MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bigyabai | 2025-05-16 04:31:13+00:00
If the president can take coercive actions to reinforce American manufacturing, then Silicon Valley isn't entirely at fault. Their obligation has always been to the shareholders; there was no illusion of reciprocal exchange in the first place. It's like trying to wring out Carnegie and Rockefeller for being the most true-blooded Americans in the industry.

The tough pill to swallow is that China subsidized manufacturing and America didn't. The free market made it's choice and America lost.
by Juliate | 2025-05-16 04:31:23+00:00
> It reveals a mediocre mindset and likely self undermining too

It could.

> since most of those types are in fact smarter than the ~80th-90th percentile.

But you’re skipping the very issue of this mindset. Being smarter along a very specific scale of evaluation doesn’t make one de facto « smarter » in general, neither properly adjusted to work and collaborate in an organisation.

Denouncing arrogance might not be the best move in some context, but it is not a show of weakness.
by const_cast | 2025-05-16 04:32:26+00:00
It is, pretty much, nothing. As in the job of being a car is about the same.

Will you get there faster? No. Will you get there safer? Well... no. Will you get there with less traffic? Will the drive be easier? Eh... no.

So it's about equivalent. You might be slightly more comfortable. If you happen to be paying attention when you take that measurement, otherwise you wouldn't notice.
by amatecha | 2025-05-16 04:32:35+00:00
Definitely not the end of the world - no worries! It just feels a bit uh, haphazard in a way. My eye is leading forward for the next words only to find I need to skip to the next line. I usually read very fast so I'll be a bit more sensitive to variations in formatting like that, I guess? All good though, like I said a great read anyway!
by zerosizedweasle | 2025-05-16 04:33:38+00:00
This idea, that their only obligation is to shareholders is relatively modern phenomenon (just ask GM and Ford during WWII) and I bet if you asked Americans they wouldn't share it. US taxpayers built Silicon Valley. And furthermore, if Americans see Silicon Valley as a threat, it would lead to the total destruction of the entire order there. Ultimately it's in the interests of Silicon Valley and their shareholder to not be seen as an enemy of the United States.
by rstuart4133 | 2025-05-16 04:34:56+00:00
From the article:

> the people are idiots

"The people" refers to the voters.

The use of the word idiot contrasts to an earlier post today suggesting Musk is a useful idiot for Trump. The reverse looks like more likely to me. The monarchists (as this article calls them) think the citizens are idiots, and I suspect they find Trump a particularly useful one.

I guess we will find out in about 19 months if they are right on all counts.
by outcoldman | 2025-05-16 04:35:25+00:00
It is a bit sad. And obviously the reason why it sees such a decline is because AI (ChatGPT and similar) took the job of answering the basic questions about programming that StackOverflow used to help with.

Looking at my profile since 14 years ago, the most upvoted answer that I solved was about a basic question of how to specify fields properly when you serialize JSON into a C# class.

I do believe the value of StackOverflow was only about people who were lazy enough to read the documentation of the language/framework they were trying to use. I used to be active on StackOverflow back in the days, but in the last 10 years the only value I saw in it was if I needed to get back to some language to just find an answer on how to write a for loop in that specific language (swift vs go vs ...).

I personally do not believe there is much knowledge base on StackOverflow. In most of my questions to "google" for the last 10 years, very rarely would I be directed to StackOverflow for the right answer.

There are a lot of complicated questions on StackOverflow, but the site was flooded by people asking and answering basic questions about programming. And people who are there just to get some karma.
by dottrap | 2025-05-16 04:35:36+00:00
>> I really wish the Lua authors would add official types to Lua.

> Never going to happen IMO. Adding static types would change the nature of the language completely, even more than it has in Python.

You both are kind of right.

The Lua authors have been working on the new companion language to Lua named Pallene. Pallene is a subset of Lua that adds types, not for the sake of types themselves, but for the purpose of performance. The Pallene compiler can generate optimized native code that potentially removes the need to manually write a module for Lua in C.

The other cool trick is that Pallene and Lua are completely interoperable with each other, so Pallene can be added to existing Lua projects, and you can opt to use regular Lua for the dynamic parts of your code where compilers won't be able to optimize much and strong types might be more trouble than help.

Here is a talk Roberto Ierusalimschy gave about Pallene. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGF2UFG7n6Y
by lolinder | 2025-05-16 04:36:24+00:00
People get this way about TypeScript too, and it always perplexes me. These projects are about adding types to untyped languages, and that comes with a few givens:

* Your type system cannot be sound. It's going to have escape hatches and exceptions because that's how dynamic languages roll.

* There will always be constructs that you can't type. See above.

* If your type system is going to usefully type enough of the ecosystem, it will be Turing complete.

All of these things are the trade-offs you make when you set out to layer types on a dynamic language, and they're well worth it to get 99% of the way to type safety in a language that otherwise couldn't scale. Theoretical purity is meaningless if the language isn't useful.
by rashunain | 2025-05-16 04:36:25+00:00
Read current affairs of 16 May 2025 in English to improve your performance in the general awareness section of the government exams and become a government officer. Daily Current Affairs are very important for the preparation of the government exams like SSC CGL, SSC CHSL, RRB NTPC, SBI PO, UPSC, State PSC, Defence exams.
by chatmasta | 2025-05-16 04:36:35+00:00
> I would not be surprised if within the next few years we see Holmes in a government position

That’s a ridiculous theory and I’d gladly take the other side of that bet. She has zero populist appeal and would never be elected to any office. So it comes down to whether an incumbent would appoint her to some position, and I just don’t see any rational reason why anyone would do that.
by simonw | 2025-05-16 04:38:22+00:00
The timing on this is a little surprising given llama.cpp just finally got a (hopefully) stable vision feature merged into main: https://simonwillison.net/2025/May/10/llama-cpp-vision/

Presumably Ollama had been working on this for quite a while already - it sounds like they've broken their initial dependency on llama.cpp. Being in charge of their own destiny makes a lot of sense.
by bluecalm | 2025-05-16 04:39:42+00:00
I tried to report a FB page of obvious car (campervan) thieves: no address, name, telephone numbers only visible on the photo (so it's more difficult to scrap/automatically detect). A lot of made up testimonials with hidden comments. The company was supposedly registered in my country but there is no way to check if it exists (we have national public registry of all companies) as no relevant data is provided. I came across the website when someone from another country not speaking my language asked me about the page and if it's legit.

FB doesn't care. There is no way to tell them what the report is about (only that it somehow violates "community standards") and they don't care to check if the company even exists.

The only thing they are battling is negative PR as they don't care to take even baby steps to prevent literal thieves advertising on their service.
by jjk166 | 2025-05-16 04:39:50+00:00
One aspect not covered by the article is fictitious economies of scale. Designing a new ship class, like any other such large project, is an expensive undertaking. To try and make this number more palatable, it is typically proposed to build large numbers of ships over many years. Of course this makes the overall project very expensive, but the per unit price doesn't look too bad. The issue is because these ships will be in production for so long, there is a need to make the ships extremely capable as future needs are difficult to determine. Further because the overall project is so expensive, there aren't many concurrent projects, so this one projects has to be everything for everybody. Of course this further drives up costs and produces compromises that make no-one happy. Then invariably once these overpriced and underpowered ships start getting delivered and people complain, there is a strong call to cancel some of the ships planned, which means the cost of the remaining ships go up, which leads to further cancellations. This is how you wind up with a multi-billion dollar single ship class that has no weapons.

There are further disadvantages. Since these projects are large and infrequent, there are few opportunities to train up people in actually handling such projects. The shipyard that wins the contract will grow fat and lazy while those that didn't will shrivel up and die, leading to a very unhealthy ecosystem when the next big project comes around. Because the project goes on for such a long period of time, leadership priorities both within the navy and in the government are likely to shift, meaning long term consistent support can not be counted on. And finally, the large number of ships that are unlikely to ever materialize allow planners to hand waive away real gaps in capability that realistically still need to be filled.

By starting out with a commitment to small ship classes, all these issues get reversed. Since you expect to be doing projects frequently, they are low stakes, meaning it is okay to take risks, learn lessons, and make a tool for dealing with your current, real problem. You can maintain a health ecosystem of many shipyards and a large population of experienced individuals who have a few such projects under their belt. Lessons learned from each project can be applied to future ones, both allowing for improved ships and improved project management. You can always produce more of a class if you really need it, but if you do the cost savings are merely a bonus.

There are cases where the benefits of standardization and mass production are just too critical to pass up. You don't want to have to worry about 37 different types of ammunition for your frontline troops for example. But warships are few enough in number and high in value - the managerial resources necessary to handle variety are easily justified.
by somenameforme | 2025-05-16 04:40:17+00:00
The good ole 'a glass a day of wine is healthy' issue. For those that don't know - it isn't. The numerous studies that found that all failed to account for a really simple issue. People who are unhealthy tend to give up drinking more frequently than those that aren't, even if for undiagnosed reasons.

So it turns out that people that were drinking a tiny amount of alcohol, but not enough to start seeing the endless negative affects of alcohol, were healthier than those that drunk none, but only because of this bias. The right amount of alcohol, so far as health is concerned, is zero.

It's quite insightful to see how this error then spawned a whole new series of 'approved' explanations for why wine was supposed to be healthy for you, such as antioxidants or whatever. In many fields everything remains extremely ad hoc - from brain plaque to serotonin, and I'll even add in intentional partial reps!
by hansmayer | 2025-05-16 04:40:46+00:00
No, I did not suggest the solution you are implying my comment meant. What I am saying is that these PLATFORMS are not the right way to handle the supply of short-term rentals, as they incentivise the home-owners to take them off the market for long-term rentals. I would be perfectly fine with short-term rentals which were not the converted living units. We have to think differently here. But if the push comes to shove, actually restrictions would work here in favour of the long-term rentals, because being, as you said yourself, a supply-demand problem, it would raise the supply of long-term rentals and reduce the prices. Just as it was happening before AirBnB. Its just that we have to be moral enough to recognise that the basic human right of a local in a tourist location to live affordably is set higher than the luxury problem of the so-called digital natives, namely, booking a short-term rental in a city center (so they can produce yet another piece of "content"). Not to mention that a platform which does not generate profit should not even be allowed to exist.
by const_cast | 2025-05-16 04:41:04+00:00
> Couldn't you create even faster software if you went down another level? Why don't you?

No, actually, C++ is pretty much as low as you can go.

Well, I mean, you can go lower but you're not going to get performance benefits. You could go down to C. But C is going to be more of the same or, more likely, slower. You're going to be swapping Templates for things like void *.

You could go to assembly, but let's be honest - who can write better assembly than a C++ compiler?
by Rebelgecko | 2025-05-16 04:41:54+00:00
You can give someone a $175 bonus for being particularly helpful or going above and beyond. Everyone can give 20/year so it doesn't have to be that crazy of an effort to get one (although most people don't give out all 20 and the limit wasn't even enforced for a while).

It technically requires manager approval but it's kind of a faux pas for a manager to deny one unless it's a duplicate.
by jsight | 2025-05-16 04:42:59+00:00
To be fair, that's also what a lot of us used to say about IDEs. In reality, plenty of folks just turned vim into a fighter jet and did just as well without super-heavyweight llms.

I'm not totally convinced that we won't see a similar effect here, with some really competitive coders 100% eschewing LLMs and still doing as well as the best that use them.
by DocTomoe | 2025-05-16 04:43:32+00:00
Consider that the text is, in fact, from the 19th century.

Also, 'Weib' is not rude in every context. "Wein, Weib und Gesang" is not diminutive towards women, but in fact appreciative (as in 'necessary for having a good time'). We have Weiberfassnacht. And then there are the dialects, in which "Weib" often is indicative of a homely, loving relationship (-> bairisch, Swabian). Context matters.
by Joel_Mckay | 2025-05-16 04:43:34+00:00
Various learning challenges would fall outside a lifetime of suffering, and often such kids have statistically higher IQ. ;)

I think it is more likely people will create synthetic diseases by experimenting on human beings with unique unpredictable gene expression.

He Jiankui already crossed the ethical boundary in 2018... only to discover his best intentions were still nonsense. The GMO kids he helped edit will have a lifetime to figure out if that alteration negatively affected them, and as adults consider how their own children may change.

People may cross the "Primum non nocere" line, but it can never ethically be justified =3
by kamaal | 2025-05-16 04:43:42+00:00
>>And obviously the reason why it sees such a decline is because AI (ChatGPT and similar) took the job of answering the basic questions about programming that StackOverflow used to help with.

A big reason why AI is replacing these things. A big part is the experience itself. There are quite a few people who have have been repulsed due to the smugness, or other wise having their questions marked duplicate/irrelevant/stupid etc.

AI is also pretty much instant. You can also talk to it like you are talking to a person.

The killer AI feature!---> AI listens, without judging you.
by GuestFAUniverse | 2025-05-16 04:44:13+00:00
The example with the rain is wrong. It's either the proper "wegen des Regens" (Genitiv), or the new idiom "wegen dem Regen" (Dativ). "wegen den Regen" means something slightly different (more like: "because of _multiple_ rainfalls")

There's a whole book by Bastian Sick (famous German author) named "Der Dativ ist dem Genitiv sein Tod." -- the title about the Dativ being the death of the Genetiv is playing with that idiom.

https://languagetool.org/insights/de/beitrag/dativ-genitiv-s... -- it's in German and discusses the (perceived) change of that idiom.

As much as I like Twain, the English language is one of the hardest European languages, when it comes to pronunciation (contrary to Italian, which sticks to a few simple rules). So, you're welcome, choose your poison.
by kunzhi | 2025-05-16 04:45:21+00:00
20 years of desk work here. Both remote and in office.

The key is to make movement a regular part of your life. Mix up the movement like another commenter said.

For myself, I try to get outside and walk in the morning for about 30 minutes before work. It's a lot easier working from home than dealing with a commute, of course. I exercise 3-6 days a week also (with a mandatory rest day). I also have a walking pad treadmill thing that I pull out from time to time.

During the day I build in iron-clad breaks, including booking 30 minute out of office breaks in my schedule so I know I have protected time to get out and walk.

If I find myself with a spare moment, I do some squats. Sometimes with weights; I keep a pair of adjustable dumbbells in my office (they go up to 50 each). If I have even just 10 minutes between meetings, sometimes I will step outside for a 5 minute walk.

It's a lot of work for sure. And some days it really feels like work.

But over time if you keep it at you won't need as much discipline as you did in order to start. Think of brushing your teeth - that's a good habit most people manage to build and it's automatic for most.

Last thought - learn about yourself and your body. Try physical therapy before you need it from an injury. Try barbell lifts or other heavy weights. Try stuff you might think is "woo" like Alexander Technique or Feldenkrais. Try Crossfit. Try yoga. Try running. Try martial arts. Try dance. Try road biking. Keep trying stuff until you figure out what's for you.

Hydrate. Don't eat shit. DO NOT SMOKE! Watch your alcohol intake (or whatever else you're into). Get good sleep.

And especially if you're a man - don't kid yourself. You are not invincible and you are not immortal. You have to learn to take care of you and no-one else is going to do it for you. :)

Good luck. <3
by lolinder | 2025-05-16 04:48:30+00:00
Do you know what exactly the difference is with either of these projects adding multimodal support? Both have supported LLaVA for a long time. Did that require special casing that is no longer required?

I'd hoped to see this mentioned in TFA, but it kind of acts like multimodal is totally new to Ollama, which it isn't.
by VoidWhisperer | 2025-05-16 04:49:13+00:00
Enums are possibly going to end up in JS eventually - this proposal[0] is at stage 1 (i know the readme says stage 0, it looks like there is a PR to update this). Granted, that means 'under consideration' but it is a start

[0]: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-enum
by divbzero | 2025-05-16 04:49:18+00:00
> Note that modern compilers like gcc or clang will produce something like is_leap_year2 from is_leap_year1, so there is not much point in doing this in C source, but it might be useful in other programming languages.

The optimizations that compilers can achieve kind of amaze me.

Indeed, the latest version of cal from util-linux keeps it simple in the C source:

return ( !(year % 4) && (year % 100) ) || !(year % 400);

https://github.com/util-linux/util-linux/blob/v2.41/misc-uti...
by alexey-salmin | 2025-05-16 04:49:20+00:00
Technically lesswrong is about rationalists not effective altruists, but you're right in a sense that it's the same breed.

They think that the key to scientific thinking is to forego the moral limitations, not to study and learn. As soon as you're free from the shackles of tradition you become 100% rational and therefore 100% correct.
by mkopinsky | 2025-05-16 04:49:22+00:00
Initially I was sure you were talking about my Scoutmaster. (The details diverged in the end.) The expected arrival time for camping trips was always something like 9:59am - that way people would hopefully show up at 9-something or maybe just a few minutes late like 10:10. If the expected arrival time was 10:00, people would interpret it as 10-something and show up at 10:45.
by anonymousiam | 2025-05-16 04:50:18+00:00
Turning this off doesn't necessarily stop your phone from participating in the "Find My" network, it just prevents your items from being seen. Your phone will continue to relay BLE/UWB traffic for others, and run down your battery more quickly.

Turning off Bluetooth seems to disable the traffic, but then you can no longer access your local Bluetooth devices.
by YZF | 2025-05-16 04:50:24+00:00
I work for "big tech" and have worked for others. Other than some CYA training there really isn't a lot of cross talk between engineering productivity and this sort of risk aversion.

Process, complexity, inefficiency is just something that happens for big companies and big software. Things slow down and then there's a negative feedback loop and things just go down hill. Innovators dilemma sort of stuff.
by DocTomoe | 2025-05-16 04:50:52+00:00
> "wegen den Regen" means something slightly different (more like: "because of _multiple_ rainfalls")

That's your natural feel of language, and you are deriving from casual use of Dativ plural ... but in these situations, Genitiv would be correct again (wegen DER Regen, but more clearly: wegen der Regenfälle, as Regen is uncountable (unlike, for example, Sturm/Stürme)).

Your example is vernacular German as spoken on the road, but grammatically, it is incorrect.

Yes, I am lots of fun at parties.
by kunzhi | 2025-05-16 04:51:18+00:00
> That’s a ridiculous theory

> I just don’t see any rational reason why anyone would do that.

Agree, which is why I think I will be correct. Back in August of 2016 I was joking with friends that if Trump won election he would declare his intent to annex Canada. Everyone had a good laugh at that. Now it's not so funny.
by NBJack | 2025-05-16 04:53:41+00:00
> "Having your problem addressed" is not a valid reason to post on Stack Overflow. You are expected before posting to have done enough analysis to the point where if your question is answered, you can solve the underlying problem yourself.

Your response to what was intended as a light-hearted joke tells me how passionate you are about the site. For what it's worth, thanks for all the time you've taken with a genuine interest in helping those in need.

Evaluating how much effort a user has put into their research before a post is really, really tricky, and difficult to quantify. I also know, first hand, the things that seem obvious with the experience I have aren't always the same way others (particularly beginners) see the same problem. For the (few) areas I feel remotely qualified to help in, there are hundreds of others that humble me. Getting a question effectively shut down as a duplicate (with seemingly little recourse) has been both frustrating and disheartening to the point I often just continued my journey elsewhere.