MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Ninjak8051 | 2025-04-14 17:10:29+00:00
Props to the author for the well-researched original article.

I disagree with the conclusion. In the current environment, OpenAI can raise money as if were water pouring from a faucet. If SoftBank can't meet its agreements then there are 50 others waiting to take their place. In the current environment, OpenAI's revenue and capital requirements are not meaningful given their ability to raise.

The environment can change quickly, look at early year 2000 vs late year 2000 funding for .com for example - money went from on-faucet to you're-not-getting-a-dime in a few months. So if the funding environment for AI suddenly shifts, yes, OpenAI is cooked, but so is the entire AI industrial complex, from the smallest barely-billion-dollar startup all the way up to Nvidia.

My conclusion is that OpenAI is not a systemic risk, it's not going to fall or take down a large portion of the tech industry on its own, it will fall if investors sour on the entire AI industry for some reason.
by drog | 2025-04-14 17:10:32+00:00
I've been using my own telegram -> ai bot and its very interesting to see what others do with the similar interface.

I have not thought about adding memory log of all current things and feeding it into the context I'll try it out.

Mine is a simple stateless thing that captures messages, voice memos and creates task entries in my org mode file with actionable items. I only feed current date to the context.

Its pretty amusing to see how it sometimes adds a little bit of its own personality to simple tasks, for example if one of my tasks are phrased as a question it will often try to answer the question in the task description.
by skybrian | 2025-04-14 17:10:35+00:00
The problem with the “knife is sharp” argument is that it’s too generic. It can be deployed against most safety improvements. The modern world is built on driving accident rates down to near-zero. That’s why we have specialized tools like safety razors. Figuring out what to do to reduce accident rates is what postmortems are for - we don’t just blame human error, we try to fix things systematically.

As usual, the question is what counts as a reasonable safety improvement, and to do that we would need to go into the details.

I’m wondering what you think of the CaMeL proposal?

https://simonwillison.net/2025/Apr/11/camel/#atom-everything
by Y_Y | 2025-04-14 17:10:49+00:00
This reminds me of something Adam Smith said in The Wealth of Nations:

"People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices."

Ymmv, but I cannot image that this "innovation" will result in a better outcome for the general public.
by mplanchard | 2025-04-14 17:10:58+00:00
Yeah, I mean, I'm not claiming it's generally better in any objective sense, just that I prefer it.

I don't think mine loses a minute per week, but it isn't perfect. Noticing the watch is a minute or two behind once a month and quickly popping out the dial to roll it forward is not a meaningful hassle for me.

Relative to a battery watch, it's nice that the watch is a self-contained functional unit. It will "always" be functional, even if I've left it in a drawer for a few years (always in quotes because of course anything can break).

Part of it is also just that I like to think about the mechanical complexity and elegance of it. It gives me a little bit more joy than my battery watches (but I still have plenty of battery watches that I like!), and that's something I appreciate.
by fyresite | 2025-04-14 17:11:01+00:00
Last Friday, we hosted an internal Vibe Code Hackathon at the Fyresite office! A total of 11 team members participated, ranging from software engineers to folks from our marketing team.

The challenge? Build something cool in just 4 hours. After the time was up, everyone voted on their favorite projects. Prizes were awarded to the top three winners—1st, 2nd, and 3rd place.

The main goal was to introduce the whole team to agentic coding in a fun and collaborative way. It turned out to be not only a great learning experience but also a lot of fun!

One of our engineers created a super simple (yet oddly addicting) game during the hackathon. I’ve dropped the link below if you’re curious and want to give it a try.
by randerson | 2025-04-14 17:11:36+00:00
> you should assume they are worthless.

I had this mindset at a startup and decided not to risk any of my money exercising my stock options. They eventually expired. Years later the company IPO'd and I would have made a lot of money had I exercised.

Waiting for more certainty before exercising means the fair market value will likely be higher then and you'll have to pay AMT.

I now approach a job with the mindset that stock options are probably worthless, but I'll risk what I can afford to by exercising as soon as I can.
by yberreby | 2025-04-14 17:12:23+00:00
> Note that GPT‑4.1 will only be available via the API. In ChatGPT, many of the improvements in instruction following, coding, and intelligence have been gradually incorporated into the latest version (opens in a new window) of GPT‑4o, and we will continue to incorporate more with future releases.

The lack of availability in ChatGPT is disappointing, and they're playing on ambiguity here. They are framing this as if it were unnecessary to release 4.1 on ChatGPT, since 4o is apparently great, while simultaneously showing how much better 4.1 is relative to GPT-4o.

One wager is that the inference cost is significantly higher for 4.1 than for 4o, and that they expect most ChatGPT users not to notice a marginal difference in output quality. API users, however, will notice. Alternatively, 4o might have been aggressively tuned to be conversational while 4.1 is more "neutral"? I wonder.
by smeej | 2025-04-14 17:12:30+00:00
My dream tool allows me to create snapshots from either mobile or desktop browser, then read and highlight on my Android eInk reader or phone, then export my highlights and notes into Logseq...all without collecting all my data and selling it to advertisers (which basically leaves me with FOSS tools).

Omnivore was as close as I've ever gotten to this dream, even though their Android app wasn't great and certainly didn't have an "eInk pagination" option, but Readeck is at least giving me some hope again once Omni sold out.
by rvz | 2025-04-14 17:12:39+00:00
> Yesterday, using v0, I replicated a full nextjs UI copying a major saas player. No backend integration, but the design and UX were stunning, and better than I could do if I tried.

Exactly. Those who do frontend or focus on pretty much anything Javascript are, how should I say it? Cooked?

> Software will get automated

The first to go are those that use JavaScript / TypeScript engineers have already been automated out of a job. It is all over for them.
by Balgair | 2025-04-14 17:12:49+00:00
It's a lot easier than you all make it out to be [0].

I'm not a 'programmer' like you all are, at best I can hack together code to get things done. I use git maybe once a year. I'm a biotech person that likes to hang out because y'all are mostly smart and the community is great here.

But man alive, this is not that difficult. Yes, it's hard to wrap your head around some nested dependancies. But it's a lot easier than any chain of protein/gene/neuron interactions. This stuff makes sense and you can edit it. My field can't really do that most of the time and it really doesn't make sense for decades (at best).

Like, I'm trying to follow along here and am mostly lost. But the few times I do know something about the code y'all are talking about, it's made out to be a lot more complicated than it needs to be.

I mean, yeah, keep that up though. Makes your bosses pay you more and lord knows those suits should be doing that and not spending the cash on rockets and shitty pick-ups.

But for real, y'all are making this out to be a lot harder than it is.

[0] this is supposed to an unpopular opinion, right?
by drivingmenuts | 2025-04-14 17:12:54+00:00
Seems to me that if your country is not spying on allies and enemies alike, someone is not doing their job properly. The US spies on the EU and its member countries, just like the EU and its member countries spy on the US as they can. That's what they're supposed to be doing. Every country is going to massage "the truth" when dealing with others, so it's good to know how much massaging is going on.

The big difference now is that the US (my own damn country) is not nearly as trustworthy as it was (for some value of trustworthy), nor is it nearly as competently led as it was (for some value of competence), nor is it behaving in rational and predictable ways (as compared to before). So, maybe we all just understand that it's in everyone else's best interest to keep a close eye on conditions in the US, because it's not going to get better any time soon. And we all should probably also understand that the US is just going to see enemies wherever it looks and that's not going to improve any time soon, either.
by perihelions | 2025-04-14 17:12:58+00:00
What happens when the US starts "deporting" US citizens to the custody of foreign strongmen? As is he is repeatedly saying he intends to do. Would anything change, or will it continue the same way—SCOTUS orders Trump to "facilitate" citizens' access to "due process"; foreign Trump affiliate says "no", and that's that. (?)

- "President Trump just said he was open to sending American citizens convicted of violent crimes to President Bukele’s prison in El Salvador. Trump had a similar response when Bukele first offered to jail convicted American criminals in February. “I’m all for it,” Trump said, adding that his attorney general was studying whether the idea was legally feasible. “If it’s a homegrown criminal, I have no problem, no,” he said, adding: “I’m talking about violent people. I’m talking about really bad people.”"
by xg15 | 2025-04-14 17:12:59+00:00
I do believe it's a bad thing, for a number of general reasons. But as far as the US specifically is concerned, I think a society can pick one out of the following two:

(1) Define people's worth through labour.

(2) See labour as a cost center that should be eliminated wherever possible.

US politicians and technologists are trying to have it both ways: Oppose a social safety net out of principle as to "not encourage leechers", forcing people to work, but at the same time seek to reduce the opportunities for work as much as possible. AI is the latest and potentially most far-reaching implementation of that.

This is asking for trouble.
by jchw | 2025-04-14 17:13:08+00:00
Not sure how well this article has held up to time but Scott Alexander had a pretty compelling analysis of the situation.

https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-than-y...

The tl;dr, as I recall it: it seems ivermectin really did work in some populations, in reducing COVID mortality. However, those populations were ones where one was much more likely to have worms, so the hypothesis is that indeed did work, but only because it worked as a dewormer and not having worms concurrently with COVID decreased the likelihood of mortality.
by taylorallred | 2025-04-14 17:13:25+00:00
I mostly agree with the sentiments in this article. I was once an extremely zealous FP acolyte but eventually I realized that there are a few lessons worth taking from FP and applying to more conventional programming: 1. Pure functions are great to use when you have the opportunity. 2. Recursion works great for certain problems and with pure functions. 3. Higher order functions can be a useful shorthand (but please only use them with pure functions). Otherwise, I think simple, procedural programming is generally a better default paradigm.
by aylmao | 2025-04-14 17:13:37+00:00
+1, it's been a while since I interviewed with Google, but this brought me back to how annoying it was. I've never had a good interview experience with Google. I only interviewed during college for internship and then a full-time new-grad role and got a consistent "we're doing you a favour by even talking to you" attitude from them— the delays, the impersonality, the delays to the general vibe of the emails, etc.

They became significantly more attentive when I got an internship offer from a competing big-tech company, but as much as my recruiter seemed to try, the process just seem to be deficient beyond their capacity to do anything about it. It had to go through many steps, and be reviewed by many people who seemingly had better things to do.

Eventually they reached to the right people to tell me my decision before my other deadline. I _was_ going to get an offer. They couldn't get me the actual offer letter, or tell me if I had guaranteed host-matching though. I happened to know Google can send intern offers that don't guarantee you'll be matched to a team, and if you're not, the internship just doesn't happen. In my book that's not only as good as no offer really, it's also just disrespectful. I knew people who had this type of offers and didn't get teams.

I took the other offer. "You will get an offer, the details are just taking a while" is not enough to decide on, and the whole process didn't particularly warm me up to Google. For comparison, and to give credit where credit is due, the other company was Meta (then FB). My recruiter was very response, understanding, and personable, which is especially appreciated as an college student— you're nervous, unexperienced and have a lot going on beyond interviewing. They sent me pictures of their dog to lighten the mood. I had told them I'd appreciate quickness, and by the time I was eating dinner after my on-site, I had the offer letter in my inbox.
by snovymgodym | 2025-04-14 17:13:47+00:00
Well the simple answer is that humor is subjective and that the things which were considered novel, topical, subversive humor in 1970s might not hit the same for everyone today. I'm not even sure the "British Humor" aspect has that much to do with it, since I think Monty Python has a bigger following in the US than in the UK. It might just not be your brand of humor.

That being said, the good sketches from their show are still funny and memorable today. But as with any sketch show, there's a mixture of quality. Holy Grail has its intergenerational staying power among nerds and theatre kids for a reason, even if the quoting and references to it have become pretty trite in my view.

Life of Brian is probably the best thing they've done, and is definitely one of my favorite comedies ever.
by iLemming | 2025-04-14 17:13:48+00:00
I sincerely appreciate your admonition, my good sir/gentle person. You have gone above and beyond to teach me (a lowly peasant of the digital world) an invaluable lesson of humility and emotional intelligence. Your beautiful eloquence and articulation of the matter moved me beyond words. At the same time, my heart is saddened by the great loss for the world of Emacs; it would absolutely crumble without the wisdom of such an incredible scholar and keyboarding wizard. Nevertheless, I can promise you, expect your Medal of Gallantry to arrive at your mailbox in five to ten days. I wish you good luck in all your future endeavors. Cheers.
by bananapub | 2025-04-14 17:14:14+00:00
he wasn't deported, he was legally in the US and then randomly got kidnapped by the US Federal Government, who then paid the El Salvadorian government to him put in a super maximum security prison for no reason, indefinitely. the US government is now refusing to comply with a court order to bring him back.

the US media has absolutely no ability (or interest) in grappling with the reality of the situation they have helped cause.
by meetpateltech | 2025-04-14 17:14:20+00:00
GPT-4.1 Pricing (per 1M tokens):

gpt-4.1

- Input: $2.00

- Cached Input: $0.50

- Output: $8.00

gpt-4.1-mini

- Input: $0.40

- Cached Input: $0.10

- Output: $1.60

gpt-4.1-nano

- Input: $0.10

- Cached Input: $0.025

- Output: $0.40
by srean | 2025-04-14 17:14:28+00:00
Nope that update with the rank one update is exactly the projected gradient of the reconstruction loss. That's not the way it is usually taught. So Hebbian learning was an unfortunate example.

Gradient descent is only one way of searching for a minima, so in that sense it is not necessary, for example, when one can analytically solve for the extrema of the loss. As an alternative one could do Monte Carlo search instead of gradient descent. For a convex loss that would be less efficient of course.
by cmurf | 2025-04-14 17:14:46+00:00
Bukele is being feted at the White House today, courtesy of U.S. taxpayers.

Trump hasn't asked Bukele to release Garcia, therefore hasn't facilitated Garcia's release per a SCOTUS and district court order.

Trump tells Bukele he intends to send U.S. citizens.

https://bsky.app/profile/titonka.bsky.social/post/3lmrwi4hwv...

People need to clearly understand: The U.S is paying a dictator to operate concentration camps outside the U.S. and is asserting in public and at court that courts can do nothing about it.

Ignoring this and hoping it goes away is how it is getting worse. And it will get much worse still.

https://bsky.app/profile/jacobtlevy.bsky.social/post/3lmryxf...
by zoogeny | 2025-04-14 17:14:53+00:00
> But that overhead is gonna be fixed-cost, and paid one-time at e.g. session initialization, not every time per e.g. request/response.

I don't work for a foundational model provider, but how do you think the tool definitions get into the LLM? I mean, they aren't fine-tuning a model with your specific tools definitions, right? Your just using OpenAI's base model (or Claude, Gemini, etc.) So at some point the tool definitions have to be added to the prompt. It is just getting added to the prompt auto-magically by the foundation provider. That means it is eating up some context window, just a portion of the context window that is normally reserved for the provider, a section of the final prompt that you don't get to see (or alter).

Again, while I don't work for these companies or implement these features, I cannot fathom how the feature could work unless it was added to every request. And so the original point of the thread author stands.
by femiagbabiaka | 2025-04-14 17:15:03+00:00
> Honest question, what recourse does someone in this situation even have?

None.

> Would the ICC take this case?

Maybe, not that it would matter much given that even member states refuse to enforce rulings if they run contra to U.S. goals.

> Are there any penalties that would (in theory) apply to either country?

No.
by ty6853 | 2025-04-14 17:15:08+00:00
He's been in jail for a month. If he isn't dead or seriously injured, there is a high likelihood he has had to join MS-13 or Barrio 18 (listed terrorist organizations) just to survive while locked up with hardened gang members. Which according to the DoJ would make him ineligible for withholding of removal.

Does anyone know if this is true? That could create a real catch-22, toss someone into a prison full of gang members, make them join a foreign terrorist organization to survive, then invalidate their withholding because they are now a terrorist.
by chrisfosterelli | 2025-04-14 17:15:11+00:00
A common structure would be something like:

* Class A - voting shares, founders / controlling parties, etc. Typically small fixed share count (e.g. 100), not issued dividends directly but used to represent percent of controlling interest.

* Class B - non-voting shares, early stage employees, advisors, supporters, etc. Used to issue dividends.

* Class C - Same as class B but reserved for future issuance through more formal programs like ESOP when you're ready for that

Then you might have some preferred shares for investors, say class D and E for two investor groups and then a Class F for convertible debt (even bootstrapped companies can have owner / friends / family / seed / etc money, plus may want to not rule out raising at some point).

This is obviously a lot of classes, but by doing something like this you can separate control from economic upside, create different terms / stock agreements for different classes, keep room for future planning (things like ESOP), facilitate investor needs (they almost always want preferred shares), have more flexibility with fundraising or convertible debt, etc.

I'm not actually trying to argue that exactly six classes are necessary or optimal, but moreso that its common to want not just one single share class. Practically speaking I imagine that firm does six because they're trying to give a template that'll work for many of their companies and reduce the amount of per-customer customization. My company has less although more than one.
by jltsiren | 2025-04-14 17:15:38+00:00
Those are two mostly unrelated discussions.

If you do demanding work, a full working week is 20-30 hours. Even 40 hours is too much and cannot be sustained in the long term. You can do more in the short term, but you'll eventually burn yourself out. Longer hours are only possible with routine and/or fake work that doesn't really make you more productive.

All organizations eventually stagnate, because humans have their own goals instead of being mindless cogs in the machine. SpaceX is still young enough that it may not be showing clear signs of stagnation, but it's hard to see that from the outside. Google is a few years older and clearly suffering from conflicting interests.
by crazygringo | 2025-04-14 17:15:59+00:00
I genuinely don't understand what you're talking about.

> You’ve also stated you want to ignore the timezone and display 12 in whatever tz.

No I didn't. I literally said "You need to store things permanently with the timezone". Obviously lunch at 12 belongs to a specific timezone.

> Yet again, no need for long lived datetime.

You keep saying this. I don't know where you're getting it from. You need to store these things in databases. If my calendar goes 2 years in the future, these datetimes live for 2 years at least.

It sounds like you're arguing that datetime libraries don't need to exist. I'm genuinely baffled. That feels as nonsensical to me as saying that floating point numbers don't need to exist. Long-lived datetimes are a commonly required thing in anything regarding calendars or scheduling. If you don't believe there is a genuine use case for this, I don't know what to tell you.

I was trying initially to provide you with a basic answer to what seemed to be a genuine question, but I can't help you anymore.
by Philpax | 2025-04-14 17:16:23+00:00
> The number system differentiates the models based on capability, any other method would not do that.

Please rank GPT-4, GPT-4 Turbo, GPT-4o, GPT-4.1-nano, GPT-4.1-mini, GPT-4.1, GPT-4.5, o1-mini, o1, o1 pro, o3-mini, o3-mini-high, o3, and o4-mini in terms of capability without consulting any documentation.
by googlryas | 2025-04-14 17:16:26+00:00
I bike packed 2000 miles around Europe, and one time in the mountains outside San Sebastian I was chased by a black bear. Weird people were probably the most dangerous wildlife, but like OP, basically every interaction with strangers I had was positive. But, I did move my tent a few times after setting it up upon realizing that the weird person I interacted with earlier knew where I was sleeping.
by smeej | 2025-04-14 17:16:41+00:00
I wonder if some sort of coalition of compounding pharmacists might be up for making and retaining a repository. They at least make some money by helping would-be patients take these drugs, right? So even if it's nothing like Big Pharma money, I can't really think of anybody who'd have a better chance to benefit from promoting off-label use cases for out of patent drugs than them.