-04-30 19:33:36+00:00
Do you honestly think Trump is individually reviewing grants?

Trump with help of various groups makes political appointees who either individually oversee grant reviews or administrate individuals that do. These people are just as faceless and unaccountable as with any other president ...

The difference here is that Congress who is much more accountable to voters deliberated and wrote laws authorizing various funding which is being completely overridden by the branch of government that is supposed to carry out the law.
by EvgeniyZh | 2025-04-30 19:33:42+00:00
The solutions weren't published anywhere. There is also no good automatic way to generate solutions as far as I know, even expensive ones (previous sota was 10 solutions and one before was 8 using pass@3200 for 7b model). Potentially the developers could've paid some people who are good in putnam-level math problems and lean to write solutions for LLMs. It is hard to estimate likelihood of that but it sounds like waste of money given relatively marginal problem/benchmark.
by SideburnsOfDoom | 2025-04-30 19:33:52+00:00
> I don't understand this "saving face", disrespect logic.

It isn't logic, it's emotion.

"disrespectful" is a term that the Chinese officials have used to describe US officials statements (1). I'm not reasoning my way to that term, I'm noting that the Chinese are there.

That and "Bowing to a bully is like drinking poison to quench thirst" (2)

I agree with sibling comment that saving face is it's "addressing Trump on his own terms" but I wouldn't say it's "just" that. It's also universal human psychology to react defiantly, expressed in regional idioms.

I agree that it's bizarre that it ended up there, nevertheless this is the USA's "art of the deal" working out as well as it's going to. With China calling the bluff.

1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNUs9G0sCFc

2) https://www.mediaite.com/news/china-responds-to-trump-tariff...
by goatlover | 2025-04-30 19:34:24+00:00
> I don't care about politics

It's this kind of person that allows autocrats to take over. There's too many of you with your head in the sand. There's still plenty of technical posts on here, but when you have a tech billionaire appointed to spearhead an agency dismantling Federal agencies in order to give the executive unchecked power and deregulate tech industries, it's going to be a recurring story on here. So is Trump achieving Project2025 goals, since I'm guessing most hackers don't want to live under Christian Nationalism.
by gibibit | 2025-04-30 19:35:08+00:00
I predict this won't be popular. E-ink is great for reading a book, especially on a portable battery-powered device, but on a large desk display connected to a general-purpose computer, it doesn't make sense at all.

Slow and inconsistent refresh rate, limited lifetime cycles that you could wear it out in a year or 2 with frequent use.