MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by paulluuk | 2025-05-30 14:52:02+00:00
On a side note, I do worry about the energy consumption of AI. I'll admit that, like the silicon valley tech bros, there is a part of me that hopes that AI will allow researchers to invent a solution to that -- something like fusion or switching to quantum-computing AI models or whatever. But if that doesn't happen, it's probably the biggest problem related to AI. More so even than alignment, perhaps.
by rayiner | 2025-05-30 14:52:14+00:00
If “racism” can be a “public health emergency” (https://abcnews.go.com/US/york-governor-declares-racism-publ...) then surely the gutting of american industrial capacity qualifies as an “economic emergency.” One that has serious national security implications, too. Surely it falls within the “emanations from the penumbras” of Congress’s delegation.

And I never said the tariff power belongs to “wholly to the executive.” My view is that economic warfare between countries falls within the scope of Congress’s delegation of tariff authority. And under existing precedent, that’s a sufficient “intelligible principle” to avoid non-delegation problems.
by fny | 2025-05-30 14:52:40+00:00
I think everyone is missing the bigger picture.

This is not a matter of whether AI will replace humans whole sale. There are two more predominant effects:

1. You’ll need fewer humans to do the same task. In other forms of automation, this has led to a decrease in employment. 2. The supply of capable humans increases dramatically. 3. Expertise is no longer a perfect moat.

I’ve seen 2. My sister nearly flunked a coding class in college, but now she’s writing small apps for her IT company.

And for all of you who poo poo that as unsustainable. I became proficient in Rust in a week, and I picked up Svelte in a day. I’ve written a few shaders too! The code I’ve written is pristine. All those conversations about “should I learn X to be employed” are totally moot. Yes APL would be harder, but it’s definitely doable. This is an example of 3.

Overall, this will surely cause wage growth to slow and maybe decrease. In turn, job opportunities will dry up and unemployment might ensue.

For those who still don’t believe, air traffic controllers are a great thought experiment—they’re paid quite nicely. What happens if you build tools so that you can train and employ 30% of the population instead of just 10%?
by guerby | 2025-05-30 14:53:11+00:00
"Storage is something like $0.14-$0.50/kWh by itself"

LFP at the cell level is below $100/kWh, 5000 cycles means $0.02/kWh out of the cell (maximum since after 5000 cycles battery is still at 80% capacity so the real price is even lower).

Current LFP cell price look more like $50/kWh these days and still going down...

Also about near $0 or below $0 prices, they exist only because we don't currently signal those prices to consumers. Anyone with electric car (parked 95% of the time) or batteries at home or business would charge them at $0.01-0.05/kWh no question asked and price would never go to zero or negative.
by untrust | 2025-05-30 14:53:24+00:00
Another question: If AI is going to eat up everyone's jobs, how will any business be safe from a new competitor showing up and unseating them off their throne? I don't think that the low level peons would be the only ones at stake as a company could be easily outcompeted as well since AI could conceivably outperform or replace any existing product anyways.

I guess funding for processing power and physical machinery to run the AI backing a product would be the biggest barrier to entry?
by vidarh | 2025-05-30 14:53:59+00:00
> If you give it the rules to generate something, why can't it generate it?

It can, but that does not mean that what is generate is not new, unless the rules in question constrains the set to the point where onely one outcome is possible.

If I tell you that a novel has a minimum of 40,000 words, it does not mean that no novel is, well, novel (not sorry), just because I've given you rules to stay within. Any novel will in some sense be "derived from" an adherence to those rules, and yet plenty of those novels are still new.

The point was that by describing a new language in a zero-shot manner, you ensure that no program in that language exists either in the training data or in the prompt, so what it generates must at a minimum be new in the sense that it is in a language that has not previously existed.

If you then further gives instructions for a program that incorporates constraints that are unlikely to have been used before (but this is harder) you can further ensure the novelty of the output along other axes.

You can keep adding arbitrary conditions like this, and LLMs will continue to produce output. Human creative endeavour is often similarly constrained to rules: Rules for formats, rules for competitions, rules for publications, and yet nobody would suggest this means that the output isn't new or creative, or suggest that the work is somehow derivative of the rules.

This notion is setting a bar for LLMs we don't set for humans.

> That's pretty much what LLM training does, extracting patterns from a huge corpus of text. Then it goes one to generate according to the patterns.

But when you describe a new pattern as part of the prompt, the LLM is not being trained on that pattern. It's generating on the basis of interpreting that what it is told in terms of the concepts it has learned, and developing something new from it, just as a human working within a set of rules is not creating merely derivative works just because we have past knowledge and have been given a set of rules to work to.

> It can not generate a new pattern that is not a combination of the previous one.

The entire point of my comment was that this is demonstrably false unless you are talking strictly in the sense of a deterministic view of the universe where everything including everything humans do is a combination of what came before. In which case the discussion is meaningless.

Specific models can be better or worse at it, but unless you can show that humans somehow exceed the Turing computable there isn't even a plausible mechanism for how humans could even theoretically be able to produce anything so much more novel that it'd be impossible for LLMs to produce something equally novel.
by honkycat | 2025-05-30 14:54:16+00:00
Cryptic, overly complicated syntax. for loops, if statements, etc.. are all done better in other languages.

No package manager, build, or dependency features. This means it is ugly and gross to import functions from other programming languages.

Zero data structure support, so any data manipulation is horrible.

No test support, so you can't mock and test business logic.

No debugger support.

It's just a bad, cryptic, confusing language that is hard to maintain.

Remember: it's not that you CAN'T do these things, it's that they work better in other languages, like Node or Python. And shelling out in Python or node works great and is very easy. And Python comes built into most systems these days.

It is hard to justify writing shell scrips anymore. It's like writing perl or cobol. We have better tools now, the world has moved on.
by Workaccount2 | 2025-05-30 14:54:31+00:00
Forcing telecos to authenticate phone calls would probably be the single most important change.

But instead of forcing them, we have been letting them drag their feet while while regular people are losing billions to scams.

The whole phone system is ancient and long deprecated. When I get a call from my bank I should see their name and a badge of authentication. Not a random phone number.

Imagine you could register irs.gov and start sending e-mails from that domain. That is pretty much the current state of the phone system.

Un-fucking-believable no one is forcing change here.
by paganel | 2025-05-30 14:54:38+00:00
> had total air dominance as the "Anglos" fight?

It will most probably come as a big surprise to the Anglos when they'll find out that they do not have any such dominance. Also see their surprise when they had to use their aircraft carriers against the Houthis, didn't go quite as they (the Americans) had expected.

Real war can be like that, is usually like that, i.e. it washes away in a second any previous misconceptions, it places you right in front of reality itself.
by rowanseymour | 2025-05-30 14:54:45+00:00
Every time something like this happens it seems clear the problem is changing the vision for a project - once you've gotten a community invested in a different vision. There are lots of great projects doing something in between fully community driven Open Source and closed source. Nobody is obliged to license their work in any particular way... but please figure that out at the start so everyone knows what they're working with.
by chneu | 2025-05-30 14:54:51+00:00
I think you're misinterpreting what I said.

I said 75% of people with garages likely don't put their cars in their garages.

This is unrelated to the number of RV owners who store their caravan at a storage facility. I didn't talk about that and didn't specify a figure there. I just said people buy RVs and some people pay to store them.
Ask HN: Do you print software documentation? If so how do you do it?
by squeegee_scream | 2025-05-30 14:54:52+00:00
I suspect that I would be more focused and work better if I did more of my engineering work away from the computer, so I'm looking at aspects of my workflow to make analog. I'm considering printing documentation and putting it in a 3-ring binder but I would appreciate insights from others who have done this.

So far my plan is

1. gather the vital documentation for a given project (including language, apis, etc)

2. choose which aspects of the documentation to print. Let's use the Elm language for example, I wouldn't need to print docs for every single package just the ones I'm using in the project.

3. clean up the documentation so it is print-ready. I did a dry run for the Elm language and realized this would be a tedious step but doing it well should result in less wasted paper and easier-to-navigate documentation

3. print

4. collect into separate 3-ring binders with tabs to make navigation easier. For example I would have a binder for Elm, a separate binder for the backend language, a separate binder for miscellaneous

I know that these will get out of date, and I suspect some documentation like React and HTML will be difficult to curate due to the large volume. I'm primarily a web developer and these technologies seem to move faster than others which means the risk of them getting outdated is higher.

So while "print out documentation" sounds simple enough, as I've begun thinking it through it seems more complicated than it should and I would love any insight anyone here has, including any references to blogs about this, and especially if a service already exists that does this sort of thing
by munksbeer | 2025-05-30 14:55:23+00:00
That prayer works.

(Many) true believers believe that prayer has the power to heal people. So if you pray for someone with cancer, and they get better, then it shows the power of prayer.

If you pray for someone with cancer, and they don't get better, then it was all part of God's plan.

This may not strictly meet the definition of cognitive dissonance, but it is close enough for me.
by douvy | 2025-05-30 14:55:33+00:00
Hi! I built BTC Tooling because most Bitcoin dashboards are either paid, full of ads, or don't have key data all in one place like this.

Key features: - Real-time price with multiple timeframes - Live Bitfinex orderbook visualization - Market analysis including Assessment, Strategic Outlook, and Sentiment - Twitter/X Insights - Halving countdown - 100% free and open source

GitHub: https://github.com/douvy/btc-tooling Built with: Next.js, React, TypeScript

Looking for feedback and contributors welcome!
by ack_complete | 2025-05-30 14:56:13+00:00
Not to dismiss the thought that's been put into this, but the aspect ratio of the image (display aspect ratio) is almost always the wrong way to approach this. Retro computers typically have a limited number of dot clocks and video timings compared to the frame sizes that they can support. The Atari 8-bit, for example, supports only a single pair of horizontal and vertical refresh timings, but is very flexible regarding how wide and tall the display is. If you try to estimate aspect ratios based on the image area, you'll get lots of variance because many games deviate from the 320x192 area that the operating system uses.

On top of that, it's a mistake to assume that the original images had squares. With a small number of pixels per tile and both an aesthetic and efficiency requirement for the tiles to be uniform, it's highly likely that what look like squares actually weren't -- they could only get so close with the available resolution. I see a lot of people try to guess aspect ratios based on what they think the art was intended to look like, and on multiple occasions have had to boot games on original hardware and contemporary displays to prove that, no, what looked like a circle was actually slightly elliptical.

The correct way to approach this is by starting from the pixel dot clock and video timings to determine pixel aspect ratio and work backward to display aspect ratio. This also reveals another typical sign that aspect ratios are being determined wrong -- when significantly different pixel aspect ratios are determined for multiple systems that all supported NTSC artifacting colors, like the Apple II and the Atari. Supporting NTSC artifacting means NTSC-compatible timings and a dot clock that is an integer multiple of the color subcarrier, which means similar pixel aspect ratios.
by esafak | 2025-05-30 14:56:23+00:00
Looks neat. If I understand correctly, I can use it to spin up backends on the fly? You have an ambitious list of languages to support: https://github.com/microsandbox/microsandbox/tree/main/sdk

edit: A fleshed out contributors guide to add support for a new language would help. https://github.com/microsandbox/microsandbox/blob/main/CONTR...
by 0cf8612b2e1e | 2025-05-30 14:56:50+00:00
Only did a quick skim of the readme, but a few questions which I would like some elaboration.

How is it so fast? Is it making any trade offs vs a traditional VM? Is there potential the VM isolation is compromised?

Can I run a GUI inside of it?

Do you think of this as a new Vagrant?

How do I get data in/out?
by brookst | 2025-05-30 14:56:57+00:00
I was a bigger fan of the certain doom in 2025, and I think the AI 2030 movement will have better design sense and storytelling. But really I haven’t seen anything that really has the oomph and fire of Tipper Gore’s crusade against youth music.

We need more showmanship, more dramatic catastrophizing. I feel like our current crop of doomers isn’t quite shameless enough to be really entertaining.
by righthand | 2025-05-30 14:57:06+00:00
Those technological advancements with Llms are low effort advancements. So you only get low effort responses.

Do you understand why maybe no one’s wowed by browser automation/automated web search? Can you extrapolate why no one’s stoked to talk on Llm bots replacing them with low effort inaccurate “good-enough” fly-by-research summarization?

These are obvious for most people that’s why it’s low effort. You shouldn’t need to expound high-effort discussion just because you feel the low effort discussion doesn’t make a clear point or makes Llms look bad. The points are well discussed, and obvious. Hence low effort, hence sucky discourse.

Feel free to ignore and dismiss my perspective that doesn’t make me wrong or you right. It just makes you a bully.
by HenryBemis | 2025-05-30 14:57:10+00:00
Yes, correct. (try to) Move some of the accountability and guilt to the user.

Also, someone got to shake hands of members of parliament, ministers, senators, governors, mayors, etc. took selfies with Gates, Malala, et al, and created 'content' for their LI profile, and are dubbed 'an influencer of security', and made it to some "30 under 30" list.

So yes.. :) a proper PR effort.
by energy123 | 2025-05-30 14:57:21+00:00
It's impossible in the sense of "this goes against an informed understand of history and human nature", which admittedly is a soft analysis not rooted in verifiable fact, but is one that I nevertheless hold to. The last 10,000 years have been a gradual, unceasing trend of increasing centralization, from isolated hunter gatherer tribes, to EU and UN type bodies today. The unceasing nature of this trend isn't an accident. There are underlying causal factors that generate it. Positing that those causal factors will continue in the future, leading to an increase in the size of EU-like entities, to the point of de facto hemispheric/world government type bodies, isn't so radical, even if it is uncertain.
by darth_avocado | 2025-05-30 14:57:37+00:00
The comment wasn’t on the trend or where things are going and the historical progress the country has made. The comment was on the current state of the economy. The fact that wealth concentration creates its own unique challenges. If as many people were unemployed and in poverty (or in the low income bracket) in the US or any other developed nation, the living conditions would have been drastically deteriorated. The consumer market would have shrunk to the point where most people couldn’t afford to buy chips and soda.
by electroly | 2025-05-30 14:57:55+00:00
Maybe there is a language barrier involved here, but "outsized" in this context means drones have more of an effect per dollar than conventional techniques. It's talking about how big their impact is--that they can do a huge amount of damage with very little cost. This is congratulatory language, not dismissive. It's acknowledging the serious defense problem that drones pose. You can't rely on an expensive defense against an inexpensive offense.
by oytis | 2025-05-30 14:58:01+00:00
> try-with-resources in Java, defer in Go, with in Python

Or 'goto error8;' in C. Still RAII is much more convenient, especially for cases where you allocate a lot of interdependent resources at different time points. It keeps deallocation logic close to allocation logic (unlike, say, defer), makes sure deallocation always happens in the reverse order of allocations and doesn't force you to create a nested scope each time you allocate a resource
Show HN: W++ – A Python-style scripting language for .NET with NuGet support
by sinisterMage | 2025-05-30 14:58:01+00:00
Hey HN

I’ve been building *W++*, a scripting language that looks like Python but runs on the .NET runtime. It started as a fun side project, but it evolved into something surprisingly powerful — and potentially useful:

Key Features:

- Python-style syntax with semicolon-based simplicity

- Compiles to .NET IL with experimental JIT support

- Can run interpreted or compiled

- Built-in CLI for managing projects, running, and building

- Supports importing NuGet packages and converts them to .ingot modules automatically - MIT licensed and fully open-source

You can even do things like:

wpp import Newtonsoft.Json let person = new JObject() person["name"] = "Alice" print person["name"]; Use Cases:

Game scripting (Unity, OpenTK support in progress)

Education (gentle intro to .NET without C# syntax)

Blazor scripting

Embeddable scripting engine for .NET apps

GitHub: https://github.com/sinisterMage/WPlusPlus

I’d love feedback, ideas, and thoughts. Thanks for reading — and if you’ve ever said “I wish Python ran on .NET,” this might be for you.
by asmor | 2025-05-30 14:58:14+00:00
The diff contains this addition:

fetch("https://dl.min.io/server/minio/agplv3-ack", { mode: "no-cors", })

This looks like it could be the "you downloaded the Virtual Box Expansion Pack from a corporate IP" Oracle playbook to me. Certainly falls under "mistreating the user".
by myko | 2025-05-30 14:58:48+00:00
Maybe, but aren't LLM companies burning cash? The efficiency gains I see from LLMs typically come from agents which perform circular prompts on themselves until they reach some desired outcome (or give up until a human can prod them along).

It seems like we'll need to generate a lot more power to support these efficiency gains at scale, and unless that is coming from renewables (and even if it is) that cost may outweigh the gains for a long time.
by haiku2077 | 2025-05-30 14:58:58+00:00
I think you want rclone. Specifically a combination of:

a local filesystem remote

a cloud provider remote

rclone serve s3 to serve a local s3 compatible API for the local remote

something orchestating an rclone copy, rclone sync or rclone bisync command to sync the local and cloud remotes. Could be triggered on a timer, or using another tool to watch the local directory for changes and trigger a sync.
Is anyone seeing results from LLMSTXT files, or is it just hype?
by keploy | 2025-05-30 14:59:36+00:00
I've been seeing a lot of chatter about using llmstxt files (the so-called "SEO cheat code" for LLMs) to get better backlinks, visibility, and even organic traffic.

The theory is that these files make your site friendlier to LLM crawlers like ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Claude—kind of like an XML sitemap for generative AI models. But I haven't come across any hard data or case studies showing that this actually works.

Is there anyone here who has implemented an llmstxt file and can share real results? Like:

Any noticeable change in traffic?

LLM-generated summaries including your content?

Better placement in AI search tools?

Or is this just another hype train with no real engine behind it?

Curious to hear from the community. Let’s separate signal from noise!

I made one personally to extract unlimited urls but got no results
by JSchneider321 | 2025-05-30 14:59:42+00:00
See, I think that's where things just need to be cleaned up and pieced together here. Dr. Priyamvada Natarajan (https://physics.yale.edu/people/priyamvada-natarajan) proved mathematically that direct-collapse SMBH in the early cosmos is possible, which Gough mentions and links to. But I agree that these elements need to be assembled into a larger, cohesive model that can be studied and ran through simulations.

However, the question remains as to how to gather experts and convince them to work towards this without some sort of ideation phase, which is, to my understanding, the phase this work is currently being presented as. A "Hey Science, come look at this, please!" invitation.
by edent | 2025-05-30 15:00:04+00:00
Buy a dishwasher - they're cheap, work really well, and don't use much energy / water.

Same as a washing machine / drier. Chuck the clothes in, press a button, done.

There are Roomba style lawnmowers for your grass cutting.

I'll grant you painting a house and plumbing a toilet aren't there yet!
by furkansahin | 2025-05-30 15:00:08+00:00
Look, this is basically a UI change. None of those features are removed from backend and I hope they don't, ever. As an engineer who maintains a kind of a beefy MinIO cluster myself, I already have a bunch of complaints about the product. UI is not one of them. I really hope that this move is simply the result of a re-org that moves more people to work on real issues.
by ownagefool | 2025-05-30 15:00:09+00:00
I'm pro make them code and test their big o.

Honestly it's 30-45 minutes where you can establish whether the person can code, and whether they have the basic foundational knowledge to crack efficiency problems is pretty hard to beat.

Whilst there's probably diminishing returns on making the actual challenge more and more difficult, the general concept is a lot fairer than the majority of other interview types I've had thrown at me. ( Usually something they've solved internally, where they expect you to regurgitate the same answers without the same context )