MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by gz5 | 2025-04-16 19:13:31+00:00
We need to be careful on how and where we define our constraints regardless, but we can mitigate against this to some degree for some APIs:

>The problem with these increasingly expressive end points is that you are putting them not just in the hands of your front end developers, but also in the hands of potentially hostile users.

Meaning, let's not expose to 'hostile users' if we can help it.

For example, put the API gateway solely on a private overlay, and gate entrance to that overlay to endpoints with enrolled private key signed certs (+ other factors if you wish).

Puts more burden on the API clients - e.g. PKI enrollment, management, etc. would need to be reliable, automated and abstracted.

So infeasible or too much friction for some APIs, but this would reduce the attack surface for a B2B API with a limited number of consumers...and many of those would take that tradeoff?

Of course, we still wouldn't 'trust' the private network overlay in our API definitions...it would just be one more layer of security if access is gated with modern cryptography.
by shmatt | 2025-04-16 19:13:38+00:00
If we're making comparisons, its more like someone selling a $10,000 course on how to be a millionaire

Not directly from OpenAI - but people in the industry is advertising how these advanced models can replace employees, yet they keep on going on hiring tears (including OpenAI). Lets see the first company to stand behind their models, and replace 50% of their existing headcount with agents. That to me would be a sign these things are going to replace peoples jobs. Until I see that, if OpenAI can't figure out how to replace humans with models, then no one will

I mean could you imagine if todays announcement was - the chatgpt.com webdev team has been laid off, and all new features and fixes will be complete by Codex CLI + o4-mini. That means they believe in the product theyre advertising. Until they do something like that, theyll keep on trusting those human engineers and try selling other people on the dream
by starfezzy | 2025-04-16 19:14:53+00:00
Oh I was just saying it came off as an uncle er troll because it's like a weak bait with a comical conclusion.

It's like saying "4chan would be great if they were more like reddit". But the entire point is to not be like reddit. HN is largely equivalent to reddit for this point—progressives who cant fathom the existence of intelligent people who reject frail sensibilities; who conclude out of such closed mindedness that anyone who rejects those sensibilities must be broken.

I think there's room for improvement in both places. I wouldn't go as far as to say that the value in the internet is that you can be exactly the way your are IRL. As someone who rejects a lot of ultra progressive stuff (most of what's astroturfed as "normal" by giga-progressives corporations that have taken over the internet and banned dissent for 15 years), I appreciate that I can at least feel a false sense of security sharing mentally sound ideas that have been recognized for thousands of years without having my life ruined.
by vunderba | 2025-04-16 19:15:06+00:00
> This is just getting to be a bit much, seems like they are trying to cover for the fact that they haven't actually done much.

Did you miss the 4o image generation announcement from roughly three week ago?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43474112

Combining a multimodal LLM+ImageGen puts them pretty significantly ahead of the curve at least in that domain.

Demonstration of the capabilities:

https://mordenstar.com/blog/chatgpt-4o-images
by cafard | 2025-04-16 19:15:33+00:00
A while back, our neighborhood book club read Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow. One of the members said that she couldn't stand the jumping around in the narrative sequence of the book. It hadn't bothered me, and it was only later that I remembered that she habitually listens to books.

Listening was how most of humanity consumed literature for most of history. But the written word has its advantages as well.
Show HN: AptiDude – LeetCode for Aptitude Preparation Built with MERN
by roshxnyadav | 2025-04-16 19:15:34+00:00
Hi HN!

I’m a third-year undergrad at IIT Kharagpur, and over the past 3 months, I’ve built AptiDude (https://aptidude.in) – a platform for practicing aptitude questions, similar to how LeetCode works for coding. We launched our MVP four days ago and would love your feedback!

Why This Matters Aptitude tests are critical for campus placements (especially in India), CAT/GMAT prep, and government exams, but existing tools are either PDF-driven or lack real-time analytics. AptiDude solves this with:

Live contests (WebSocket-powered leaderboards)

Math equation support (KaTeX + React-MathQuill)

Performance analytics (Chart.js visualizations)

1,024 curated questions (logic, quant, reasoning)

Tech Stack Deep Dive Frontend: React 18 + Vite, TailwindCSS/DaisyUI, PWA support

Backend: Node.js/Express.js on AWS Lambda (serverless-http), MongoDB, Redis for caching

Auth: JWT + Passport.js (Google OAuth)

Deployment: Vercel (frontend), AWS Lambda (backend)

What’s Unique Real-time contest analytics: See how you rank against peers mid-test (like Codeforces races).

Adaptive difficulty: Questions adjust based on user performance (WIP).

Zero cold starts: Achieved 200ms avg. response time on AWS Lambda via Redis caching.

Ask for Feedback We’re looking for input on:

UI/UX – Is the interface intuitive for first-time users?

Performance – Any lag during live contests or question transitions?

Feature gaps – What would make this indispensable for your prep?

Check it out here: https://aptidude.in
by raxxorraxor | 2025-04-16 19:15:47+00:00
Israel has security interests after it was attacked by Hamas. It did withdraw from Lebanon, Gaza and quite a few other places that immediately filled with militant terrorists. And this latest escalation only happened because of an attack as well, otherwise Gaza would look quite differently now.

To say their goal is just killing people is way out of context and blind to the facts.

Either these places find peaceful solutions like Egypt or Jordan, or they will face military consequences for their aggression that will also hit innocents, which is what is happening now.

Hamas wanted to start this war, not Israel. There are numerous way for them to get their land back and sue for peace if they take the chance. Of course they don't get land that is Israels, they have lost their war.
by dewcifer | 2025-04-16 19:15:55+00:00
Good question! I'm not too sure. But I often wonder why P2P hasn't become more robust as speeds and tech have improved. Like live service games.. it feels like there could be robust P2P implementation that could facilitate a lot of failed multiplayer.

I imagine that cutting out the live service ($$$) and SaaS have a large role to play.
by InsideOutSanta | 2025-04-16 19:16:24+00:00
This hasn't been true in my experience. I find very few examples of Wikipedia being downright wrong. Less popular pages can get outdated, but that is to be expected. Reasonably popular pages are often updated within minutes when news occurs, or new discoveries are made.

If you look up controversial topics, you also have the option of looking at the discussion or edit history to get a grasp of where the disagreements are.

When I made simple, objective, anonymous contributions, they were usually also accepted.

People seem unreasonably upset with Wikipedia for reasons unclear to me. Despite all the political pressure it constantly receives, it's a great resource that has largely stuck to its mission of creating a free, verifiable, neutral encyclopedia. It's probably the best thing the web has created.
by Magma7404 | 2025-04-16 19:16:32+00:00
The point would be getting real content from real people because most of the internet will soon be written by bots and that's bad for LLMs. They need new content all the time.

And IMHO that's why programming is fucked if no one writes new code anymore, and every code monkey vibes code all day long. But it seems not to bother programmers for some reason...
by zemahran | 2025-04-16 19:16:57+00:00
so i've been working on this second brain app for months and we're currently fundraising for it –

for those who write blogs or newsletters...

we're building an omni-capture AI that would enable you to search everything that you've read or seen on your screen without having to manually capture anything. this completely automates the first step in building a second brain (capture).

so i'd appreciate to learn more about your writer workflow through this survey (3-mins): https://tally.so/r/wAQNJy

the more datapoints i have, the stronger the business case i have for it – so i also included an option to book a 15-min call if you're willing to share about your writing process and how your dream second brain tool might help.
by immibis | 2025-04-16 19:16:58+00:00
It is, but since we rely on DNS anyway, no matter what, and your DNS provider can get a certificate from Let's Encrypt for your site, without asking you, there's merit to combining them. It doesn't add any security to have PKI separate from DNS.

However, we could use some form of Certificate Transparency that would somehow work with DANE.

Also it still protects you from everyone who isn't your DNS provider, so it's valuable if you only need a medium level of security.
by tedsanders | 2025-04-16 19:17:01+00:00
Yep, we have a page of announced API deprecations here: https://platform.openai.com/docs/deprecations

It's got all deprecations, ordered by date of announcement, alongside shutdown dates and recommended replacements.

Note that we use the term deprecated to mean slated for shutdown, and shutdown to mean when it's actually shut down.

In general, we try to minimize developer pain by supporting models for as long as we reasonably can, and we'll give a long heads up before any shutdown. (GPT-4.5-preview was a bit of an odd case because it was launched as a potentially temporary preview, so we only gave a 3-month notice. But generally we aim for much longer notice.)
by bruce511 | 2025-04-16 19:17:26+00:00
Yeah, it seemed to jump the shark a bit here. Professional bodies, certified engineers, taking on liability for Open Source code... there's a LOT going on here...

Here's what'll really happen; no one cares or wants yo be a certified professional. Companies don't care about it. We carry on as is...

This is a classic over-engineered solution that nobody wants to a problem that barely exists. Just add burocracy, what could possibly go wrong...??
by egypturnash | 2025-04-16 19:17:32+00:00
According to online calculators, $20 in 1980 dollars is worth about $80 today. $77.something to be precise, close enough.

I chose 1980 because that's when Space Invaders came out for the VCS. And $20 was, IIRC, the going rate for the average VCS cartridge.
by 9rx | 2025-04-16 19:17:38+00:00
> People seem unreasonably upset with Wikipedia for reasons unclear to me.

Like who? I've never met anyone who has been upset with Wikipedia. I don't suppose the vast majority of people I know ever think about Wikipedia at all. I expect some of them don't even know what Wikipedia is.

I might buy "a person I once encountered was upset with Wikipedia one time". Stranger things have happened. But as a trend across people...?
by silverquiet | 2025-04-16 19:18:49+00:00
> Not long ago, Kansas would have responded to the current situation by making the bastards pay. This would have been a political certainty, as predictable as what happens when you touch a match to a puddle of gasoline. When business screwed the farmers and the workers – when it implemented monopoly strategies invasive beyond the Populists' furthest imaginings – when it ripped off shareholders and casually tossed thousands out of work – you could be damned sure about what would follow. Not these days. Out here the gravity of discontent pulls in only one direction: to the right, to the right, further to the right. Strip today's Kansans of their job security, and they head out to become registered Republicans. Push them off their land, and next thing you know they're protesting in front of abortion clinics. Squander their life savings on manicures for the CEO, and there's a good chance they'll join the John Birch Society. But ask them about the remedies their ancestors proposed (unions, antitrust, public ownership), and you might as well be referring to the days when knighthood was in flower.

"What's the Matter with Kansas?"
by mmh0000 | 2025-04-16 19:18:52+00:00
Looks like the zoom.us domain has a problem, currently suspended with a serverHold.

⟩ whois zoom.us Domain Name: zoom.us Registry Domain ID: D1813391-US Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.markmonitor.com Registrar URL: www.markmonitor.com Updated Date: 2025-04-16T18:25:44Z Creation Date: 2002-04-24T15:03:39Z Registry Expiry Date: 2027-04-23T23:59:59Z Registrar: MarkMonitor, Inc. Registrar IANA ID: 292 Registrar Abuse Contact Email: registry.admin@markmonitor.com Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.2083895740 Domain Status: serverHold https://icann.org/epp#serverHold Domain Status: clientDeleteProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientDeleteProhibited Domain Status: clientUpdateProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientUpdateProhibited Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
by skyyler | 2025-04-16 19:18:57+00:00
It is used as a dogwhisle amongst a certain crowd.

Plenty of examples in this old thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/bsl5ix/what_i...

Part of the point of dogwhistles like this is that they sound insane to people that aren't initiated.

I believe the comment you're replying to overstated the frequency with which the word is used as a shibboleth for racists, but it is legitimately used as a shibboleth for racists. The most notable example is probably the defunct "frenworld" subreddit.
by tialaramex | 2025-04-16 19:19:48+00:00
There has been a nasty habit of the LLVM people treating their IR as "Yeah, but we all know it's basically C++ right?" as if there weren't any other consumers except Clang. The semantics claimed for that loop IR said it can go infinite, the reality was that it has the (at the time) no infinite loops C++ semantics instead.

The doubly funny thing is that some C++ people don't want those either, and so the ISO document will be updated to say actually C++ does have infinite loops because programmers want that. It just won't have an elegant way to express it like Rust.
by porridgeraisin | 2025-04-16 19:20:43+00:00
> how did you decide that such a database has no serious utility to the governments and private institutions worldwide

I did not. I said that the signal noise ratio has to be improved. I explicitly used the word "revamp". I know, hyperbole <= hot head => low reading comprehension.

> So perhaps what's needed to improve their quality is to increase their funding, not cut it further.

Sure, if that is the blocker, funding them more is fine by me.
by kragen | 2025-04-16 19:21:07+00:00
I used the p-System on a Heathkit H-89.

I think the overall approach of future-proofing your software by compiling it to a simple, portable virtual machine is valid. Since the p-System, in addition to the JVM and Zork Z-machine mentioned in this post, we've seen Smalltalk-80, PostScript, Open Firmware aka OpenBoot, Glulx, the ASS/400, the Open Software Foundation's ANDF (the architecture-neutral distribution format), Google's NaCl and pNaCl, Microsoft's CIL, JS as a compilation target, WebAssembly, uxn, and the revival of old video game consoles in emulation as a stable software target.

A problem with this approach is that most of these portable platform layers are still far too unstable for reliable archival; even video game emulators face a constant struggle to maintain compatibility as they are updated to keep up with whatever platform they're running on. Platforms like the JVM, which make more concessions to efficiency than MAME, have even more difficulty, so the JVM's slogan of "write once, run anywhere" was widely mocked as "write once, debug everywhere". But it's a good aspiration. I'd like to see it realized in a practical way.

My memory of the p-System is that it was almost unusably slow, a problem made worse by its filesystem being so simple it didn't support fragmentation, so sometimes you had to defragment your floppy disk in order to write new files onto it. It's true that its UI was screen-oriented, as wduquette said, and it was driven by a Lotus-1-2-3-like menu system, which enhanced its usability quite a lot.

Being a pure bytecode interpreter was a serious handicap, especially on the sub-1-MIPS machines we were running it on. EUMEL managed to make a go of it. I never got a chance to use EUMEL on an actual Z80, but I hear it was usably fast; I suspect the EUMEL virtual-machine instruction set (which included string operations) and operating environment went a long way towards compensating for the slowness of bytecode interpretation, much as Numpy does on CPython today.

I suspect you could have done a better job with a bytecode more like Dalvik, designed for efficient JIT compilation by leaving less work for the JIT compiler. But Deutsch and Schiffman didn't publish the first JIT-compilation paper until a few years after the p-System was released. (Schiffman told me a self-deprecating joke about this which I guess I can't really repeat.)

Long Tien Nguyen and Alan Kay published a paper on designing a very simple virtual machine for such digital preservation 10 years ago: https://tinlizzie.org/VPRIPapers/tr2015004_cuneiform.pdf

I think these ideas point the way to achieving the kind of future-proofness that the p-System was shooting for.
by 0xbadcafebee | 2025-04-16 19:21:23+00:00
I hate this, but I'm also glad it's happening, because it will speed up the demise of Web PKI.

CAs and web PKI are a bad joke. There's too many ways to compromise security, there's too many ways to break otherwise-valid web sites/apps/connections, there's too many organizations that can be tampered with, the whole process is too complex and bug-prone.

What Web PKI actually does, in a nutshell, is prove cryptographically that at some point in the past, there was somebody who had control of either A) an e-mail address or B) a DNS record or C) some IP space or D) some other thing, and they generated a certificate through any of these methods with one of hundreds of organizations. OR it proves that they stole the keys of such a person.

It doesn't prove that who you're communicating with right now is who they say they are. It only proves that it's someone who, at some point, got privileged access to something relating to a domain.

That's not what we actually want. What we actually want is to be assured this remote host we're talking to now is genuine, and to keep our communication secret and safe. There are other ways to do that, that aren't as convoluted and vulnerable as the above. We don't have to twist ourselves into all these knots.

I'm hopeful changes like these will result in a gradual catastrophy which will push industry to actually adopt simpler, saner, more secure solutions. I've proposed one years ago but nobody cares because I'm just some guy on the internet and not a company with a big name. Nothing will change until the people with all the money and power make it happen, and they don't give a shit.
by hinkley | 2025-04-16 19:21:35+00:00
I know of an ISP that wrote a custom CRM/ERP solution in order to harass the less well behaved telecom company in town into doing their jobs when they said they would do them. So it would do things like send you a reminder to see if the approval or the hookup they promised you Wednesday was done so you could meet you customer’s expectation of having their Internet turned on by Friday.

That’s probably the best you can do. Make it obvious to everyone including the bureaucracy what their externalities are doing, and either nudge them to go faster or divest some responsibilities to someone else.
by BrenBarn | 2025-04-16 19:21:50+00:00
You're right, and when I say "judging people" I don't mean buying on Amazon instantly means I think you're irredeemably evil, I just mean it's a negative factor in my overall judgment. It can be mitigated by other things, in particular whether the person thinks critically about their Amazon purchases, and whether they take other mitigating action (e.g., voting for government policies that would punish Amazon and similar monopolistic businesses).

What I'm talking about is at least slightly less nebulous than what you describe. My claim is something like "The more that people buy from Amazon today, the lower the expected quality of your own life in 25 years." It's similar to other negative externalities like climate change. I'm not saying someone is satan incarnate for driving their gas car to work. But the less they realize that there are problems with that and the less they take action where possible to mitigate them, the more dubious I'll be about them.

(Incidentally, I'm not "one of those software people who makes plenty of money". I make in the mid five figures with no benefits, so I'm not arguing from quite as privileged a perspective as the one you mention. But my position is still more privileged than many, many other people who can't order from Amazon at all because, for instance, they have no credit card or fixed address. And those people are also harmed by the growth of Amazon as it gradually reduces their options for buying things in person.)
by _DeadFred_ | 2025-04-16 19:22:01+00:00
"you don't just have to read a news article and then try your best to update your thoughts to conform to the daily talking points" is going low.

"I think: - he's lying about being in danger" - this is the basic premise you have made this entire time. Yet you also continue to claim:

"I never condemned the man or made any unfair assumptions about him"

Your entire premise is a blanket judgement should be applied to people seeking asylum as to them being liars, based on 'because of course they are'. While I agree that there are strong incentives to lie, I don't use solely that incentive to then baseless claim 'he and all asylum seekers are lying' like you continue to do. We have immigration courts and people directly responsible for determining this better than you or I. They determined the threat to his life was real enough to put a stay on him being sent back to his home country even though they denied his asylum claim. My 'current days talking point' position is that in America we don't apply blanket assumptions like this, and that we have a system of rules, laws, courts, and judges that make those determination. A truly toxic position to hold today I guess because... something unrelated to current talking points? I've held this position my entire life. As did every single person around me. From conservative grandfathers that fought in WW2, to hippie parents, to teachers, to... basically everyone until recently. But I'm adopting the current day take?

I think 'all members of XYZ immigrant group are liars' is a horrible take, and has led us down bad paths in the past. Using that claim to bypass due process, in situations where people's actual lives are in danger, because the Constitution/due process/the American way is expensive and takes too long is a popular take/is too hard on the scale of an entire country full of people, I just don't share it.