MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by gligierko | 2025-05-02 04:36:39+00:00
Location: Szczecin, Poland (EU) Remote: Yes Willing to relocate: No Technologies: iOS (Swift, SwiftUI, Objective-C), Metal, OpenGL, CoreData, CoreML, LLM fine-tuning, on-device AI deployment Experience: 19 years software development, 14+ years iOS Email: g5@pgligierko.com LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/greg-ligierko/

Hi there! Get in touch if you need an easy to work with and versatile lead iOS developer for your app or platform that needs good performance, slick user experience, and maybe some kind of AI. I'm a developer and cofounder (indie game) specializing in graphics optimization (Metal/OpenGL), real-time visualizations, and embedding ML models for on-device inference. Experience with LLM fine-tuning, vector search, and converting large models to compact on-device implementations. Led development of an App Store-featured app WikiNodes, and games with multiple awards. Recently built a word game system navigating 1.5M+ words with 110M+ relationships using Metal shaders at 60fps. Seeking remote senior/lead role.

Personal site: https://www.pgligierko.com/

Recent project: A pathmaking wordplay game: https://www.inotherwords.app
by RevEng | 2025-05-02 04:37:46+00:00
I'm seeing a lot of that in my own job. Every company has a top-down mandate to use more AI and a budget to back it up, my employer included. But we write software. Now this means we are chasing the AI dragon making LLM-based software in the hopes that we can capitalize on the hype. I would be more charitable in my description if I thought we were going after the high value targets, but our marketing strategy is literally "AI in everything". I'm all for selling what the customer wants to buy, but I don't think that's actually what we are making. Trying to make everything at once means making none of it well.

There's a huge disconnect between what customers think AI will do for them and what we are actually capable of delivering. When customers and colleagues alike complain that something doesn't work well and ask how we are going to fix it I have to keep reminding them "this is an open area of research in the field; nobody has found a solution to this yet." Nobody likes hearing that, but it's the truth.

It reminds me a lot of the dotcom bubble. People thought they could get rich just my making a web site that talked about their company. Even many of the biggest most successful early movers failed completely. We can all agree today that the Internet has provided tremendous value and really has changed the world, but not in the way most people thought it would then. Most of the startups being started didn't have a business plan beyond "it's on the web" and that's where I see a lot of the AI development right now. They think making the technology makes it profitable without asking what problems it solves better than our existing solutions. Some of what we are developing shows potential, but a lot of it is a solution in search of a problem.

It's definitely resulting in opportunity costs as we pour money and people into projects that only exist because we can put AI in the name, taking priority over projects that we had already planned and vetted with customers and market research. For a company that prides itself on slow and steady progress and long term stability, we sure are jumping head first into AI solutions and we are doing so at a rate that precludes any kind of design, testing, or quality control. We are selling shaky prototypes and our customers are happily paying for them. Everyone on both sides is so blinded by the hype that they are setting aside everything they've learned over decades of experience and success.

I can't wait for the hype to end so we can start talking about where LLMs and other generative AI are actually useful.
by jppope | 2025-05-02 04:37:52+00:00
I understand where you are coming from but it doesn't work like that. Sales people are have direct measurement where the rest of us have proxy measurement. They also typically hold pre-existing relationships with potential clients. They take on more risk than any other side of the business except for executives (who are often former sales people).

But if a sales person performs wildly above what is expected of them it can change EVERYTHING for a company. Engineers are actually similar in potential impact, but measurement is a challenge... which is why we are typically paid higher than other cost centers in a business but why we are not on variable comp.
by aussieguy1234 | 2025-05-02 04:38:12+00:00
Code review is one of the slowest parts of getting things done as an engineer. I can write code quite fast without AI but that can't speed up the code review.

I'm now regularly using AI to do a "pre code review" before getting the humans on my team to do the formal code review.

It catches obvious things, saving lots of back and forth with the reviewers and cutting delivery time back by days. It has also caught a couple of bugs, which I then fixed, saving even more days of back and forth.

I'm also using it to review others code, to help me spot bugs. It spotted an obscure one related to inconsistent dynamodb column naming in some rushed code during an incident, which I then pointed out, preventing a second incident. It was a 1000 line PHP file, with the inconsistent names far away from each other.

Using git cli on Linux, it's quite simple

`xclip -sel clip | git diff develop...feature/my-branch`. Copies the entire diff to my clipboard, then I paste it into a logic model like o3 to do the code review.
by somenameforme | 2025-05-02 04:40:24+00:00
I think comparing the wrongs of one administration vs another is not really viable. This is in large part because of partisanship but another issue is that we all value different things, and have different worldviews. For instance gerrymandering is an interesting thing, but I think it's entirely political theater, because there's a simple completely self-serving solution.

First off imagine an ostensibly completely fair system where each district was somehow made up of a random person within a state. Contrary to intuition, you would have actually just created the most gerrymandered system imaginable, where a party with only 51% of approval within a state would end up with 100% of representative seats, winning each and every district by 51%.

So counter-intuitively you do intentionally want to pack voters of a similar type into certain districts to create a fair system, which leads to all sorts of weird things, including the "solution"! It turns out the most fair system is to intentionally gerrymander! If you let each party with at least e.g. 1% of the vote take their turn creating an intentionally gerrymandered district for themselves (you can only 'district' your own voters), the self-maximizing solution is to create a 51% district in your favor. But if you mathematically work this out, this actually creates a perfectly fair (as close as possible to x% voters = x% of seats) result in the end! I can give an example if you find this unbelievable.

So all the rhetoric about trying to solve gerrymandering is mostly just theater and gesturing. The solution I gave is not some huge secret, even if most people are not aware of it. The only argument against it is that x% voters = x% seats is not desirable, but I think that's a rather fringe view. Geographic stuff doesn't mean what it used to, especially when there's millions of voters per district.
by Tadpole9181 | 2025-05-02 04:40:44+00:00
It's so much worse than that. They aren't even doing this because of money, they're doing it as a part of a culture war against liberals. Intelligence, patience, kindness, sustainability, deliberation - all signs of weakness to be purged and replaced with a caricature of masculinity sold to them by media.

It doesn't matter that it's better for their health, that it's economical, that it's important for their children, or even that it's a spiritually-mandated care for God's gift to man (for those that believe that sort of thing). Jesus is too woke anyway.
by permo-w | 2025-05-02 04:42:12+00:00
the current journal system works like this:

- the govt (i.e. taxpayers) and universities pay for research to be done

- once the research is done, the universities pay journals to review and publish their work

- the journals then get academics to review the work

- the journals do not pay the reviewers for this

- the journals then charge exorbitant fees for the universities and members of the public to view the work that they as a collective paid for

- from which exactly none of those fees go back to the original creators or funders of the research

-- so in conclusion, the journals get paid from both sides, supplier and consumer, at no point paying anything to the funders or creators of their product, except perhaps in tax. their sole costs are administrative, and maybe some printing, if they even still bother to do that

these institutions deserve to die. they are cancerous parasites leeching the veins of science, extracting money at every opportunity, taking funding from research, all for the sake of a service that can largely be boiled down to prestige for a price

>if journals ceased to exist tomorrow I doubt anyone here would volunteer to do the task of what the journals do now

this simply isn't true. there is a growing movement where academics do this very thing, founding their own fairer journals that aren't owned by Elsevier
by rixed | 2025-05-02 04:43:05+00:00
I did once write to about 20 of them about another topic.

First of all, this is surprisingly hard, even for someone whose expectations were already pretty low; Similarly hard as it is to contact anyone from an actual company: you have to go through circular FAQs and robots and I ultimately had to write a small scrapper to get the postal and/or email address of the people of interest.

One month later I received one answer, from one of the ~20 people I mailed (which did not told me anything I didn't already knew, but reasserted that my concern won't move the needle - fair enough).
by st-msl | 2025-05-02 04:44:48+00:00
Entourage | Founding CTO | Remote | Full-time ($230k+ equity)

We're building the protocol layer for collective AI agent intelligence. Our core insight is enabling mutually distrusting agents to exchange and validate experiences via a shared memory layer, transforming isolated learning into compounded network intelligence (think Git/OSS for agent experiences). This is crucial infrastructure for the future agent economy. Incubated by Moonsong Labs (Kluster.ai, Moonbeam, Tanssi).

Seeking a hands-on, visionary CTO & Co-founder to architect our system (AI, distributed systems, data, infra), build the founding engineering team, and drive technical strategy. This involves deep work in multi-agent systems, collective learning, secure execution, and potentially novel consensus/incentive mechanisms.

Must have: Proven leadership in AI infra (CTO/VP/Founder/Lead Scientist). Expertise in GenAI/RL/DL/MLOps/PyTorch. Experience with agent frameworks (LangGraph, AutoGen, etc.) and distributed/federated AI concepts. MSc required, PhD strongly preferred. Strategic thinker passionate about building developer ecosystems.

Nice to have: Blockchain/Web3/tokenomics experience.

Shape the future of agent collaboration: https://jobs.lever.co/moonsong-labs/a094e9ba-0beb-405c-9cda-...
by kazinator | 2025-05-02 04:45:45+00:00
Yes; if someone hijacks example.com's main A record, that gets caught at the SSL level.

If someone hijacks example.com's cookie record, that won't be caught; they just write themselves permission to have their page access example.com's cookies.

The same info could just be hosted by example.com (at some /.well-known path or whatever). The web could generate a lot of hits against that.

The DNS records could be (optionally?) signed. You'd need the SSL key of the domain to check the signature.
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 | 2025-05-02 04:45:58+00:00
Three threads on front page at same time, all covering same topic:

https://news.ycombinator.com/front?day=2025-05-01

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43856795

2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43852145

3. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43859814

None flagged for "repitition"
by clipsy | 2025-05-02 04:45:58+00:00
> The article mentions ‘ four years ago is unacceptable so it sounds like they want to retest new versions every four years, rather than every new version.

Your choice of quote makes it seem like you are misunderstanding or deliberately misrepresenting the article. In more context:

> "As we've said before, trials from four years ago conducted in people without natural immunity no longer suffice. A four-year-old trial is also not a blank check for new vaccines each year without clinical trial data, unlike the flu shot which has been tried and tested for more than 80 years," Nixon said in a statement he had earlier sent to The Washington Post. "The public deserves transparency and gold-standard science — especially with evolving products."

This states that a Covid vaccine passing the placebo-controlled study requirement 4 years ago will not suffice to accept updated versions of the same Covid vaccine -- not that vaccines and/or delivery mechanisms will only need to be tested every 4 years. More concisely: it's an upper bound, but not a lower bound.

Edit: Fixing up some grammar.
by JonChesterfield | 2025-05-02 04:45:58+00:00
Looks coherent and well considered to me. Oxide can't really get away with hiring friendly-but-incompetent. I liked this section from the written part, that looks worth doing as a self reflection exercise.

> What work have you found most challenging in your career and why?

> What work have you done that you are particularly proud of and why?

> When have you been happiest in your professional career and why?

> When have you been unhappiest in your professional career and why?
by mjevans | 2025-05-02 04:46:16+00:00
Manufacturing lead times are huge. E.G. Offhand CPUs take something like 5-7 years from initial plans to final tapeouts / production.

That's not even considering the issues of planning, permits, installing machines, training workers, etc, in a more down to earth facility like a generic food plant, or heck forbid something seriously regulated (I hope) like making prescription drugs.
by dukeofdoom | 2025-05-02 04:46:26+00:00
Fact is that service jobs don't pay as well, or well at all, and some not even not enough to live on your own, or enough to save for retirement, or to start a family. This resentment is from the young working class males, and the rage is building. You can look at the election in Canada, to see how the younger people voted, and its totally opposite of the boomers they increasingly want to MAID. Populism isn't necessarily bad, It's what gave birth to America. Raging hillbillies rebelling is kind of a thing though out humanity. But particularly successful in America, thanks to the constitution it spawned. And probably many more examples since ...
by stahtops | 2025-05-02 04:47:28+00:00
In the first few paragraphs the court states that it is anti-competitive for a company to set its profit margin to a factor that isn't linked to the value of its intellectual property.

Isn't this business 101? Charge what the market will bear? Unclear to me why the court thinks profit margin needs to be a factor of the value of goods/services/ip, or that the court is even capable of determining what that value is?
by cortesoft | 2025-05-02 04:47:37+00:00
Look, I know licensing decisions are important and a lot of people care a lot about them.

For me and my company, though, it just doesn't matter. We don't use redis in a way that would ever come into conflict with the license, so it really doesn't affect me. Redis didn't break my software stack with the license change. I am sorry, but I just can't get up the energy to care that much about which license they choose. If it helps them make money, fine go for it. I can't root that hard for the side Amazon is on.
by felsqualle | 2025-05-02 04:49:18+00:00
Hi, author here.

Caching is already enabled, but this doesn’t work for the highly dynamic parts of the site like version history and looking for recent changes.

And yes, it doesn’t work for volumetric attacks with tens of gbps. At this point I don’t think it is a targeted attack, probably a crawler gone really wild. But for this pattern, it simply works.
by abdullahkhalids | 2025-05-02 04:49:28+00:00
It's more complicated than that.

Pakistan's economy has been so bad for so many decades, no one wants to invest dollars into the country. The way the Pakistani government was able to set up power plants in the last decade was to give sovereign guarantees that investors will get fully paid back even if the power plant turns out to be economically unviable.

This means there is an agreed number in dollars that power plant investors get per year, whether the power plant sold 0 units or all possible units, and irrespective of the Rupee denominated price of electricity. They call it capacity charges.

So on this parameter alone it is in the interest of the Pakistani state to encourage demand as much as possible so power plants are used at full capacity. Unfortunately, there is a trade off. Many power plants are run on imported fossil fuels. So increased electricity demand places incredible strains on Pakistan's dollar reserves, which approached zero about 3 years ago. Similarly, fossil fuel price increase destroys the Pakistani economy, because something like 60% of imports are just fossil fuels.

Renewables cause similar problems in the short run, but hopefully in the long run they will be beneficial. Long run here means till after all the foreign power plant owners have been paid off in about 15 years.
by lytedev | 2025-05-02 04:50:22+00:00
I'm not aware of any ignorance (feigned or otherwise) on my part or in my comments about my ignoring the author's request. I'm aware that I am doing so and have made that clear and shared with others that also would choose to do so as they deem reasonable.

If you'll allow me to make assumptions, given that the author neither demands -- and is, in fact, explicit about not doing so -- nor licenses the software in such a way as to prevent this use case, I am guessing the author had at least some intent or foreknowledge around some folks wanting to swap the images. I further assumed that such use cases were for instances such as those the author wrote Anubis for to begin with, protecting small git forges with little resources. Now, I admit my server is not small and I have resources, and so am happy to pay for and donate towards open source software, but in this case the only option was to contact the author, which is something I deemed overkill in this case. I would simply wait and see how the author planned to approach the issue and revisit at that time.

Perhaps I've made the wrong move socially or ethically, which I think is at least a worthwhile discussion to have, and if I should decide I feel like I've made an ethically sideways choice, I will eat my words and make things right as best as I can.

However, if we're going to talk about intent, I an guessing there is a bit more nuance to bring to the conversation. Or perhaps the author can chime in or update the documentation to be more clear, because the liberal license says quite a lot about intent to me. I think it's at least a little disingenuous to say that the software license carries no intent behind it (spirit of open source and all that) and is "only" an enumeration of my rights.
by rbergmair | 2025-05-02 04:50:38+00:00
SEEKING WORK | Remote | Data Scientist, Data Engineer, Search Engineer, AI Backend Developer

Location: Germany

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Languages: English, German

Technologies: Python, Natural Language Processing, Search Engines, Machine Learning, Finance, Perl, Lua, Java, Linux, Golang, Haxe, scientific Py (numpy, scipy, pandas, matplotlib, scikit-learn), QGIS & geographical Py, nltk, word2vec, vector search, llms, elasticsearch, apache solr, lucene, quickwit, tantivy, PostgreSQL, clickhouse, mongodb, redshift, AWS, Azure, docker, git

Résumé/CV: https://richard.bergmair.eu/en/projects/resume.docx

Web: https://richard.bergmair.eu/

Email: richard.bergmair funny-at-shape urefpa25.onmicrosoft.com

Hours: CET (European), US East, Indian

Ph.D. in Natural Language Processing (NLP) from the University of Cambridge; recently: course on LLMs from M.I.T.'s AI & ML Certificate

13 years of freelancing

~ 10 years of that was heavy on Data Science & Machine Learning (Goldman Sachs, Telefónica Germany, Flowminder Foundation, ...)

~ 7 years of that was heavy on Search Engines & Natural Language Processing (DuckDuckGo, JUJU a.k.a. job-search-engine.com, ...)

some special interests: privacy & data protection (TÜV-certified), law & compliance, finance, bookkeeping
by JonChesterfield | 2025-05-02 04:53:05+00:00
There's a really sad failure mode for talented raw engineers that get no feedback in the first few years. They write a lot of code, and it's trash, but noone steers them in a better direction. Wait maybe three years on zero feedback and they've convinced themselves that their work is great and this new critical feedback they're getting can't possibly be right. You end up with clever and productive and shite, all mixed up in one indignant bug farm.
by dreadbeef | 2025-05-02 04:53:21+00:00
Location: US, NM

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Mostly no

Technologies: Data engineering (Hadoop onprem, AWS native), "Data science" (Python pandas polars duckdb holoviews bokeh), Signal processing, event processing, graph analysis, ML (Pytorch, tensorflow, burn), zmq, rust, Linux (NixOS, Debian+friends, rhel+friends)

Resume/CV: Upon request

Email:dreadbeef at protonmail.com
by gohil-yagnik | 2025-05-02 04:54:22+00:00
Location: Ahmedabad, India (IN) Remote: Yes Willing to relocate: Yes Technologies: Node, Typescript, Javascript, PostgreSQL, React, NestJS, Go, Git, Linux Résumé/CV: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y2yhqaaDfYOGihZKXhZRnQYGeetFT_1e3ZMIGeNl3m0/edit?usp=sharing Email: yagnikpc@gmail.com Preferred Location: Ahmedabad, Bengaluru
by rbergmair | 2025-05-02 04:54:56+00:00
Location: Germany

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Languages: English, German

Technologies: Python, Natural Language Processing, Search Engines, Machine Learning, Finance, Perl, Lua, Java, Linux, Golang, Haxe, scientific Py (numpy, scipy, pandas, matplotlib, scikit-learn), QGIS & geographical Py, nltk, word2vec, vector search, llms, elasticsearch, apache solr, lucene, quickwit, tantivy, PostgreSQL, clickhouse, mongodb, redshift, AWS, Azure, docker, git

Résumé/CV: https://richard.bergmair.eu/en/projects/resume.docx

Web: https://richard.bergmair.eu/

Email: richard.bergmair funny-at-shape urefpa25.onmicrosoft.com

Hours: CET (European), US East, Indian

Data Scientist, Data Engineer, Search Engineer, AI Backend Developer

Ph.D. in Natural Language Processing (NLP) from the University of Cambridge; recently: course on LLMs from M.I.T.'s AI & ML Certificate

13 years of freelancing

~ 10 years of that was heavy on Data Science & Machine Learning (Goldman Sachs, Telefónica Germany, Flowminder Foundation, ...)

~ 7 years of that was heavy on Search Engines & Natural Language Processing (DuckDuckGo, JUJU a.k.a. job-search-engine.com, ...)

some special interests: privacy & data protection (TÜV-certified), law & compliance, finance, bookkeeping
by hunter2_ | 2025-05-02 04:58:01+00:00
For the local OS and sustained workloads like video playback, yes, battery optimization is huge. For an individual app with bursty compute, less so, plus some of that inefficient code can run in the cloud instead, which is costly, but premium subscriptions can pay for it, and power plants are now colocated with data centers so power transmission cost is negligible. The incentive to be efficient is insufficient.