MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by sneak | 2025-05-05 20:01:03+00:00
Correct, but nobody turns it on because it’s opt in, and even if you turn it on, 100% of your iMessages will still be escrowed in a form readable to Apple due to the fact that the other ends of your iMessage conversations won’t have ADP enabled because it’s off by default.

Again, Apple gets to say “we have e2ee, any user who wants it can turn it on” and the FBI gets to read 100% of the texts in the country unimpeded.

If Apple really wanted to promote privacy, they’d have deployed the so-called “trust circle” system they designed and implemented which allowed a quorum of trusted contacts to use their own keys to allow you to recover your account e2ee keys without Apple being able to access it, rolled that out, and then slowly migrated their entire user base over to e2ee backups.

They have not, and they will not, because that will compromise the surveillance backdoor, and get them regulated upon, or worse. The current administration has already shown that they are willing to impose insanely steep tariffs on the iPhone.

You can’t fight city hall, you don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows, etc. The US intelligence community has a heart attack gun. Tim Apple does not.

Separately it is an interesting aside that Apple’s 1A rights are being violated here by the presumptive retaliation should they publish such a migration feature (software code being protected speech).
by Spooky23 | 2025-05-05 20:02:54+00:00
What a novel suggestion. Sure just do what you’re supposed to do.

What’s your answer when the same idiots campaigning against fluoride decide that toothpaste is a problem? Or that the ADA is a scam and there is no proof that toothbrushing has any effect?

And what’s real food? That is a question that doesn’t have an answer.
by TZubiri | 2025-05-05 20:03:09+00:00
This looks like it would add nothing. MCP's were released like 2 seconds ago, if you want to build something in prod, you can build it against the official MCP code.

If you want to add something in the middle or a MCP specific dependency it should add some value, some specific value: industry specific, or add some specific feature.

This is just a generic dependency that provides overly generic features like "production ready" and "integration" (that's true for all dependencies.

Par for the course for AI companies, "do everything for everyone"
by plam503711 | 2025-05-05 20:03:52+00:00
Hi,

I respectfully disagree with much of your comment.

First, this wasn't intended as a promotional piece. It's a personal blog post where I share some of the challenges involved in building a full virtualization stack — a stack that happens to be fully open source. It's unfortunate that sharing real-world experience is sometimes immediately perceived as promotional.

Second, I think there's some confusion between using a hypervisor and mastering one — or building and maintaining an entire stack around it. KVM/QEMU is widely used, but it has significant issues, especially regarding security, performance, and latency consistency. Very few groups in the world are actively trying to tackle these challenges holistically (even major players like VMware have made some questionable shortcuts).

When it comes to low-latency, real-time use cases with a strong security model, Xen remains unique among open-source hypervisors. It's definitely not boring — in fact, it's one of the few that enable certain classes of critical applications at all.

We also work closely with academic research labs, and I can tell you: there’s still a lot of exciting work happening around Xen — even if it's less visible than buzz around newer projects like Firecracker or crosvm.
by ddoolin | 2025-05-05 20:04:45+00:00
I didn't have any issues with it. I ran the same server straightaway on a new domain maybe 7 years or so, maybe more. I recently changed hosts from AWS to somewhere else, so the IP changed, etc, and I did have one major e-mail provider ding me for a single outgoing e-mail after that, but it didn't happen twice and never any issues since then. I feel like if you follow all the DNS recommendations, it's not a problem anymore.
by retrorangular | 2025-05-05 20:05:24+00:00
> I also think the US is going to ban all non-US LLM providers from the US market soon for "security reasons."

Well Trump is interested in tariffing movies and South Korea took DeepSeek off mobile app stores, so they certainly may try. But for high-end tasks, DeepSeek R1 671B is available for download, so any company with a VPN to download it and the necessary GPUs or cloud credits can run it. And for consumers, DeepSeek V3's distilled models are available for download, so anyone with a (~4 year old or newer) Mac or gaming PC can run them.

If the only thing keeping these companies valuations so high is banning the competition, that's not a good sign for their long-term value. If you have to ban the competition, you can't be feeling good about what you're making.

For what it's worth, I think GPT o3 and o1, Gemini 2.5 Pro and Claude 3.7 Sonnet are good enough to compete. DeepSeek R1 is often the best option (due to cost) for tasks that it can handle, but there are times where one of the other models can achieve a task that it can't.

But if the US is looking to ban Chinese models, then that could suggest that maybe these models aren't good enough to raise the funding required for newer, significantly better (and more expensive) models. That, or they just want to stop as much money as possible from going to China. Banning the competition actually makes the problem worse though, as now these domestic companies have fewer competitors. But I somewhat doubt there's any coherent strategy as to what they ban, tariff, etc.
by astrange | 2025-05-05 20:05:27+00:00
> You think service workers at a fast food restaurant or working the till at Walmart are higher paid than Factory workers?

Fast food workers aren't service-economy workers, they're making burgers back there.

More importantly, factory work destroys your body and email jobs don't, so whether or not it's high earning at the start… it isn't forever.

> Salaries may have nominally gone up but this is clearly not weighing the cost of living into the equation

That's not a salary chart. The income chart I did post is adjusted for cost of living (that's what "real" means).

Also see https://www.epi.org/blog/wage-growth-since-1979-has-not-been...
Show HN: Tinysums v2 (now with story and comment tl;dr's and a better layout)
by mbm | 2025-05-05 20:05:43+00:00
Everyone was amazing with their feedback on the initial version. Here's a v2 with more concise tl;dr-type summaries for each story and comment thread, and a more dense layout for faster skimming.

Thanks for your feedback, keep it coming!
by pulsarmx | 2025-05-05 20:06:08+00:00
Is my brain broken somehow? I'm either at my desk or on my phone/tablet a good 75-80% of my waking hours, and have all this information and entertainment at my fingertips, and I'm _still_ bored half of the time or find my mind wandering or thinking about all sorts of things happening around me when I least expect it.
by zoogeny | 2025-05-05 20:06:21+00:00
I mean, I have. I use them every day. You often see them literally saying "Oh there is a linter error, let me go fix it" and then a new code generation pass happens. In the worst case, it does exactly what you are saying, gets stuck in a loop. It eventually gets to the point where it says "let me try just once more" and then gives up.

And when that happens I review the code and if it is bad then I "git revert". And if it is 90% of the way there I fix it up and move on.

The question shouldn't be "are they infallible tools of perfection". It should be "do I get value equal to or greater than the time/money I spend". And if you use git appropriately you lose at most five minutes on a agent looping. And that happens a couple of times a week.

And be honest with yourself, is getting stuck in a loop fighting a compiler, type-checker or lint something you have ever experienced in your pre-LLM days?
by miki123211 | 2025-05-05 20:06:38+00:00
OpenAI (or, more specifically, Chat GPT) is CocaCola, not Facebook.

They have the brand recognition and consumer goodwill no other brand in AI has, incredibly so with school students, who will soon go into the professional world and bring that goodwill with them.

I think better models are enough to dethrone OpenAI in API, B2C and internal enterprise use cases, but OpenAI has consumer mindshare, and they're going to be the king of chatbots forever. Unless somebody else figures out something which is better by orders of magnitude and that Open AI can't copy quickly, it's going to stay that way.

Apple had the opportunity to do something really great here. With Siri's deep device integration on one hand and Apple's willingness to force 3rd-party devs to do the right thing for users on the other, they could have had a compelling product that nobody else could copy, but it seems like they're not willing to go that route, mostly for privacy, antitrust and internal competency reasons, in that order. Google is on the right track and might get something similar (although not as polished as typical Apple) done, but Android's mindshare among tech-savvy consumers isn't great enough for it to get traction.
by atleastoptimal | 2025-05-05 20:06:49+00:00
I believe phones and social media are why so many movies, media, fiction just seems generally worse now. Humans make lots of connections when their minds wander. Stanley Kubrick came up with the match cut in 2001 (the bone cutting to the satellite) playing around with a broom in between shots. When absent external stimuli, human brains explore the latent space around us, with constant external stimuli, we devote cognitive resources to managing and understanding the influx of information.
by diggan | 2025-05-05 20:07:46+00:00
> I am still trying to sort out why experiences are so divergent. I've had much more positive LLM experiences while coding than many other people seem to, even as someone who's deeply skeptical of what's being promised about them. I don't know how to reconcile the two.

As with many topics, I feel like you can divide people in a couple of groups. You have people who try it, have their mind blown by it, so they over-hype it. Then the polar-opposite, people who are overly dismissive and cement themselves into a really defensive position. Both groups are relatively annoying, inaccurate, and too extremist. Then another group of people might try it out, find some value, integrate it somewhat and maybe got a little productivity-boost and moves on with their day. Then a bunch of other groupings in-between.

Problem is that the people in the middle tend to not make a lot of noise about it, and the extremists (on both ends) tend to be very vocal about their preference, in their ways. So you end up perceiving something as very polarizing. There are many accurate and true drawbacks with LLMs as well, but it also ends up poisoning the entire concept/conversation/ecosystem for some people, and they tend to be noisy as well.

Then the whole experience depends a lot on your setup, how you use it, what you expect, what you've learned and so many much more, and some folks are very quick to judge a whole ecosystem without giving parts of it an honest try. It took me a long time to try Aider, Cursor and others, and even now after I've tried them out, I feel like there are probably better ways to use this new category of tooling we have available.

In the end I think reality is a bit less black/white for most folks, common sentiment I see and hear is that LLMs are probably not hellfire ending humanity nor is it digital-Jesus coming to save us all.
by aerhardt | 2025-05-05 20:08:36+00:00
> an instance of this from a few days ago.

Bro I've been using LLMs for search since before it even had search capabilities...

"LLMs not being for search" has been an argument from the naysayers for a while now, but very often when I use an LLM I am looking for the answer to something - if that isn't [information] search, then what is?

Whether they hallucinate or outright bullshit sometimes is immaterial. For many information retrieval tasks they are infinitely better than Google and have been since GPT3.
by thesz | 2025-05-05 20:09:43+00:00
> modify the node in-place

I consider this anti-pattern [1].

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20070417190836/https://www.eecs....

Authors found themselves fighting with control flow graph modifications and replaced mutable graph with immutable one, modified by zippers. They achieved speed up of 11% in optimizing transformations, some of which they were unable to implement in mutable version. E.g., more complex optimizations were working faster.
by Nuzzerino | 2025-05-05 20:09:46+00:00
It’s like a free beer, but it’s Bud Light, lukewarm, and your reaction to tasting the beer goes toward researching ways to make you appreciate the lukewarm Bud Light for its marginal value, rather than making that beer taste better or less unhealthy. They’ll try very hard to convince you that they have though. It parallels their approach to AI Alignment.
by btilly | 2025-05-05 20:09:48+00:00
It is a theorem that any argument that can be made with nonstandard analysis (NSA), can also be made without it. The question is therefore whether NSA helps people's intuition enough to make it worthwhile.

In elementary Calculus, it really does help people's intuition. In fact it allowed us to formalize a lot of the intuitive arguments through which Calculus was originally built. In analysis, it has helped at least some people's intuition. See, for example, Robinson and Bernstein's proof of the invariant problem. However most people in analysis have found that it isn't that hard to translate the NSA version of such proofs into more familiar terminology, and they don't find the NSA version to help their intuition.

When we go as far afield as the asymptotic growth of functions, I don't see our intuition being helped much by NSA. I could be wrong - I would have been on the wrong side of the importance of oracles in cryptography on somewhat similar intuitions - but it remains my impression.
by jillesvangurp | 2025-05-05 20:09:53+00:00
> I don’t see the logic?

You use the surface area you have. Most people simply don't have a lot of ground to put solar on but they might have a roof. Also, you don't just need solar panels but also the wires to where the power is needed. On the roof of the building where you are using the power is just about as close as you can get with that.

Otherwise it's a simple economic equation. If installing solar saves enough money such that you end up with a decent return on investment then making that investment is more optimal than not making that investment.

That's why most of Australia is running on rooftop solar when the sun is shining. The US is a bit behind on that mostly because the US has a lot of rules stacked in favor of grid providers. Australia used to have that and eventually the grid providers lost that battle.
by kelnos | 2025-05-05 20:09:54+00:00
Are there any stats as to the percentage of iPhone users that enable Advanced Data Protection? Defaults matter a lot, and I wouldn't be surprised if that number is (well) below 10%.

If you are the only person out of all the people you correspond with who has ADP enabled, then everyone you correspond with is uploading the plaintext of your messages to Apple.
by Night_Thastus | 2025-05-05 20:10:01+00:00
The genetic aspect is quite small. People vastly over estimate the concept of a 'fast metabolism' or a 'slow metabolism', it's more fiction than fact.

The fact is calories in and calories out.

Despite that, losing weight is not easy. It is not trivial or simple. It takes consistent hard work over many months.

Making wishy-washy excuses for some people does not solve the problem.
by voidspark | 2025-05-05 20:11:28+00:00
> AGI would mean something which doesn't need direction or guidance to do anything

There can be levels of AGI. Google DeepMind have proposed a framework that would classify ChatGPT as "Emerging AGI".

ChatGPT can solve problems that it was not explicitly trained to solve, across a vast number of problem domains.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2311.02462

The paper is summarized here https://venturebeat.com/ai/here-is-how-far-we-are-to-achievi...
by dewley452 | 2025-05-05 20:11:46+00:00
We recently explored ways to improve LLM code completion when models are asked to use specific libraries, especially ones they may not have seen before. We developed a ReadMe.LLM format that organizes essential library information into a structure optimized for LLMs. In experiments across two libraries, we saw major accuracy improvements in simple case studies (up to 100% in correctness). Happy to hear any feedback or interest in this idea.
by steveklabnik | 2025-05-05 20:11:48+00:00
I think this is related, but I'm more interested in the factual aspects than the subjective ones. That is, I don't disagree there's also arguments over "are LLMs good for the same things search engines for" but it's more of the more objective "they do not search the web" part. We need to have agreement on the objective aspects before we can have meaningful discussion of the subjective, in my mind.
by caseyy | 2025-05-05 20:12:36+00:00
It's doubtful if there even is a race anymore. The last significant AI advancement in the consumer LLM space was fluent human language synthesis around 2020, with its following assistant/chat interface. Since then, everything has been incremental — larger models, new ways to prompt them, cheaper ways to run them, more human feedback, and gaming evaluations.

The wisest move in the chatbot business might be to wait and see if anyone discovers anything profitable before spending more effort and wasting more money on chat R&D, which includes most agentic stuff. Reliable assistants or something along those lines might be the next big breakthrough (if you ask certain futurologists), but the technology we have seems unsuitable for any provable reliability.

ML can be applied in a thousand ways other than LLMs, and many will positively impact our lives and create their own markets. But OpenAI is not in that business. I think the writing is on the wall, and Sama's vocal fry, "AGI is close," and humanity verification crypto coins are smoke and mirrors.
by tshaddox | 2025-05-05 20:12:42+00:00
> I started a business that would give people back $9 if they gave me $4

I feel like people overuse this criticism. That's not the only way that companies with a lot of revenue lose money. And this isn't at all what OpenAI is doing, at least from their customers' perspective. It's not like customers are subscribing to ChatGPT simply because it gives them something they were going to buy anyway for cheaper.
by steveklabnik | 2025-05-05 20:13:35+00:00
Yeah, I try to stay away from reaching for these sorts of explanations, because it feels uncharitable. I saw a lot of very smart people repost the quoted post! They're not the kind who "cannot imagine a world where they are wrong."

But at the same time, the pace of advancement is very fast, and so not having recently re-evaluated things is significantly more likely while also being more charitable, I think.
by DoingIsLearning | 2025-05-05 20:13:43+00:00
Tecsun PL series is pretty much the modern version the old Grundig Yachtboy series.

I have a PL 330 as my 'is there anybody out there' armaggedon world radio receiver. I also sometimes use it just for kicks to hear radio from somewhere unreasonably far away from me.

You can find a lot of pros and cons across the different models in their offering with plenty of online discussion as well.
by progbits | 2025-05-05 20:14:04+00:00
First, regarding "zero benefit" and "no risk". I disagree. The risk and benefit might be low, and not worth the change for you. But it is absolutely not zero.

You have a JSON key file which you can't know how many people have. The person who created the key, downloaded it and then stored it as github secret - did they download it to /dev/shm? Did some npm/brew install script steal it from their downloads folder? Any of the github repo owners can get hold of it. Depending on whether you use github environments/deployments and have set it up properly, so can anyone with write access to the repo. Do you pin all your dependencies, reusable workflows etc, or can a compromise of someone elses repo steal your secrets?

With the workload identity auth, there is no key. Each access obtains a short lived token. Only workflows on main branch can get it. Every run will have audit logs, and so will every action taken by that token. Risk of compromise is much lower, but even more importantly, if compromised I'll be able to know exactly when and how, and what malicious actions were taken.

Maybe this is paranoid to you and not worth it. That's fine. But it's not "no risk", and it is worth to me to protect personal data of our users.

---

As for your question, first step is just to run https://github.com/google-github-actions/auth with identity provider configured in your GCP project, restricted to your github repo or org.

This will create application default credentials that most GCP tools and libraries will just work with as if when you are running things locally after "gcloud auth login".

For firebase token you can just run a python script as subsequent step in the github job doing something like https://firebase.google.com/docs/auth/admin/create-custom-to.... For signed storage url this can be done with the gcloud tool: https://cloud.google.com/storage/docs/access-control/signing...

In both cases after running the "google-github-actions/auth" step it will just work with the short-lived credentials that step generated.
by munificent | 2025-05-05 20:14:06+00:00
Weaving looks like fun!

One of the things I appreciate about knitting is how accommodating it is as a hobby. If I want to really focus on knitting, I can choose a project that uses a lot of complex stitches, cables, etc. If I just want to zone out and feel like I'm making progress, I can choose a simpler pattern that just does the same stitches over and over.

If I want to make something large and intricate, I can pick a pattern that uses multiple colors. But if I want something portable, I can pick a pattern that just needs a single ball of yarn and a single circular needle.
by danaris | 2025-05-05 20:14:07+00:00
I mean...sure? But that's not what you were saying. You said, as a blanket statement, that fair use requires citing the passage, which is not true.

Fair use and plagiarism are related, but they are two separate things. Especially when talking about the legalities of things, as we are here, it's vital to be clear and accurate about what specific legal issues are under discussion.

Facebook isn't claiming fair use to write academic papers about the books they're taking parts from. They're claiming fair use to feed them into LLM training. If that is a usage that is deemed to fall under fair use, then it won't require specific citation, even if it requires attribution in the more general sense (ie, crediting all the works you fed into your word-chipper), any more than you're required to cite specific passages when you're making a wholesale parody of a copyrighted work (also fair use) or writing a fanfic based on it (also fair use).
by jameslk | 2025-05-05 20:14:14+00:00
OpenAI is a relatively unknown company outside of the tech bubble. I told my own mom to install Gemini on her phone because she's heard of Google and is more likely going to trust Google with whatever info she dumps into a chat. I can’t think of a reason she would be compelled to use ChatGPT instead.

Consumer brand companies such as Coca Cola and Pepsi spend millions on brand awareness advertising just to be the “default” in everyone’s heads. When there’s not much consequence choosing one option over another, the one you’ve heard of is all that matters