MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by beloch | 2025-04-19 01:33:27+00:00
Legal immigrants commit crimes at a lower rate than U.S. citizens, and illegal immigrants at an even lower rate than legal immigrants[1]. This should not be surprising. Those who are in a country illegally know they will likely be deported if caught committing a crime.

Why build apparatus to monitor the people least likely to commit crimes? In isolation, it doesn't make sense. If you take a look at other actions the Trump is administration is taking, such as cracking down on universities in ways designed to suppress protest, it becomes a little more clear. This database will likely be extended to cover citizens as well as immigrants, and not for the purpose of preventing crime.
by Jach | 2025-04-19 01:33:32+00:00
Another game that gave me similar vibes to A Short Hike was Lil Gator Game.

For me though, a game doesn't have to have cozy aesthetics to put me in a more cozy or calm mood, and I've never really gotten into games like Stardew Valley or AC. Beauty in a sense is probably important. Celeste comes to mind, though it can also be quite challenging. My own favorite game even for destressing purposes is Dark Souls... And then you have things like classic solitaire/klondike, or recently I played through the entire SNES Populous conquest mode, where they're almost more meditative than anything.
by soulofmischief | 2025-04-19 01:33:43+00:00
I couldn't remember, thanks for raising that point. So, I searched and found this CNET article[0] which states Facebook ended up only paying $715 million: "Although Instagram's original price tag was $1 billion, Facebook ends up paying $521 million in cash and $194 million in stock for the popular photo-sharing network."

I guess not mostly stock, but still half a billion cash, although not $1 billion. I guess my original point still stands, though it isn't quite as impactful an example. :)

[0] https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/facebooks-fi...
by class3shock | 2025-04-19 01:34:15+00:00
"Additionally, that 60x claim is getting old by the minute. We are getting to 300+ with advancements coming in so fast they are hard to keep track of. That 60x could drop to 10x or lower in just a few years"

What was a Tesla Model S power density 10 years ago? Today? Hardware moves slower than you think. All your points have some basis of consideration but the potential performance improvements they represent are tiny compared to the single huge downside of having to fly a giant, heavy battery everywhere and that is not going to change anytime soon.
by viraptor | 2025-04-19 01:34:53+00:00
> still be in original owners hands in 2000 instead of museums.

Kinda, yes. Almost entirely for sentimental reasons though. The longest held ones would still likely be Amigas. Virtually only PCs were used in offices in 2000. Industrial cases would still hold on to some old machines simply because nobody upgrades those. (But that's kind of like subways today still working from floppies)

And then there's the in between of dos terminals for accounting, inventory, etc. Those were everywhere and survived for so much longer than in other countries as far as I can tell.
by ninetyninenine | 2025-04-19 01:34:55+00:00
Nobody is talking about a financial bubble. That's orthoganol.

Something can be worth zero and still be fucking amazing.

The blog post is talking about the hype in general and about AI in general. It is not just referring to the financial opportunity.

You can use chatGPT for free. Does that mean it's total shit because openAI allowed you to use it for free? No. It's still freaking revolutionary.
by toomuchtodo | 2025-04-19 01:38:16+00:00
Probably for the best, it’s a mediocre asset class considering the risk adjusted returns and illiquidity.

https://cepr.net/publications/private-equity-university-endo...

https://pitchbook.com/news/articles/pitchbooks-university-en...

> So, how did the endowments fare? Pitchbook reports that the 50 largest university endowments saw an annual return of 8.3 percent over the past 10 years. And how did a plain vanilla 60-40 Vanguard mutual fund (60 percent stocks, 40 percent bonds) do? It returned 8.38 percent over the same period without the added risk of speculative investments in risky private assets.

> Let that sink in. Endowment funds got no extra payoff for investing in private equity funds or other private assets.

> The lesson? US endowment funds could have made the same return by joining with millions of ordinary people and investing in a plain vanilla mutual fund.
by parentheses | 2025-04-19 01:38:22+00:00
I think one-shotting a full feature is a losing battle today. You have to figure out the best step size for the situation and prompt using components of that size.

My prompts usually resemble actions I could tell a college student — they just have a better understanding of concepts and professional lingo.

The benefit of this approach is that you know the code fairly well. You are staying with the LLM in developing a deeper understanding of the code you'll ultimately create a PR for. Then when there's an incident, you have enough deep knowledge of the code that you can be tactical.

I have found that until I trust AI to develop the code unsupervised, I have to have an equally good mental model of everything AI makes.
by iJohnDoe | 2025-04-19 01:40:21+00:00
Pro bodybuilders almost never drink protein shakes. They get protein from eating food. Not shakes. If they are recommending a protein shake or supplement, it’s because they are getting paid to do so.

Protein shakes and other supplements is an industry trying to sell you something.

Most don’t work out hard enough to need a protein shake. The protein will turn to fat.
by zamadatix | 2025-04-19 01:41:40+00:00
Agree wholeheartedly on the pragmatic standpoint of just using minimums.

With regard to the problems of out of band signaling in plain PMTUD I fully agree with all your well stated points, doubly so on PLPMTUD! PLPMTUD is my preferred variation of PMTUD and I was glad to see the datagram form utilized in QUIC (especially since it's really a generic secure network tunneling protocol, not just the HTTP variant). I'm also glad QUIC's security model naturally got rid of MSS clamping... it was somewhat pragmatic in one view... but concerning/problematic in others :D. Of course it's not like TCP/mss clamping have exactly gone away though :/.

Also fully agree on both PLPMTUD still not being as reliable/fast as one would like (though I still think it's the best of the options) + safe minimums never seeming to stay "safe". At least IPv6 attempted to hedge this by putting pressure on network admins, saying "everyone is expecting 1280". Of course... we all know that doesn't mean every client ends up with 1280, particularly if they are doing their own VPN tunnel or something, but at least it gives us network guys an extra wall of "well, the standard says we need to allow expectation of 1280 and the rate of bad things which happen will be much higher lower than that".

You seem to have some really neat perspectives on networking, do you mind if I ask about what you do/where you got your experience? I came up through the customer side and eventually over time morphed my way into NOS development at some network OEMs and it feels like I run into fewer and fewer folks who deal with the lower layers of networking as time has went on. I think the most "fun" parts are trying to design overlay/tunneling systems which are hardware compatible with existing ASICs or protocols but are able to squeeze some more cleverness out of the usage (or, as you put it, if we had the benefit of today’s hindsight and could time travel - could we have made it better). The area I'd say I've been least involved in, but would like to, is anything to do with time sensitive networking or lossless ethernet use cases.
by dzdt | 2025-04-19 01:41:44+00:00
There is an elephant in the room. When an article comes up about the elephant's tusks or the elephant's trunk or the people the elephant has just stepped on, the discussion ends up being about the whole elephant. I know what you're saying about these threads being repetitive and interchangeable. Its just that the elephant is so big and its parts so connected, its hard to have a limited discussion about only one part of the elephant. But nevertheless that elephant is very important to the larger set of topics that this site is dedicated to! It would be good to have a solution besides not talking about the elephant.
by londons_explore | 2025-04-19 01:42:08+00:00
Any decent sized installation will use current clamps at the local transformers to scale the charging rate up and down depending on other users in the local area.

Ie. in the evening whilst everyone has their ovens on, charging might only be 3 kW per bus, but then at 1am when everyone has gone to bed, it can be 30 kW per bus.

Using that approach, you can get far more capacity out of old infrastructure.

Unfortunately, some utility companies aren't amenable to that approach, and instead insist you pay to upgrade the infra, since to them it's a free upgrade.
by AIPedant | 2025-04-19 01:42:36+00:00
Agreed - to be clear I was saying it confabulated analyzing the visual details of the photo to back up its actual reasoning of reading the EXIF. I am not sure that “low‑slung pre‑Alpine ridge line, and the latitudinal light angle that matches mid‑February at ~47 ° N” is actually evident in the photo (the second point seems especially questionable), but that’s not what it used to determine the answer. Instead it determined the answer and autocompleted an explanation of its reasoning that fit the answer.

That’s why I mentioned the case where it made up things that weren’t in the photo - “drives on the left” is a valuable GeoGuesser clue, so if GPT looks at the EXIF and determines the photo is in London, then it is highly probable that a GeoGuesser player would mention this while playing the game given the answer is London, so GPT is probable to make that “observation” itself, even if it’s spurious for the specific photo.

I just noticed that its explanation has a funny slip-up: I assume there is nothing in the actual photo that indicates the picture was taken in mid-February, but the model used the date from the EXIF in its explanation. Oops :)
by the_af | 2025-04-19 01:42:44+00:00
Going on a tangent here: not sure 2001's HAL was a case of outright malice. It was probably a malfunction (he incorrectly predict a failure) and then conflicting mission parameters that placed higher value on the mission than the crew (the crew discussed shutting down HAL because it seemed unreliable, and he reasoned it would jeopardize the mission and the right course of action was killing the crew). HAL was capable of deceit in order to ensure his own survival, that much is true.

In the followup 2010, when HAL's mission parameters are clarified and de-conflicted, he doesn't attempt to harm the crew anymore.

I... actually can see the 2001's scenario happening with ChatGPT if it was connected to ship peripherals and told mission > crew and that this principle overrides all else.

In modern terms it was about both unreliability (hallucinations?) and a badly specified prompt!
by noosphr | 2025-04-19 01:42:53+00:00
The point is that the upside of investing in a technology before everyone else does is huge.

The downside is whatever you end up investing it in.

Hype is then technologies fighting for that slice of the pie.

The upside to current AI is that we've solved natural language interaction with computers. We have the Star Trek computer you can talk to. You probably don't want to because natural language is naturally terrible at exactness which is why humans have endless meetings to discuss the next meeting about next quarters targets.

This was science fiction in 2020. Today I can do it on a top end consumer grade GPU.

By comparison blockchain is bullshit - to find out why just ask what the clearance rate is of the bitcoin network. You won't change the world at 7 transactions a second. If someone manages to build a block chain that can clear 10 million transactions a second you'd have something on par with the current AI hype train because it would be a legitimately useful finance tool and it will be worth investing billions in.
by alganet | 2025-04-19 01:43:03+00:00
I am ok looking like a tool right now.

That is the goal of a hype trend. To make even healthy skeptics feel like they are missing a great thing.

I am actually an early adopter though. I just don't like bragging around.

Researchers know that most "goal posts moved" are actually great challenges. It would be sad if they saw it as pessimism.

Think of it as a more creative way to engage in the hype.

Skeptics are more valuable than blind believers. You want a blind believer testing your airbag or a skeptic that will move some goal posts to try and sniff out any bugs?
by layman51 | 2025-04-19 01:43:12+00:00
I’m not sure how hyped up databases were during their advent, but what do you mean “by partly because they are old?” The phonograph prototypes that were made by Thomas Alva Edison are old and they were hyped in a way. People called him the “Wizard of Menlo Park” for his work because they were seeing machines that could talk (or at least reproduce sounds in the same way photographs let you reproduce sights.)
by grugagag | 2025-04-19 01:44:55+00:00
Maybe games do have something special because you have to be more actively engaged and empathizing with coziness part puts us in a calming mood. But it seems obvious to me that anything that you can engage with has a similar effect and games are just one type of media. Books, movies, music can do the same thing too, you just have to know how to get in on it and not suffer through it if it doesn’t click the first time. I don’t think it’s only the cozy part that brings the benefits but rather what effects that media or genre has on you at that moment in time. Over time what bring me calm and comfort has drifted somewhat.
by Kon-Peki | 2025-04-19 01:46:49+00:00
> do they feel like they’re doing valuable work?

They answered that question in the article ;)

However, for many hundreds of years - longer than the US has had a navy - there has been a belief that allowing sailors to put their hands in their pockets would lead to mutinies. And more accidents. I think (hope) we can safely say that there wasn’t an increase in mutinies.

But studying the accident rate on ships based on a hands-in-pockets policy is actually valuable work. I hope they publish the results.
by James-Bennet | 2025-04-19 01:47:20+00:00
I am looking for a game framework that allows interactive programming like LISP for browser games. So far I have tried love2d, TIC-80, and defold. Fennel (Clojure like language for Lua) works with love2d and TIC-80, but I could not get emacs repl to connect to TIC-80. Also I couldn't get Fennel to work with defold. Maybe there's a way I haven't found yet, but for now the only way to achieve interactive programming is to use love2d (love2d + fennel + emacs repl).

https://vxlabs.com./2018/05/18/interactive-programming-with-... https://technomancy.us/188
by oblosys | 2025-04-19 01:47:38+00:00
When I asked GPT-4.1 to show some references to confirm an answer was as widely accepted as it claimed, it replied with a bunch of unrelated GitHub issues with fake descriptions, and this Stack Overflow link: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/74985713/fastifypluginas.... Turns out this is actually a link to a completely unrelated question https://stackoverflow.com/questions/74985713/plotting-a-3d-v.... It had tricked me by rewriting the title part of the url, which is not used to identify the question.
by mastazi | 2025-04-19 01:48:15+00:00
Yes, I think you're right, many Ultimate Guitar charts are generally low quality. I remember once checking out a song in F major and the IV chord was notated as A#, LOL.

To be fair there are also high quality charts on UG, but they generally require a paid subscription (I think they are called "pro" charts). Maybe the dataset should have been limited to those but I'm not sure about the legal implications given that they are a paid product.
by dragonwriter | 2025-04-19 01:51:26+00:00
> "My opponents are lying racists" would be the ad hominem fallacy even if it was true.

No, if it were true, standing on its own, it would be an accurate statement of fact. It is only be the ad hominem fallacy if it forms part of an argument with this logical structure:

1. My opponents argue X, but

2. My opponents are lying racists, therefore

3. X is false.
by chrisrodrigue | 2025-04-19 01:51:38+00:00
From https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/99108#issue-1436673...:

> As evidenced by the recent SHA3 buffer overflow, cryptographic primitives are tricky to implement correctly. There might be issues with memory management, exceeding lengths, incorrect buffer management, or worse, incorrect implementations in corner cases.

This is a proactive fix for zero days that may be lurking in the wild.
by smeej | 2025-04-19 01:51:40+00:00
I was so disappointed this failed, and for what seemed like such an incredibly obvious reason.

They tried to use the same viral "invitation only" system that had worked for Gmail for Wave, but apparently completely overlooked the key difference: Gmailers could send and receive emails to people who didn't have Gmail. Wave was only usable with other people who had Wave. And with only a handful of invitations, it was virtually impossible to grow your network fast enough for it to be useful.

If they had made it possible to send regular emails to and from Wave (even just by integrating the existing Gmail account!), but then also let you "upgrade" your message to send a Wave when the recipient already had Wave, I really think people would have been willing to use it long enough for their Wave networks to grow big enough to replace email.
by Nition | 2025-04-19 01:51:51+00:00
One type of question that a 20%-failure-rate AI can still be very useful for is ones that are hard to answer but easy to verify.

For example say you have a complex medical problem. It can be difficult to do a direct Internet search that covers the history and symptoms. If you ask AI though, it'll be able to give you some ideas for specific things to search. They might be wrong answers, but now you can easily search specific conditions and check them.

Sort of P vs. NP for questions.
by tzs | 2025-04-19 01:53:25+00:00
> If you have big purchases you wanted to make this year, now is the time to get them out of the way, before the next round of price hikes and shortages

That's what I just did. I got a 2025 Hyundai Kona SEL EV. It doesn't qualify for the tax credit, but many EV makers (such as Hyundai, Kia, and Nissan) who have cars that don't have been offering deals that give the same amount off as the tax credit. With that it brought it down to $32050, before tax/license/registration.

There's a good chance these are going to go up when the ones that were imported before the tariffs are gone, considering that final assembly is in South Korea from a 50/50 mix of parts from South Korea and China.

I think there are definitely others trying to beat the tariffs. In the last 3 days, 3 of the 4 Kona SEL EVs that were on the lot when I bought mine are now gone.
by londons_explore | 2025-04-19 01:54:32+00:00
Busses currently have big engines and fuel tanks (or motors and batteries).

That intuitively makes sense - obviously a big vehicle needs more energy than a small one like a car.

However, typical city bus routes spend most of their time under 30 mph, cutting aerodynamic drag by a whopping 90% compared to 70 mph highway cruising that a car does.

With more work on rolling resistance (buying super-good bearings and fancy tyre designs), regen round trip efficiency, and energy use of the passenger cabin (heat pump heating, double glazing), I could see busses needing similar size batteries to electric cars and still being able to do a full days city work.

In turn, that makes the energy source fairly irrelevant from both an economic and a social perspective.
by jagged-chisel | 2025-04-19 01:55:05+00:00
Do they release any software? It’s frustrating when Brett Victor tells us how modeling our protagonist’s path during development is a boon for the developer … and refuses to release even a demo. I can read (and hear) about things Ink & Switch have explored, but can we experience that, too?

I love the ideas these folks explore. I also want to explore - but I don’t have the time budget to learn and implement their concepts. I can’t speak for other software engineers, but I am much more likely to improve on such work if I can experience it first.
by insane_dreamer | 2025-04-19 01:55:26+00:00
> So the underlying problem here is economic opportunity

Very much agree with this. Economic inequality is the root of the problem. But it's also one that very few people are willing to actually address because that sounds like "socialism" (how un-American!). It's the biggest problem facing this country, but the kind of social changes that are needed to solve that problem are anathema to Americans. (Certainly Trump doesn't give F about poor people, and the Democrats mostly pay lip service to it.)

But here's why I'm in favor of DEI initiatives, generally speaking (though certainly not all of them or even most of them):

DEI doesn't directly address economic inequality the way it should, but it does get is part of the way. Certainly it's better than nothing, which is what those who are anti-DEI are mostly proposing.

We also have to take into consideration that certain groups of people, specifically African Americans and Native Americans, are _not_ on a level playing ground, even today, because they were deliberately suppressed for centuries. Just because the Civil Rights Act finally got signed 50 years ago means that all of a sudden they have equal opportunity.

If companies and universities, and society as a whole, makes no effort to level the playing field, it won't just level on its own, especially in today's society (which does not offer the wide-open opportunities that America 100 or 200 years offered to anyone landing on its shores with $5 in their pocket).

If you don't make an effort to recruit from low-income black neighborhoods for example, you're not likely to get many takers because of the amount of effort that it takes to climb out of such deep social holes--only the very best and most determined will. But if you can deliberately offer opportunity to more people who have been suppressed, more of them will be in a position to provide their children with an environment where they can have better opportunities, and over generations society changes for the better (and everyone benefits).

So that's why I'm generally in favor of DEI type initiatives. Not what companies did or do -- which was mostly greenwashing PR based on either public opinion (last administration) or government pressure (this administration). But genuine efforts to level the playing field in terms of economic opportunity, including a boost to those who were deliberately disadvantaged for so long.

You can argue that it's unfair to white poor people. I agree, it is somewhat unfair. Economic opportunity should have nothing to do with race, and we should be making every effort to raise the economic standard of poor whites too. But we also need to recognize that poor whites are starting at a different baseline, one of poverty, yes, but not slavery and targeted suppression. So while there might be economic similarities (poor whites, poor blacks) they're not necessarily on the same level.