MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by proc0 | 2025-05-29 07:44:58+00:00
My mental model has been increasingly one of mining minerals or gems. Prompting and iterating is like slowly chipping away the rock of a deep cave with a pickaxe. You then find a gem after many different prompts. Eventually you exhaust that particular area that you're trying to prompt.

The best quality things are incidental to how the model was trained and the training data, and it is not consistent in a combinatorial way as one might expect. Still, there are a lot of interesting things that are going to be found and are going to go viral, as people find interesting gems.
by thicktarget | 2025-05-29 07:46:47+00:00
Many state of the art galaxy formation simulations use MHD, it does not however affect the formation of the Cosmic Web.

> MOND’s also been around since the early 1980s, but, in 2021, it finally developed a model – the Aether-Scalar-Tensor framework, or AeST – which ALSO maps perfectly onto the acoustic peaks revealed by WMAP and Planck. (It does it by proposing a new vector field and scalar field that duplicate the effects of Cold Dark Matter in the early universe

This doesn't contradict what I said. These models are not simply removing DM, I said people have tried with modified gravity models like these. First the models which fit the CMB were engineered to do, and each model has many more free parameters than dark matter. And note they have replaced invisible matter with an invisible matter-like field, it's not a simplification. Remembering that cold dark matter predicted these features, with fewer parameters and it is a physical model, not merely a fit. People have run simulations with the more basic MOND models, to find it cannot form realistic structure. Generally it forms structure more quickly than standard cosmology. Finding they need to add dark matter to their already modified gravity models to get something reasonable.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.00555

https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.05696

https://arxiv.org/abs/1309.6094
by _benedict | 2025-05-29 07:47:23+00:00
I think you may have misunderstood the GP and are perhaps misusing terminology. You cannot meaningfully scale vertically to improve write availability, and if you care about availability a single machine (and often a primary/secondary setup) is insufficient.

Even if you only care about scaling reads, eventually the 1:N write:read replica ratio will become too costly to maintain, and long before you reach that point you likely sacrifice real-time isolation guarantees to maintain your write availability and throughput.
Seeking beta users for Webhound, an AI agent that builds datasets from the web
by mfkhalil | 2025-05-29 07:47:26+00:00
TL;DR: We’re working on Webhound (https://webhound.ai), an AI agent that builds custom datasets from the web. We’re looking for beta users who will receive free unlimited access to the product while it is in beta.

----------

Hey everyone! After working on products in the search space for the past two years (since graduating from YC), we’ve spent the past few months building Webhound, a deep search agent that is purpose-built for data collection and aggregation.

It can search the web, visit websites, and watch YouTube videos. It has a working memory, an internal notepad which it uses to make and execute on plans, and a fleet of deep search worker agents which it can deploy in parallel to answer questions, extract information, and analyze search results.

We’re looking for beta users to help us iron out any kinks in the product. If any of this sounds interesting to you, please either drop a comment below or fill out this google form and we’ll send you an invite code to try it out: https://forms.gle/7Wip9toggKDRX2zAA

Also, here’s a video from my co-founder Theo giving a more in-depth guide to how to use Webhound and how it works

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGtQlgULYFw
by mreid | 2025-05-29 07:48:28+00:00
These are definitely thought-provoking questions and there are branches of mathematical philosophy such as constructivism and mathematical intuitionism that explore these.

Even if computation is not directly part of the laws of physics, knowing that humans and our computers are limited to things that are finite and computable might place limits on how we can appreciate how the universe works.

This is kind of a digression but if you (or others) are interested in some examples of things that are right on the edge of these questions you should check out the [busy beaver function](https://www.quantamagazine.org/amateur-mathematicians-find-f...). This tell you the maximum number of steps an n-state Turing machine can take before halting.
by chvid | 2025-05-29 07:48:47+00:00
I agree with you.

Of course, some benchmarks are still valid and will remain valid. Ie. we can make the models play chess against each other and score them on how well they do. But those benchmarks are in general fairly narrow. They don't really measure the "broader" intelligence we are after. And often, LLMs perform worse than specialized models. Ie. I don't think there is any LLM out there that can beat a traditional chess program (surely not using the same computing power).

What is really bad are the QA benchmarks which leak over time into the training data of the models. And sometimes, one can suspect even big labs have an economic incentive in scoring well on popular benchmarks which cause them to manipulate the models way beyond what is reasonable.

And taking a bunch of flawed benchmarks and combining them in indexes, saying this model is 2% better than that model is just completely meaningless but of course fun and draws a lot of attention.

So, yes, we are kind of left with vibe checks, but in theory, we could do more; take a bunch of models, double-blind, and have a big enough, representative group of human evaluators score them against each other on meaningful subjects.

Of course, done right, that would be really expensive. And those sponsoring might not like the result.
by TwoNineFive | 2025-05-29 07:48:50+00:00
A ton of Walmart's "Mainstay" brand items from China got price-jacked even before their earnings call. Items which were $0.99 before went to $3 or even $7. I have a price tracker that watches a bunch of this stuff.

Some of these items are now completely out of stock, even after the prices went up x3 or x7.
by herbst | 2025-05-29 07:50:34+00:00
I have a premium account as I really like the idea of just paying for the service I use.

I highly assume that the AI will be integrated in a way that you can mostly disable it or barely notice it if you aren't looking for it, like all the other paid or special features.

So many people never noticed stars, NFTS, a whole nft market, pay for messages, pay for groups, ... While using it ever day
by thom | 2025-05-29 07:51:15+00:00
You cannot say HTAP is dead when the alternative is so much complexity and so many moving parts. Most enterprises are burning huge amounts of resources literally just shuffling data around for zero business value.

The dream is a single data mesh presenting an SQL userland where I can write and join data from across the business with high throughput and low latency. With that, I can kill off basically every microservice that exists, and work on stuff that matters at pace, instead of half of all projects being infrastructure churn. We are close but we are not there yet and I will be furious if people stop trying to reach this endgame.
by b00ty4breakfast | 2025-05-29 07:52:51+00:00
hmm, I dunno if that simple example holds up very well. In the real world, folks do awful stuff that could be categorized as pestering individuals weaker than them than them, stuff much worse than stealing lunch money from little kids, and many of them never have to answer for any of it. Are we saying that someone who has successfully committed something really terrible like human trafficking without being caught is inherently not smart specifically because they are involved in human trafficking?
by j1elo | 2025-05-29 07:54:52+00:00
The list of things that devs should "never ever" do grows by the day... turns out most things, even the simplest of things, even sometimes the most apparently trivial things (like naming of people, too) are in reality almost always much more complex and difficult to get right on the first go than expected.

But then discussion ensues about how programmers these days add libraries as dependencies for almost everything! :-)

I guess at some point a middle ground must be found.
by krutie | 2025-05-29 07:55:46+00:00
Thanks Danbars! You’re right, animated SVGs are more lightweight and ideal for web-native use.

But the main reason we export as downloadable video (MP4/WebM) is to support creators who want to embed these animated diagrams directly into larger videos — think YouTube explainers, Shorts, or even Instagram reels. We offer common social media presets to make that workflow possible.

That said, I’m genuinely curious — in your experience, where does animated SVG fit into your workflow? Is it mostly for embedding on websites, apps, docs, or something else? We are already thinking about Gif export, but I’d love to understand this use-case as well.
by HenryBemis | 2025-05-29 07:56:31+00:00
Happened to me back in 2009 and I couldn't believe it. I got paid for 1 month to sit around, drink coffee, answer questions. Then I moved and got a 30% raise.

This 1 month also helped me refresh all my knowledge, go through my notes, etc. "In teaching I learn, and in learning I teach". Having around 100 people asking me questions from all over the 'region' helped me put things back together, see connecting dots that I missed before, and I left there with a new (better) set of notes about myself and how to do things.
by aeneas_ory | 2025-05-29 07:57:19+00:00
To put this into some context: Ory as a product has grown a lot since then, and while it‘s not possible to have „logical user-pool multi-tenancy“ (logical in the sense that it‘s not running multiple instances) on the open source core alone, it certainly is possible on any of the paid-for options!

And generally speaking , there are a couple of examples out there that use the OSS core for multi-tenancy with the deployment scenario, but usually for a finite amount of tenants.

Our thinking behind this is that mostly direct competitors would need true multi tenancy, where every tenant has their own user pools, configs, URLs and so on.
by esperent | 2025-05-29 07:57:22+00:00
> To me, a primary goal of a scientist is to convince other people of their ideas through evidenced arguments.

That's an idealized version of science that unfortunately rarely holds up in the real world. There's a reason for the old maxim that science advances by the death of old scientists. Science is a human endeavor, massive, complicated, political. Much as we like to imagine scientists as pure and rational beings, that's never a true description of a human being.

For an outsider looking to get attention to their fringe theory, it is never enough to just calmly state it and let people logically accept it. The presentation does matter.
by pakitan | 2025-05-29 07:57:41+00:00
Sounds very much sequential, even if very difficult:

> The performer's first reply is not an entire poem. Rather, the poem is created one line at a time. The first questioner speaks and the performer replies with one line. The second questioner then speaks and the performer replies with the previous first line and then a new line. The third questioner then speaks and performer gives his previous first and second lines and a new line and so on. That is, each questioner demands a new task or restriction, the previous tasks, the previous lines of the poem, and a new line.
by jonahx | 2025-05-29 07:57:51+00:00
> for proofs of finite length in general, not just some fixed finite length.

For a brute force proof finder, for your program to be guaranteed to finish in theory, you have to pick a length. So it is fixed. Ofc you can choose whatever length you want. But you don't have that constraint with the halting oracle. Perhaps we're saying the same thing?
by drewhk | 2025-05-29 07:58:02+00:00
It is also interesting to consider, that if all transcendental numbers exist physically, then it basically means that there is an experiment that yields the Nth digit of such a number (for any N assuming unlimited physical resources to realize the experiment). If such experiment does NOT exist though, then there cannot be any relevance physically of that Nth digit (otherwise the "relevance" would materialize as an observable physical effect - an experiment!). This is something Turing machines cannot do for uncomputable numbers, like Chaitin's Omega, etc. We can yield the Nth digit of _many_ transcendental numbers (PI, e, trig functions, etc), but not all of them. It is so interesting that physics, machines and the existence of all the real numbers are so intertwined!

Of course one can also ponder, even if a mathematical object is "un-physical", can it be still useful? Like negative frequencies in fourier analysis, non-real solutions to differential equations, etc. Under what conditions can "un-physical" numbers be still useful? How does this relate to physical observation?

And just for the fun of it: when you execute unit tests, you are actually performing physical experiments, trying to falsify your "theory" (program) :D
by octo888 | 2025-05-29 07:58:31+00:00
> the WTD makes mandatory a number of things that cannot be opted out from

Let's stop cherry picking. These CAN be altered by an employment contract:

> the 20-minute rest break for those who expect to work more than 6 hours in a day

> the daily rest of 11 hours in 24 hours

> the weekly rest of 24 hours in every 7 days or 48 hours in every 14 days

> the 17-week reference period for night work

> the average hours for night workers working with special hazards

> The reference period for working out the 48-hour average maximum working week can be changed from 17 weeks to 52 weeks

This is exactly my issue with these big EU directives and regulations. The EU gets massive press about the headline issue, and the nuance, opt-outs etc get swept under the rug
by pjmlp | 2025-05-29 07:59:09+00:00
I find it a pity the lack of acknowledgement of the CSX/VBX effort.

https://ttu.github.io/dotnet-script/

Or that they on the wisdom of the C# Language Runtime, decided on an incompatible approach to how F# references dependencies on its scripts.

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/fsharp/tools/fsharp...
by Daisywh | 2025-05-29 07:59:36+00:00
Yeah, I always think of the old beat up plastic set at the park near my house. Some of the pieces were scratched up, a few were kinda melted probably left in the sun too long. But that’s what I learned on, so it still feels like “real” chess to me.

It’s weird how no matter how fancy the sets get, that scruffy one is still the one I picture first.
by olllo | 2025-05-29 08:00:19+00:00
I’ve just relaunched https://olllo.top with a brand-new design, logo, and overall presentation. Data.olllo is a no-code data analysis tool that runs on your desktop, aimed at helping users analyze large files quickly, privately, and without needing to write code.

What’s new: • Fresh branding and visual identity (logo, colors, layout) • Simplified homepage with clearer descriptions of what Data.olllo does • Improved demo experience and easier navigation • A focus on real-time, local data handling – no uploads required

You can try it directly on Windows (7 days trail after sign up), and I’d love to hear your feedback—whether about the design, the messaging, or the tool itself.

This is something I’ve been building personally, and I’m here to answer questions and gather thoughts.

Thanks for checking it out!

→ https://olllo.top
by josh_s | 2025-05-29 08:00:19+00:00
At a national and global scale, farmers moved to the cities to get work in factories operating the new machinery of industrialisation. And some were, or their children were, educated to become clerks based on a systemic development of education, ie RWr+aR. These clerks were critical to help account for all the widgets being created by industrialisation.

Point being, it was not accidental what happened to farmers during industrialisation of food production. they had a path. they were not left with nothing. so back to you. what next for out of work drivers or their children?
by DavideNL | 2025-05-29 08:01:14+00:00
> their VPN randomly disconnects again and again, once even without the killswitch being activated.

I have no idea which OS you are on, but for me it has been working flawlessly for many years, on iOS (using WireGuard.)

One exception: Apple blocking their services when using a VPN IP-address, on macOS. But that's an Apple issue of course...

Even years back, when Proton still had frequent connection/App issues, my phone using Mullvad was very reliable, and hasn't failed even once.
by HenryBemis | 2025-05-29 08:01:23+00:00
There are two parts on this approach. The 1st one is the positive "hey, chillax, transfer knowledge, don't be stressed, etc." The 2nd is security: "this guy cannot be trusted to 'touch' anything, we don't want him to plant a timebomb, we don't want him to mess things up, etc."

It's not 'polite' to bring up the 2nd, but it _is_ there. Imagine me/you/him/her doing something wrong and bringing down Prod for X hours. Then imagine your manager telling the director "oh, and btw he submitted his resignation 2 weeks ago, and in confidence he told me he goes to our ABC competitor". That-Looks-BAD, even if it was the most honest of mistakes and even someone else's fault. Once you 'stop playing', don't touch that jenga tower!!
by tapirl | 2025-05-29 08:02:32+00:00
I believe future AI systems can make correct answers. The rule is clearly specified in Go specification.

BTW, I haven't found an AI system can get the correct output for the following Go code:

package main import "fmt" func main() { for counter, n := 0, 2; n >= 0; n-- { defer func(v int) { fmt.Print("#", counter, ": ", v, "\n") counter++ }(n) } }
by albumen | 2025-05-29 08:03:05+00:00
You're right, companies should value long-term employees. But what if that person wants to be promoted, or move elsewhere?

Skills can be handed over; it depends on the complexity. Also, two people can be equally skilled, but not have the same knowledge to operate effectively in a specific company position. Eg. your new IT guy needs to know the code to the fireproof safe where the tapes are stored.
by tetha | 2025-05-29 08:03:39+00:00
Some larger companies do this in disaster drills or other emergency preparations as well. You give the team the task to stand up a database cluster from scratch and pull a dataset into it - and none of the seniors may be contacted. This is pretty effective at rooting out such knowledge silos. And it can build confidence in the other team members once they manage to do it. The main drawback is that it's just non-revenue generating preventative work.

As an IT/Admin/SRE team, we've also found that training isn't just good for the industry, but it also helps to keep such knowledge islands in check. I currently need to make sure that my junior is able to take over most crucial daily tasks, and in the future, all of my important technical tasks - and he's doing wonderful. Though that's now a staffing thing, which costs money.

In the end, it's a question how sustainable a company wants to be long-term I think.
by vixen99 | 2025-05-29 08:04:20+00:00
> but it will only work as a tool, driven by the whole human brain and its consciousness.

That is only an article of faith. Is the initial bunch of cells formed via the fusion of an ovum and a sperm (you and I) conscious? Most people think not. But at a certain level of complexity they change their minds and create laws to protect that lump of cells. We and those models are built by and from a selection of components of our universe. Logically the phenomenon of matter becoming aware of itself is probably not restricted to certain configurations of some of those components i.e., hydrogen, carbon and nitrogen etc., but is related to the complexity of the allowable arrangement of any of those 118 elements including silicon.

I'm probably totally wrong on this but is the 'avoidance of shutdown' on the part of some AI models, a glimpse of something interesting?
by x-complexity | 2025-05-29 08:04:27+00:00
> Advertising is theft of attention which is extremely limited in supply. I'd even say it's mind rape. They forcibly insert their brands and trademarks into our minds without our consent. They deliberately ignore and circumvent any and all attempts to resist.

(1): Attention from any given person is fundamentally limited. Said attention has an inherent value.

(2): Running *any* website costs money, doubly so for video playback. This is not even mentioning the moderation & copyright mechanisms that a video sharing platform like YouTube has to have in order to keep copyright lawsuits away from YouTube itself.

(3): Products do not spawn in with their presence known to the general population. For the product to be successful, people have to know it exists in the first place.

Advertising is the consequence of wanting attention to be drawn to (3), and willing to pay for said attention on a given platform (1). (2)'s costs, alongside any payouts to videographers that garner attention to their videos, can be paid for with the money in (1), by placing ads around/before the video itself.

You're allowed to not have advertising shown to you, but in exchange, the money to pay for (2) & the people who made the video have to come from somewhere.
by fmajid | 2025-05-29 08:06:58+00:00
This anti-AI talk is a coping mechanism, but completely unproductive. People don't like the possible or likely consequences of AI that delivers even 10% of its boosters' outlandish promises, and instead of planning how to organize politically to mitigate them, just plug their ears and say "la la la I can't hear you".

I have a friend who is a translator, and all her translation work has dried out. All she gets now is tedious jobs reviewing and correcting machine translations. As Simon Willison points out, writing code is much more gratifying than code reviews, and I can easily imagine a future where the only work left for most human coders is code reviews of LLM-generated code, which would be terrible for job satisfaction.

The early 19th Century Luddites, skilled craftspeople and weavers understood the benefits of mechanized looms, but demanded the profits be shared equitably with the displaced workers. When the proto-capitalists, who largely overlapped with the feudal aristocracy that rules Britain to this day, refused, they engaged in a guerrilla campaign of breaking looms, and the elite establishment responded by sending more soldiers to quell the uprising than were fighting Napoleon, and hanging people for breaking frames:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_of_Stocking_Frames...

Ironically the kinds of jobs hardest for AI to replace are those requiring manual dexterity and skill, often derided as "unskilled work" by snobbish white-collar academics and workers.
by tr33house | 2025-05-29 08:07:23+00:00
When I was in college, I'd come up with a similar concept for creating addresses for the developing world. For those that don't know, most of the world actually doesn't have any address and the governments have no plans in place to solve this.

Basically have a third party DNS like company and all it would do would be digital addressing. Since we would also deliver the mail, there was the added benefit of not sharing your actual address, temporarily sharing it, having alternatives based on day, kind etc and potentially just sharing your phone number as your address etc etc

Looking back, this would've been a great company but one that almost no investor would fund