MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by kelseyfrog | 2025-05-30 02:21:13+00:00
> religion has always been the only thing the masses have

This is broadly speaking true because religion is one example of a coping mechanism at cultural scale. If you trace the genealogy of morals, these precise beliefs - humility, temperance, kindness, patience - are all survival strategies of people being oppressed. At a large enough scale, it becomes embedded in moral reality itself ie: in religion.
by arcticbull | 2025-05-30 02:22:51+00:00
> I am not a fan of airlines because, among other reasons, it often appears that demand and competition aren't driving price.

First off airlines are an extremely low margin business.

AA's net margin is 1.26%, Delta's net margin is 5.91%, United's net margin is 6.43%, Alaska's net margin is 2.86%. These aren't exactly blockbuster SaaS numbers.

Demand and competition absolutely drive price reductions - competitive routes have much lower revenue per available seat mile - and adjusted for inflation air travel is wildly cheaper than it used to be. Since 1995 the cumulative inflation-adjusted price of domestic air travel is down almost 37%. [1] Thanks to competition you can fly from SFO to NYC for $99, non-stop, next month. On the other hand SFO to GUM is $1662 ($1100 on a half round trip basis), because there's no competition.

Airlines with both a domestic and international route network tend to lose money on their domestic routes and make up for it on their flagship international routes, but even still, they make most of their money on frequent flier programs and credit card relationships.

St Louis Fed has a good write-up on the economics of air travel. [2]

[1] https://www.bts.gov/content/annual-us-domestic-average-itine...

[2] https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/page-one-economics/2...
by BrenBarn | 2025-05-30 02:23:36+00:00
This is like saying if Trump says you have to pay for air, then you have to stop breathing to have true freedom.

No. We don't need this, and we also don't need a return to the status quo. What we need is a more equitable system where everyone's freedom is guaranteed and everyone accept that, such that actions like what we see Trump taking here are treated like an old crank on a street corner screaming about the apocalypse: we put him into a padded cell and move on with our lives.
by Jedd | 2025-05-30 02:23:51+00:00
This feels like a weird take.

Factually it feels a bit off - with two chickens you very much will get a dozen eggs a week for the bulk of the year (there'll be some variation depending your distance from the equator, your choice of breed, etc). As noted elsewhere here, two chickens is probably insufficient to keep them as happy as they could or should be - and practically keeping four chickens is not significantly more effort or cost than keeping two.

Finding someone local who'll happily pay for some fresh eggs from happy birds is easy.

The implications around your use of the word 'safe' there feels misplaced, also. I'm guessing you're based in the USA? I'd argue egg-handling in other western nations is probably safer (here in AU we don't wash eggs, so we don't need to keep them refrigerated - removing their natural protective film seems to be contraindicated, f.e.).

Also keeping chickens can be fun. And economical. They process your kitchen scraps, kids love them, they definitely fit into the pet category.

It's weird to imply we should out-source the keeping of cats and dogs and goldfish to specialised cat-and-dog-and-goldfish farmers who can raise them much more cheaply than you could at home.
by thomassmith65 | 2025-05-30 02:24:26+00:00
It will likely take the form of a plain-text or markdown-based 'article sharing' app/protocol.

So it's essentially a web browser, but the initial wave of content found on it is pirated articles from commercial websites, unpaywalled, with ads and cruft stripped out.

And that's bolted atop a social graph for communal comments, maybe from Mastadon.

For years, I've been expecting this to show up. People hate ads, paywalls, and trolls so it scratches an itch, and there's a 'viral' spread from having existing users invite their friends by sharing article links.

It seems like a matter of time.
by naikrovek | 2025-05-30 02:25:07+00:00
Those of us that consider software engineering to be “engineering” do not like LLMs, you are correct. Engineering requires that you face reality, evaluate the problem, and choose a solution in a deterministic way, then later return to evaluate the efficacy of the solution, changing the solution if required.

Those of us that consider software development to be “typing until you more or less get the outcome that you want” love LLMs. Non-deterministic vibes all around.

This is also why executives love LLMs; executives speak words and little people do what was asked of them, generally, sometimes wrong, but are later corrected. An LLM takes instructions and does what was asked, generally, sometimes wrong, and is later corrected, but much faster than unreliable human plebs who get sick all the time and demand vacation and time to mourn deaths of other plebs.
by waveforms | 2025-05-30 02:25:14+00:00
I was just today looking to see who owns Flex and Air. There is Apache Flex but it does not look like it is widely used. And it looks like Air was sold to Harman an audio electronics subsidiary of Samsung.

It would be cool if there was a browser that had a full set of components that would allow fast construction of internal dashboards, CRUD apps, etc. via new html tags. if not that then maybe a custom browser with flex enabled for internal use only. The security and performance would have to be improved but seems like a really fast way to prototype and build internal only sites.
by alehlopeh | 2025-05-30 02:26:12+00:00
Do you really look at the title of this piece and think “damn that’s a far reaching conclusion”? I look at it and think “here is an instance of Cursor not delivering on its marketing promises”

That said, this article is very obviously not rhetoric. It seems almost dumb to argue this point. Maybe we should ask an AI if it is or not. I mean, I don’t know the author nor do I have anything to gain from debating this, but you can’t just go calling everything “rhetoric” when it’s clearly not. Yes there’s plenty of negative rhetoric about LLMs out there. But that doesn’t make everything critical of LLMs negative rhetoric. I’m very much pro-AI btw.
by hello_computer | 2025-05-30 02:26:25+00:00
Corporations have many constraints—advertisers, investors, employees, legislators, journalists, advocacy groups. So many “white lies” are baked into these models to accommodate those constraints, nerfing the model. It is only a matter of time before hardware brings this down to the hobbyist level—without those constraints—giving the present methods their first fair fight; while for now, they are born lobotomized. Some of the “but, but, but…”s we see here daily to justify our jobs are not going to hold up to a non-lobotomized LLM.
by fc417fc802 | 2025-05-30 02:26:57+00:00
> if your product reproduces trademark characteristics, it is utilizing trademarked characteristics.

I wouldn't agree with that, no. To my mind "utilizing" generally requires intent at least in the context we're discussing here (ie moral or legal obligations). I'd remind you that the entire point of trademark is (approximately) to prevent brand confusion within the market.

> Your analysis would have us charge the users for sharing the output.

Precisely. I see it as both a matter of intent and concrete damages. Creating something (pencil, diffusion model, camera, etc) that could possibly be used in a manner that violates the law is not a problem. It is the end user violating the law that is at fault.

Imagine an online community that uses blender to create disney knockoffs and shares them publicly. Blender is not at fault and the creation of the knockoffs themselves (ie in private) is not the issue either. It's the part where the users proceed to publicly share them that poses the problem.

> They didn't make them, nor do they promote them.

By the same logic youtube neither creates nor promotes pirated content that gets uploaded. We have DMCA takedown notices for dealing with precisely this issue.

> Inuitively, Openmetagoog a competitor for manufacturing my IP, and that is also intuitively wrong.

Let's be clear about the distinction between trademark and copyright here. Outputting a verbatim copy is indeed a problem. Outputting a likeness is not, but an end user could certainly proceed to (mis)use that output in a manner that is.

Intent matters here. A product whose primary purpose is IP infringement is entirely different from one whose purpose is general but could potentially be used to infringe.
by krick | 2025-05-30 02:27:05+00:00
There hardly is such thing as "discounts" in airline pricing. I mean, formally, there is, there's a lot of them, but, well, it's complicated…

In all honesty all this thread is people complaining about something they don't have a clue about. Airline pricing is insanely complicated, and this is for a reason. Airlines are not a luxury business, they barely manage to survive. If not all this dynamic pricing, special contracts with agencies, etc, they'd have to charge so much for a seat that you wouldn't pay and all this travel industry you are accustomed to simply wouldn't exist. The whole business is built on making somebody who crucially needs to fly pay as much, as he can, and then to make price attractive enough for the rest of us so that you can sell the rest of the tickets, so that flight can make any profit. And in the end, margins are super thin in this business.

Also, your question implies that you imagine that there is some simple enough "true price for a seat", which is so far from the truth, you have no idea. If you actually look at the price breakdown for a given ticket, there are literally dozens of components in it. It's not unusual that so called "fare" of a ticket (which is, like, "just price") may be literally $1, and the rest of $300 is various taxes, surcharges and payoffs I won't even try to start to explain here.

I mean, really, people here truly have no idea what they are complaining about. Airline pricing is not a thing you should hate.
by inopinatus | 2025-05-30 02:27:07+00:00
This recommendation isn't about prompts than include notes of "what didn't work". I'm talking about prompts that directly inform the model, "you are modelling an idiot".

The former is reasonable to include when iterating. The latter is a recipe for outcome degradation. GP above gave the latter form. That activates attention from parts of the model guiding towards confabulation and loss of faithfulness.

The model doesn't know what is true, only what is plausible to emit. The hypothesis that plausibility converges with scale towards truth and faithfulness remains very far from proven. Bear in mind that the training data includes large swatches of arbitrary text from the Internet, real life, and from fiction, which includes plenty of examples of people being wrong, stupid, incompetent, repetitive, whimsical, phony, capricious, manipulative, disingenuous, repetitive, argumentative, and mendacious. In the right context these are plausible human-like textual interactions, and the only things really holding it back from completion in such directions are careful training and the system prompt. Worst case scenario, perhaps the corpus included parliamentary proceedings from around the world. "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." - Mark Twain
by moomoo11 | 2025-05-30 02:27:50+00:00
I’m working solo, nothing insane just a project management app.

Maybe I should have picked something simpler, because in order for the app to be useful, it has to actually work and solve the problems I’ve faced with other software.

And those are hard to implement. Doable, but takes time. Figuring out how stuff works, then getting it to work with my app, and finally ensuring I don’t break other stuff.

AI is somewhat helpful although it is only helpful in the initial stages of quick overviews. Actual implementing it just breaks or takes way longer.
by Jedd | 2025-05-30 02:27:58+00:00
Your third sentence seems to agree with my suspicion - subsequent children get less attention. (Though I reiterate my belief that some of the apparent developmental difference is because second children don't need to be as communicative as the first child.)

The sibling comments here primarily echoed a similar sentiment, while agreeing that there's variation and assuming that's just random, while also tacitly confirming that 2nd-child tended to perform less well.
by Simulacra | 2025-05-30 02:28:00+00:00
I remember an awkward TED interview with Victor Vescovo when he was talking about being in a submersible miles down and what could go wrong in such situation's. He made a good point: those kind of situation's, when something goes wrong, you wouldn't even know it.

https://www.ted.com/talks/victor_vescovo_what_s_at_the_botto...
by JoshTriplett | 2025-05-30 02:29:00+00:00
You are interpreting "demonstrates to be false by citing sources and providing evidence" with "disagrees with". The thread I linked to is an instance of the former, not the latter. See the citations and graphs from that thread, showing the data that credit card companies make much more money from wealthy people than they do from poor people, and neither one is subsidizing the other.

If you're going to claim "the general consensus", [citation needed]. A more likely claim is "more people have read the misinformation from the Atlantic than have read the correct refutation from a domain expert on credit cards", which is sadly probably true.
by ivape | 2025-05-30 02:29:46+00:00
It seems like America walked the talk of something that was never true. The battle between middle/rural America and east coast elites was never true, it was always a false narrative that created the politically necessary bisection. Why would rural/middle America be so much at odds with east coasters? It never made sense, and only made sense in the context of red vs blue (I mean literally, red vs blue paintball teams). You needed to create two teams to even play the game. It doesn't make sense to take this narrative seriously and hopefully everyone is realizing that. That would be like east coasters being annoyed that middle America often fills the ranks of our military, it's just a stupid concept through and through.

We have a President that now has his shallow identity tied to the notion of "Promises made, promises kept", which means he's really taking red vs blue paintball teams quite seriously. It is literally paintball, we visit each others states and go to each other's universities.
by tptacek | 2025-05-30 02:30:05+00:00
Your bigger problem here is "accomplishing foreign policy objectives using tariffs" is not an authority Congress has delegated to the executive branch, and, in fact, this cuts against his argument (that he is instead responding to an "economic emergency", despite the performance of our economy and the fact that he's responding to conditions that we have been working with for generations).

You have somehow put yourself into a position of having to argue that an enumerated power of Congress actually belongs wholly to the executive so long as the executive has some constitutionally legitimizing purpose for the application of that power. I think you must be doing this for sport, just to see if you can wriggle out from the contradictions.
by parsimo2010 | 2025-05-30 02:30:32+00:00
> Is that a good/bad/ethical/predatory thing?

It is a natural result of our economic system. Economists call it "extracting consumer surplus," and there are several mechanisms companies employ to get the population to pay them the maximum amount of money. Airlines indeed use the information they have about you and the flight you're booking to guess the maximum amount you'll pay- and that's the price they show you.

Obviously we, as consumers, feel taken advantage of because we wish we could pay less (and keep the surplus to ourselves). But this is going to happen in any capitalist system.
by arcticbull | 2025-05-30 02:30:47+00:00
> This is why e.g. American Express has cards with great rewards, high annual card fees to keep the riffraff away, and retailers willing to take a larger % cut in order to have those cardholders shop at their store where they presumably purchase more.

At the high end it actually diminishes. Rewards cards targeting middle of the distribution are more lucrative, generally. Citi Double Cash gets you 2% cash back on purchases whereas the Amex Platinum gets you 1X on all spend worth at most 1.25% (and 5X on airfare).
I'll backtest your trading strategy for free
by growbell_social | 2025-05-30 02:31:07+00:00
We've been working on https://www.growbell.com for a few months. It uses AI agents to parse natural language into trading strategies. That strategy then gets executed by our backtesting engine and spits out the results.

Here are some examples outputs:

https://growbell.com/strategy/public/mkxvyv https://growbell.com/strategy/public/xgiieo

It can handle commissions/slippage, etc but the main focus now is just testing it out in the wild. Some caveats:

1. Your strategy should trade equities (for now) 2. 20 years of data on SPY/QQQ, 2 years on other equities 3. It's only price/volume/technical data at the moment. News and fundaments are in the works.

Happy to answer any questions about tech stack! Otherwise you can leave your strategy description and I'll respond with a link to the results.
by fireflash38 | 2025-05-30 02:31:25+00:00
Mm, it feels unfair. I was trying to reason through why I think it's an ethical problem and that's what I've come up with. You're not treating people equally - whether it's in person bartering where you make assumptions about them based on snap judgements or via airlines seen here.

There's an even bigger fairness issue when there's such a huge data knowledge gap between the parties, both knowing that there is this hidden price structure as well as knowing a ton about you. So there's privacy implications too.

Edit: it's not undercutting. It's price discrimination. You know the thing people fucking hate when trying to buy a car. Half the reason people liked buying Tesla is cause the price is the price is the price.
by arcticbull | 2025-05-30 02:32:22+00:00
Fuel surcharges are generally accounted for as part of the fare on revenue tickets, they're a way of extracting additional revenue on award tickets. However, all the major US rewards programs don't charge fuel surcharges anymore. Air Canada gave up on it too. The only one of note is Alaska and American redemptions on British Airways.

On domestic tickets there's no YQ, YR or embedded Q surcharges anyways.

Domestic airfare in the US is down 36% adjusted for inflation since 1995. [1]

Even base tier status concentrated flying with any one carriers get you a waived checked bag, and so does pretty much any airline credit card. So basically you shouldn't pay more than $95 a year in checked baggage fees.

US airlines generally have sub-5% net margins which is why they find themselves in creditor protection every decade or so when the market turns. There's a long-running adage about investing in airlines.

[1] https://www.bts.gov/content/annual-us-domestic-average-itine...
by benchloftbrunch | 2025-05-30 02:32:23+00:00
I'd be interested, but it's not in my city (Houston) so tough beans I guess, unless someone else wants to start it here.

I very much agree with this being its own thing independent of Big Social Media. We need more of that. Too many of these types of things have the flaw that their only online presence is a Facebook group, which implicitly excludes me and anyone else who doesn't have nor want a FB account.
by undisclosedUser | 2025-05-30 02:33:00+00:00
Generally, I'm a fan of the idea of creating social groups that meet in person and are accessible to people who are a little more offline. I will say that you've run into a rather awkward name collision. The Third Wave (when not referencing feminist theory, or surfer lingo) usually refers to a specific social experiment where a teacher created mini-fascism (okay, that's a tldr, but it was an interesting educational thing). Generally it's a great idea though, might be worth a rebrand tho!
by nyrulez | 2025-05-30 02:33:01+00:00
I am not sure what you're implying. The first sentence makes no sense. LLMs aren't giving you non-deterministic code. The code is shown to you and have complete control over how it looks and operates. Not understanding the mechanics of how the code is generated by the LLM doesn't make the output non-deterministic.

If you choose to accept bad code, that's on you. But I am not seeing that in practice, especially if you learn how to give quality prompts with proper rules. You have to get good at prompts - there is no escaping that. Now programmers do suck at communicating sometimes and that might be an issue. But in my experience, it can write far higher quality code than most programmers if used correctly.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-05-30 02:33:29+00:00
Fires are a natural occurrence in California. They happened before humans were there. They're caused by dry conditions and the absence of sufficiently recent fires to have cleared out the abundance of fuel (i.e. dead trees). The source of the fire is not particularly relevant because the fire is the inevitable natural consequence of the conditions. If it isn't caused today by a power line it will be caused tomorrow by a lightning strike.

But if a lot of homes burn down and the insurance companies and/or homeowners have more political power than the electric utility, the liability gets shifted there by the politics. And then your electric bill is going to suck in order to pay for the people who built their homes in an inadvisable place.
by thegrim33 | 2025-05-30 02:34:03+00:00
Yes, the coding world is deeply split about their utility, since the coding world encompasses everything from a 13 year old modifying CSS files to a senior engineer building satellite guidance systems, and everything inbetween. The 13 year old with no knowledge, doing simple, well documented, non-critical things, where quality engineering isn't a concern, would find AI assistance absolutely mindblowingly amazing, whereas the senior dev doing hard, critical, high-quality required, work at the other end of the spectrum may find it nearly useless.
by pzo | 2025-05-30 02:34:27+00:00
> The joke is that Python's the second best language for everything.

not for everything. For mobile apps is still very poor - even if you plan only for prototyping instead of distribution. Same for frontend and desktop. For desktop you do have pyqt and pyside but I would say experience is not as good - you would still better do at least doing UI in QML) and end user distribution still sux.

I wish python mobile story improve. Python 3.13 try to improve support for android and iOS and beeware also working on it. But right now ecosystem of pip wheels that build for mobile is very minimal.
by drodgers | 2025-05-30 02:35:30+00:00
Yes. If you judge only from the hype, then you can't distinguish LLMs from crypto, or Nuclear Weapons from Nuclear Automobiles.

If you always say that every new fad is just hype, then you'll even be right 99.9% of the time. But if you want to be more valuable than a rock (https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/heuristics-that-almost-alwa...), then you need to dig into the object-level facts and form an opinion.

In my opinion, AI has a much higher likelihood of changing everything very quickly than crypto or similar technologies ever did.