MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by trollbridge | 2025-05-13 13:22:35+00:00
Good DPT with a team of PTs and PTAs, and possibly also see a DO who can do osteopathic manipulation therapy (OMT).

Start with a dedicated orthopaedic practice who will make referrals to the above and then order CATs/MRIs if the above isn’t helping and evaluate if surgery is necessary.

One challenge is that it is hard to even know how to navigate all this. LLMs could actually help with that.
by card_zero | 2025-05-13 13:23:44+00:00
I don't trust that shady-looking narrator. 5% of what exactly? Do you mean that testing for x >= start and < end is only 5% as expensive as assigning an int to array[x]?

Or would bounds checking in fact more than double the time to insert a bunch of ints separately into the array, testing where each one is being put? Or ... is there some gimmick to avoid all those individual checks, I don't know.
by sgarland | 2025-05-13 13:23:56+00:00
I’m sure you know this, but a reminder that modern devices cache a hell of a lot, even when you “quit” such that subsequent launches are faster. Such is the benefit of more RAM.

I could compare Slack to, say, HexChat (or any other IRC client). And yeah, it’s an unfair comparison in many ways – Slack has far more capabilities. But from another perspective, how many of them do you immediately need at launch? Surely the video calling code could be delayed until after the main client is up, etc. (and maybe it is, in which case, oh dear).

A better example is Visual Studio [0], since it’s apples to apples.

[0]: https://youtu.be/MR4i3Ho9zZY
by echelon | 2025-05-13 13:23:57+00:00
AI is a million times better than Google search. I don't see how it doesn't replace Google search in a few years.

AI code completion is god mode. While I seldom prompt for new code, AI code autocompletion during refactoring is 1000x faster than plumbing fields manually. I can do extremely complicated and big refactors with ease, and that's coming from someone who made big use of static typing, IDEs, and AST-based refactoring. It's legitimately faster than thought.

And finally, it's really nice to ask about new APIs or pose questions you would normally pour over docs or Google and find answers on Stack Overflow. It's so much better and faster.

We're watching the world change in the biggest way since smartphones and the internet.

AI isn't a crappy consultant. It's an expansion of the mind.
by tecleandor | 2025-05-13 13:24:10+00:00
The problem lies that in newer Android versions (11 or higher) you cannot give permissions to arbitrary folders, it's only "shared folders" or "all the files" [0][1] (It's also explained in TFA)

I'm sure they would happily allow you to select the folders you want to give permissions to, but I think that's not possible anymore.

So if you want to sync a local data folder that stores, for example, the tracks you record with your GPS, you cannot do it without full access unless your GPS app allows you to select a shared folder to store its data.

0: https://developer.android.com/about/versions/11/privacy/storage 1: https://www.theregister.com/2025/05/13/nextcloud_play_store_complaint/

edit: restructured a confusing sentence
by abadar | 2025-05-13 13:24:35+00:00
Crappy consultant? That's redundant ;)

Seriously, though, within the context of software development, these are all issues I've encountered as well, and I don't know how to program: sweeping solutions, inability to resolve errors, breaking down all components to base levels to isolate problems.

But, again, I don't know how to program. For me, any consultant is better than no consultant. And like the author, I've learned a ton on how to ask for what I want out of Cursor.
by perlgeek | 2025-05-13 13:24:44+00:00
And the package in Debian Stable (aka bookworm) is too old to be affected by the vulnerabilities in 5.0.0.

I used to hate that Debian always was behind on software versions, but now I use different package sources for the few applications where I really don't want to rely on old software (like browsers), and otherwise doing great with the old stuff :-)
by ryandvm | 2025-05-13 13:24:48+00:00
The comparison isn't unfair, but the flip side of that is that a crappy consultant with the right confidence and good soft skills can make several hundred thousand dollars a year in this industry. I'd say AI is on a pretty good career track for itself.

Just this morning my CTO was crowing about how he was able to use Claude to modify the UI of one of our internal dev tools. He absolutely cannot wait to start replacing devs with AI.

Nobody wanted to hear it back when software development was easy street, but maybe we should have unionized after all...
by skydhash | 2025-05-13 13:24:48+00:00
Architecture is best done on paper, or a whiteboard if you have contributors. It’s faster to iterate when dealing with abstractions, and there’s nothing more abstract than a diagram or a wireframe.

Once you’ve got a general gist of a solution, you can try coding it. Coding with no plan is generally a recipe for disaster (aka can you answer “what am I trying to do?” clearly)
by benoau | 2025-05-13 13:25:16+00:00
AI is like a crappy consultant who doesn't care how many times you reject their code and will get it right if you feed them enough information.

The amount of time I save just by not having to write tests or jsdocs anymore is amazing. Refactoring is amazing.

And that's just the code - I also use AI for video production, 3d model production, generating art and more.
by mstade | 2025-05-13 13:26:00+00:00
> From v96 of Sketch onwards, a bug in the Mac App caused that list of actions to include text users entered into text fields, including secure text fields. This meant that, in the case that Sketch crashed soon after you had entered your Sketch account email or password (or both), this information could be sent as part of the crash report.

These guys have a tendency to bury the lede. Sketch worked as a keylogger and information was transmitted (and presumable stored) in clear text, that's the beginning and end of it. Not only would this affect logons to Sketch, it would presumably affect all information entered into designs as well. If you design a screen that includes sensitive information, Sketch would have this as well.

I reached out to their team about this event and got a mostly canned reply with links to their DPA and privacy policy, wherein of course there is no detail of Sketch acting as a keylogger.

I had a Sketch account until this disclosure, and immediately cancelled my subscription and removed my account after this, and will recommend similar action to anyone willing to listen.

It was bad enough that Sketch stopped being a local-first application a few years ago, as that was one of the things they had going for them as Figma started eating their lunch, but this is the straw that broke at least this camel's back.
by GenZ_RiseUp | 2025-05-13 13:26:32+00:00
And dare I add to your points - actually fail students when their standard of work is not good enough? There seems to be no repercussions regarding poor quality work in the current MBA/business management undergrad space (I only speak to these, as I familiar with them) with an attitude of (actively enabled by colleges) pass entitlement and grade inflation from the students.
by AStonesThrow | 2025-05-13 13:26:36+00:00
No, it's worse than that.

"The 1800s" typically refers to the years 1800-1809. "The 1900s" refers to 1900-1909. It is by no means unambiguous, but this is the common and plain meaning, and indeed these folks may confuse many more people by attempting in this manner to refer to 1800-1899 or such.
by spamizbad | 2025-05-13 13:26:44+00:00
> Colleges need to get back to their mission and ditch the sports, drinking, non-academic facilities. Get back to teaching, standards and research and stop ripping off students to backbreaking loan debt.

Can you explain how cutting research funding achieve these goal? Especially since many of the schools most impacted by these cuts are very much not party or college sports schools.

Those most impacted are R1 schools: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_research_universities_...
by incomingpain | 2025-05-13 13:26:50+00:00
Python is plenty fast for 99% of people. I refuse to use any programming language except python now.

Yes every project eventually grows to do something computationally hard. You always choose threading because of shared memory. But then you learn about the GIL shortly after.

Then you look at multiprocessing and managers. ugh.

>get rid of GIL (PEP 703)

All good and dandy, but easier said than done im sure.

>better interpreter perf

Would have been done already.

>We shouldn’t feel like we have to accept PEP 703.

I wonder if you could abstract the GIL to be more intelligent and multiprocessed in of itself. Likely come at a overhead but in turn gain the performance everyone is seeking.
by genghisjahn | 2025-05-13 13:26:59+00:00
I have worked for large corporations that have foisted awful HR, expense reporting, time tracking and insurance "portals" that were so awful I had to wonder if anyone writing the checks had ever seen the product. I brought up the point several times that if my team tried to tell a customer that we had their project all done but it was full of as many bugs and UI nightmares as these back office platforms, I would be chastised, demoted and/or fired.
by Wowfunhappy | 2025-05-13 13:27:14+00:00
Isn't this what distros are for? So e.g. Debian could decide to replace screen with tmux, possibly with some sort of compatibility package that takes all the same command line arguments as screen but uses tmux under the hood. (I've used screen very little and have never used tmux so I'm not sure if that would make sense in this context).
by Retric | 2025-05-13 13:27:47+00:00
I don’t think it’s about trusting authority or not, it’s about how you construct a consistent model of the world and deal with conflicting bits of information.

There’s a willingness in some people to consider some grand conspiracy is lying for complex reasons without considering the possibility that the person talking about it is lying to you or just mistaken for mundane reasons. Perhaps the medical establishment lying to you, or it’s the guy trying to sell you healing crystals.

Other times it’s more subtle conflict such as the ‘healing power of touch’ vs ‘touch fulfilling a physiological need’ where it’s easy to exaggerate a subtle misunderstanding to a wildly inaccurate idea.
by rvz | 2025-05-13 13:27:53+00:00
This is what it has gotten to.

More reports of 'vibe-coding' causing chaos because one trusted what the LLM did and it 'checked' that the code was correct. [0] As always with vibe-coding:

Zero tests whatsoever. It's no wonder you see LLMs not being able to understand their own code that they wrote! (LLM cannot reason)

Vibe coding is not software engineering.

[0] https://twitter.com/levelsio/status/1921974501257912563
by trollbridge | 2025-05-13 13:27:55+00:00
I use Medicaid and have never found that to be the case.

In fact, I’d prefer to be back on full work duties, but I’m still on light duty until my next appointment, assuming he restores me to full duty.

Providers who are reimbursed via Medicaid have zero incentive specific to Medicaid to not give out work “excuses”, document disabilities and so on. Generally speaking the same providers serve both Medicaid and non-Medicaid patients.

Perhaps there are some states where the Medicaid providers are really awful (California?).
by phillipcarter | 2025-05-13 13:28:00+00:00
Some of the phenomenon described in this post are felt a lot when using AI.

My own anecdote with a codebase I'm familiar with is indeed, as the article mentions, it's a terrible architect. The problem I was solving ultimately called for a different data structure, but it never had that realization, instead trying to fit the problem shape into an existing, suboptimal way to represent the data.

When I mentioned that this part of the code was memory-sensitive, it indeed wrote good code! ...for the bad data structure. It even included some nice tests that I decided to keep, including memory benchmarks. But the code was ultimately really bad for the problem.

This is related to the sycophancy problem. AI coding assistants bias towards assuming the code they're working with is correct, and that the person using them is also correct. But often neither is ideal! And you can absolutely have a model second-guess your own code and assumptions, but it takes a lot of persistent work because these damn things just want to be "helpful" all the time.

I say all of this as a believer in this paradigm and one who uses these tools every day.
by ramesh31 | 2025-05-13 13:28:59+00:00
>I ask for the approach and I write the code myself. Letting AI write the code has become very unproductive over the period of time.

Ask it to write out the approach in a series of extensive markdown files that you will use to guide the build-out. Tell it to use checklists. Once you're happy with the full proposal, use @file mentions to keep the files in context as you prompt it through the steps. Works wonders.
by mystraline | 2025-05-13 13:29:05+00:00
From the article:

> “The left,” Tabellini concludes, “has underestimated the fact that culture can matter more than income. But as long as it insists on talking only about inequality, without addressing the identity theme, it will continue to lose out among its own former constituency.”

In my experiences, the Left / Democrats have abandoned the wage workers and labor quite along time ago. The justification was that Republicans catered to Big Business, along with their near-endless coffers of money. Democrats had to cater to their own groups that had money, and labor was NOT one of them.

Another money issue is that, in general, democrats tax the 50%-99% heavier to redistribute to the 0%-50% class. Republicans undo that. Yet nobody touches that 1% at the top, so real effective changes are really never seen, and haven't been seen since FDR.

Basically, I think culture has taken over income as a major political point because both politician groups have been able to phase it out by intentionally refusing to address it. Something else took hold, and that's identity politics.

If people saw massive, rapid change from taxing the 1% and real monetary gains quickly, identity would be shoved by the wayside quite fast.
by datax2 | 2025-05-13 13:29:11+00:00
This is a double edge sword problem, but I think what people are glazing over with the compute power topic is power efficiency. One thing I struggle with home labing old gaming equipment is the consideration to the power efficiency of new hardware. Hardly a valid comparison, but I can choose to recycle my Ryzen 1700x with a 2080ti for a media server that will probably consume a few hundred watts, or I can get a M1 that sips power. The double edge sword part is that Ryzen system becomes considerably more power efficient running proxmox or ubuntu server vs a windows client. We as a society choose our niche we want to leverage and it swings with and like economics, strapped for cash, choose to build more efficient code; no limits, buy the horsepower to meet the needs.
by JdeBP | 2025-05-13 13:29:11+00:00
If one is in group utmp, one can mess with the login accounting database: the table of currently active logins, the log of log-ons/log-offs, and the table of per-user last logins.

https://jdebp.uk/FGA/unix-login-database.html

The login accounting system that Linux-based operating systems have inherited from Unix really has never reconciled its initial real-terminal-login-only superuser-managed design with the fact that non-superuser programs that allocate pseudo-terminals (e.g. any local terminal emulator, NeoVIM, tmux, screen) want to (over)write entries for those pseudo-terminals in the login accounting database to make the output of the "who" command (and its ilk) more complete.

The best approach I've seen was to re-think the idea; have the pseudo-terminal-using programs run entirely unprivileged and use a client-server model where only the server actually has access to the database files.

Laurent Bercot did this. It fixes many holes, including that the log of log-ons/log-offs is made truly append-only (modulo superuser access to the underlying files). But it has the same architectural problem that any client in the group can overwrite any currently active login record if it knows the record ID, which by design (and the Single Unix Specification) there's an API for enumerating.

* https://skarnet.org/software/utmps/

Both the BSDs and M. Bercot have improved the situation with pututxline(), but it's still not out of the woods yet.
by skydhash | 2025-05-13 13:29:14+00:00
> AI code autocompletion during refactoring is 1000x faster than plumbing fields manually. I can do extremely complicated and big refactors with ease, and that's coming from someone who made big use of static typing, IDEs, and AST-based refactoring. It's legitimately faster than thought.

Unless you know Vim!
by palmotea | 2025-05-13 13:29:15+00:00
> Just this morning my CTO was crowing about how he was able to use Claude to modify the UI of one of our internal dev tools. He absolutely cannot wait to start replacing devs with AI.

> Nobody wanted to hear it back when software development was easy street, but maybe we should have unionized after all...

Thanks rugged libertarian individualists!

Software engineering is full of dumb people who think they're sooooo clever.
by amarcheschi | 2025-05-13 13:29:24+00:00
With gemini, even if I implore it to not make additional safety checks I usually get a shitton of superfluous code that performs those checks i didn't want to. More often than not, using it for entire chunks everything makes the whole thing much more verbose than necessary - given that sometimes these checks make sense, but often they're really superfluous and add nothing of value
by dccsillag | 2025-05-13 13:29:25+00:00
No, it's generally not valid -- it will depend on the specifics of the test (especially if the test is valid only asymptotically). You need some method that supports sequential inference. Nowadays your best bet is probably some sort of anytime-valid method from the e-value literature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-values https://projecteuclid.org/journals/statistical-science/volum...
by snide | 2025-05-13 13:29:32+00:00
I've always like Ben Franklin's 13 virtues. It's a short list.

TEMPERANCE. Eat not to dullness; drink not to elevation.

SILENCE. Speak not but what may benefit others or yourself; avoid trifling conversation.

ORDER. Let all your things have their places; let each part of your business have its time.

RESOLUTION. Resolve to perform what you ought; perform without fail what you resolve.

FRUGALITY. Make no expense but to do good to others or yourself; i.e., waste nothing.

INDUSTRY. Lose no time; be always employ’d in something useful; cut off all unnecessary actions.

SINCERITY. Use no hurtful deceit; think innocently and justly, and, if you speak, speak accordingly.

JUSTICE. Wrong none by doing injuries or omitting the benefits that are your duty.

MODERATION. Avoid extremes; forbear resenting injuries so much as you think they deserve.

CLEANLINESS. Tolerate no uncleanliness in body, cloaths, or habitation.

TRANQUILLITY. Be not disturbed at trifles, or at accidents common or unavoidable.

CHASTITY. Rarely use venery but for health or offspring, never to dulness, weakness, or the injury of your own or another’s peace or reputation.

HUMILITY. Imitate Jesus and Socrates.
by caseyy | 2025-05-13 13:29:41+00:00
We have much hardware on the secondary market (resale) that's only 2-3x slower than pristine new primary market devices. It is cheap, it is reuse, and it helps people save in a hyper-consumerist society. The common complaint is that it doesn't run bloated software anymore. And I don't think we can make non-bloated software for a variety of reasons.

As a video game developer, I can add some perspective (N=1 if you will). Most top-20 game franchises spawned years ago on much weaker hardware, but their current installments demand hardware not even a few years old (as recommended/intended way to play the game). This is due to hyper-bloating of software, and severe downskilling of game programmers in the industry to cut costs. The players don't often see all this, and they think the latest game is truly the greatest, and "makes use" of the hardware. But the truth is that aside from current-generation graphics, most games haven't evolved much in the last 10 years, and current-gen graphics arrived on PS4/Xbox One.

Ultimately, I don't know who or what is the culprit of all this. The market demands cheap software. Games used to cost up to $120 in the 90s, which is $250 today. A common price point for good quality games was $80, which is $170 today. But the gamers absolutely decry any game price increases beyond $60. So the industry has no option but to look at every cost saving, including passing the cost onto the buyer through hardware upgrades.

Ironically, upgrading a graphics card one generation (RTX 3070 -> 4070) costs about $300 if the old card is sold and $500 if it isn't. So gamers end up paying ~$400 for the latest games every few years and then rebel against paying $30 extra per game instead, which could very well be cheaper than the GPU upgrade (let alone other PC upgrades), and would allow companies to spend much more time on optimization. Well, assuming it wouldn't just go into the pockets of publishers (but that is a separate topic).

It's an example of Scott Alexander's Moloch where it's unclear who could end this race to the bottom. Maybe a culture shift could, we should perhaps become less consumerist and value older hardware more. But the issue of bad software has very deep roots. I think this is why Carmack, who has a practically perfect understanding of software in games, doesn't prescribe a solution.
by bayindirh | 2025-05-13 13:29:41+00:00
AI is just a weighted graph which stands on shoulders of a million giants. However, it can't cite, can't fact check, doesn't know when it's hallucinating, and its creators doesn't respect any of the work which they need to feed to that graph to make it to fake its all knowledgeable accent.

Tech is useful, how it's built is very unethical, and how it's worshiped is sad.
by roxolotl | 2025-05-13 13:30:02+00:00
I think the trauma argument is spot on here. The pandemic exposed the tenuous nature of the system we all exist in and for many that was simply too much. It is a deeply disconcerting thing to really sit with the knowledge that we depend upon systems so complex that no single person can fix or manage or describe them and that small perturbations can cause damage that is visible to everyone.

When that was all laid bare during the pandemic the reaction was to demand that "we" take back the power to control the system. For some this meant quietly covering the system back up, for others it means tearing it down and rebuilding it.

Of course that isn't to excuse the system, or blame the trauma. Traumatic reactions to mass death, dislocation, and disruption are expected. The system is also very far from perfect. However typically rational and effective solutions don't come from responses like we're seeing.
by the_af | 2025-05-13 13:30:10+00:00
> Researchers mustn’t be complacent. They must communicate the difference between eliminating ideologically objectionable programmes and undermining the entire research ecosystem.

This is a weird statement. Researchers -- everyone, really -- must communicate that eliminating whole areas of research because the current administration deems them "ideologically objectionable" is suicidal. What is this, a dictatorship?
by kelsey978126 | 2025-05-13 13:30:36+00:00
Funny. AI is a reflection of the self. This tells me the author is themselves the same skill level as a crappy consultant in their use of AI. The people getting the most out of AI are the ones who had the highest workload before automation arrived and now find themselves fantastically productive. People like this seem to have too much time on their hands. If you are "just now trying this vibe coding thing" in 2025 that tells me more about you than anything else.