MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by thisislife2 | 2025-05-30 17:25:45+00:00
I didn't realise how much cats depended on smell to identify us and each others, until I bathed one of my cats with a perfumed soap - once I dried her and let her free to mingle with the other cats, they suddenly started treating her as a stranger and went into defensive mode, growling at her. Even she was confused for moment to what was happening and why her siblings were suddenly acting like that. I calmed them down somewhat by rubbing a towel over their bodies and rubbing the same on her sister's body. They finally settled down when they all had sniffed each others butt and perhaps also recognized her through her meows to me.
by const_cast | 2025-05-30 17:25:56+00:00
> What AI is going to wipe out is white collar jobs where people sleepwalk through the working day and carelessly half ass every task.

The only reason this existed in the first place is because measuring performance is extremely difficult, and becomes more difficult the more complex a person's job is.

AI won't fix that. So even if you eliminate 50% of your employees, you won't be eliminating the bottom 50%. At worst, and probably what happens on average, your choices are about as good as random choice. So you end up with the same proportion of shitty workers as you had before. At worst worst, you actively select the poorest workers because you have some shitty metrics, which happens more often than we'd all like to think.
by slipnslider | 2025-05-30 17:26:16+00:00
>working on problems that "don't matter"

Usually low level engineers don't have a say on what projects they get to work. They show impact by completing whatever projects were handed to them and hope/pray those projects take off and become visible to upper management and/or tied directly to revenue.

The grind aspect is real though. 99% of FAANG engineers aren't building the next google maps or LLM, they are doing Enterprise CRUD + ELT + jira tickets. Companies like Meta and Amazon have enormous workloads and thus a grinder is preferable.

After a few years of experience, CRUD and ETL can be done while sleepwalking so the only missing component is someone willing to grind, e.g. someone who will spend 100 consecutive days doing leetcode
by redtaperat | 2025-05-30 17:26:43+00:00
“Solve the straight male loneliness epidemic.”

FTFY. Gay men have many more community options. Not sure why, but we just do togetherness inherently.

Glad to see this though. It can only be solved by the people in the epidemic but it only takes the effort of a handful of organizers in the community/town/city to jumpstart events and hit critical mass. I’ve organized things on meetup and it takes persistence. Good luck!
by sujayk_33 | 2025-05-30 17:26:57+00:00
So here is my understanding of current native image generation scenario, I might be wrong so please correct me, I'm still learning it and I'd appreaciate the help.

First time native image gen was introduced in Gemini 1.5 Flash if I'm not wrong, and then OpenAI was released for 4o which took over the internet by Ghibli Art.

We have been getting good quality images from almost all image generators like Midjourney, OpenAI and other providers, but the thing that made it special was true "multimodal" nature of it. Here's what I mean

When you used to ask chatgpt to create an image, it will rephrase that prompt and internally send that prompt to Dalle, similarly gemini would send it to Imagen which were diffusion models and they had little to know context in your next response about what's there in the previous image

In native image generation, it understands Audio, Text and even Image tokens in the same model and need not to rely on diffusion models internally, I don't think both Openai and google has released how they've trained it but my guess is that it's partially auto-regressive and diffusion but not sure about it
by twodave | 2025-05-30 17:27:16+00:00
No, today I can tell my manager when someone sucks at their job, and if enough other people are saying the same thing then that engineer will either be given help so they stop sucking or be fired so they don’t subtract from the team. Because this happens fairly often I wouldn’t want to add a lot of friction to that process. Idk, maybe you can protect people from being laid off without also complicating performance-based firings.
by Retric | 2025-05-30 17:27:35+00:00
Overall the area will be ~1/1,000th as radioactive in 100k years, and it’s not that dangerous today.

The flip side of that 24,000 year half life is Pu-239 isn’t that hot. 5% of what little Pu-239 is there isn’t that spicy compared to many places people live without significant worry about the natural radiation dose.

There’s just not enough Pu-242 to be a significant concern on its own outside of the reactor building which is unlikely to be left alone.
by mikepurvis | 2025-05-30 17:29:07+00:00
> "we just removed some features so we could charge you for them"

I think the pitch would be more like "we want to focus our more limited resources toward ensuring the core of the product is as good as possible, and there isn't a way to continue shipping an unmaintained version of the UI, so we haven't brought that part of MinIO into the community version of <new product name XX>. By offering it as a paid option, we hope to be able to sustainably maintain both the open and closed parts of XX over the long term."
by chucksmash | 2025-05-30 17:29:16+00:00
> Yet people were literally banned here just for pointing out that he hasn't actually delivered on anything in the capacity he promised until he did the salute.

I'd be shocked if they (you?) were banned just for critiquing Musk. So please link the post. I'm prepared to be shocked.

I'm also pretty sure that I could make a throwaway account that only posted critiques of Musk (or about any single subject for that matter) and manage to keep it alive by making the critiques timely, on-topic and thoughtful or get it banned by being repetitive and unconstructive. So would you say I was banned for talking about <topic>? Or would you say I was banned for my behavior while talking about <topic>?
by FabHK | 2025-05-30 17:29:27+00:00
The problem is that crypto is designed to evade regulation. You can put lipstick on a pig and regulate the centralized intermediaries (which, remember, crypto aimed to disintermediate): exchanges, custodians, ETF providers, ...

The dilemma is that you can either escape those regulations by going to unhosted wallets (self-custody) and transacting on the blockchain, or you keep everything (by regulation) entirely within the regulated intermediaries, but then there's no need to waste 1% of world electricity on some slow "decentralized" database.
by SwiftyBug | 2025-05-30 17:30:41+00:00
Kind of almost off-topic: I'm working on a project where I must run possibly untrusted JavaScript code. I want to run it in an isolated environment. This looks like a very nice solution as I could spin up a microsandbox and securely run the code. I could even have a pool os live sandboxes so I wouldn't even experience the 200ms starts. Because this is OCI-compatible, I could even provide a whole sandboxed environment on which to run that code. Would that be a good use case for this? Are there better alternatives?
by const_cast | 2025-05-30 17:31:26+00:00
Right, but the elephant in the room is that despite those industries being constantly understaffed and labor being in extreme demand, they're underpaid. It seems nobody gives a flying fuck about the free market when it comes to the labor market, which is arguably the most important market.

So, flooding those industries with more warm bodies probably won't help anything. I imagine it would make the already fucked labor relations even more fucked.
by abeppu | 2025-05-30 17:31:52+00:00
> to more lightweight semi-formal approaches (such as property-based testing, fuzzing, and runtime monitoring)

Ok, I get how property-based testing and fuzzing have a relationship to formal methods (the thing being checked looks like part of a formal specification, and in some sense these are a subset of the checks that a model-checking confirms), but calling runtime monitoring a "semi-formal approach" seems like a real stretch.
by mystified5016 | 2025-05-30 17:32:17+00:00
Yes! So many times my brain just skips right over some tasks because it takes too much effort to start. The LLM can give you something to latch onto and work with. It can lay down the starting shape of a function or program and even when it's the wrong shape, you still have something to mold into the correct shape.

The thing about ADHD is that taking a task from nothing to something is often harder than turning that something into the finished product. It's really weird and extremely not fun.
by zimzam | 2025-05-30 17:32:20+00:00
I think this is a framing issue.

Is it fair to charge people with different sized families different prices (per unit) for toilet paper?

vs.

Is it fair to charge people different prices (per unit) for different sized packages of toilet paper?

The former makes it seem nefarious but the latter is commonly accepted as fair. Same for airline tickets - if there's a discount for buying in bulk that's just as fair as a discount for buying toilet paper in bulk.
by Terr_ | 2025-05-30 17:32:44+00:00
> There really shouldn't be.

I don't see how, barring some kind of transcendental change in the human condition. Simple lies [0] and ignore-this-until-later is basically human nature for learning, you see it in every field and topic.

The real problem is not about if, but when certain kinds of "incantations" should be introduced or destroyed, and in what order.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie-to-children
by robbles | 2025-05-30 17:33:45+00:00
This is a neat idea.

I don't know enough about the underlying proof-of-work stuff to comment on how effective this could be, but I think it's pretty funny that the UI examples say "I'm a human".

I guess "there's only a few of me at most" or "I could allocate enough computation to this that I'm probably not up to no good" don't read as clearly.
by glenstein | 2025-05-30 17:34:19+00:00
I think you're kind of losing track of what this thread was originally about. It was about the specific idea that hooking up a bunch of AI's to interface with each other and engage in a kind of group collaboration gets you "self awareness". You now seem to be trying to model this on analogies like the stock market or heat death of the universe, where we can trust an overriding principle even if we don't have specifics.

I don't believe those forms of analogy work here, because this isn't about progress of AI writ large but about a narrower thing, namely the idea that the secret sauce to self-awareness is AI's interfacing with each other and collaboratively self-improving. That either will or won't be true due to specifics about the nature of self-improvement and whether there's any relation between that and salient properties we think are important for "self-awareness". Getting from A to B on that involves knowledge we don't have yet, and is not at all like a long-term application of already settled principles of thermodynamics.

So it's not like the heat death of the universe, because we don't at all know that this kind of training and interaction is attached to a bigger process that categorically and inexorably bends toward self-awareness. Some theories of self-improvement likely are going to work, some aren't, some trajectories achievable and some not, for reasons specific to those respective theories. It may be that they work spectacularly for learning, but that all the learning in the world has nothing to do with "self awareness." That is to say, the devil is in the details, those details are being skipped, and that abandonment of naturalistic explanation merits analogy to supernatural in it's lack of accountability to good explanation. If supernatural is the wrong term for rejecting, as a matter of principle, the need for rational explanation, then perhaps anti-intellectualism is the better term.

If instead we were talking about something really broad, like all of the collective efforts of humanity to improve AI, conceived of as broadly as possible over some time span, that would be a different conversation than just saying let's plug AI's into each other (???) and they'll get self-aware.
by bediger4000 | 2025-05-30 17:34:35+00:00
I, too have CenturyLink fiber. I've got an hourly cron job to save the IP address of the "ppp0" interface. I've got a Linux machine doing routing instead of a modem. Since 2022-12-04, my IP address has changed 109 times. IP address usually does not change when I reboot my routing machine. I frivolously have not saved reboot timestamps.

Minimum 1 hour between addresses Maximum 1512 hours Mean 200 hours
by DiabloD3 | 2025-05-30 17:34:42+00:00
Q4_K_M is the "default" for a lot of models on HF, and they generally require ~20GB of VRAM to run. It will not fit entirely on a 16GB card. You want to be about 3-4GB VRAM on top of what the model requires.

A back of the envelope estimate of specifically unsloth/Qwen3-30B-A3B-128K-GGUF is 18.6GB for Q4_K_M.
by skeaker | 2025-05-30 17:34:50+00:00
Fact is that in a social situation, you don't get to decide how you're viewed. If someone says you're being a jerk, then in their eyes, you're being a jerk. You can't change society or whatever so that they don't view you as a jerk. It's not up to you how they view you. This is not a flaw with society, it is by design. By definition it is how socialization works, and it goes both ways.

You DO, however, control your own words and actions, and generally those have a strong correlation with how you're perceived. Food for thought.
by SunlitCat | 2025-05-30 17:34:58+00:00
I think it's kind of a German thing.

Even as a German, I sometimes struggle to connect with others for many of the reasons FirmwareBurner mentioned.

I made some good friends through a sports group I attend, which also organizes regular social events outside of training.

But aside from that, many so-called 'low-key social spaces' tend to feel like they're 'only for groups' Not because of any official rules, of course, although some places do advertise things like 'bring your friends', but in practice, you usually see people there in pre-formed groups. These aren’t necessarily close friends either, sometimes it's coworkers or people who already know each other through other contexts.

Those groups tend to stick together, and it's rare for outsiders to be included unless you already know someone who can introduce you.
by bitpush | 2025-05-30 17:35:05+00:00
This seems like a watershed moment for Apple enthusiasts. I just went back and checked out two of Marco's podcasts (https://www.relay.fm/radar/312) and (https://www.relay.fm/radar/318)

(I'm still listening to the second one, so thoughts based on the first one)

I dont know who was speaking between the two hosts but it struck me how one of them characterized their relationship with Apple. This person looked up to Apple, like a "parent". They wanted "their approval", and it was painful to see them come to that realization.

To me they also correctly identify the level of agency they gave up, and how they should be beholden to customers/users rather than this towering company, that never knew any of them existed.

There was a nugget in their about how on the web, there are no gatekeepers .. which is something all the web dev folks have been clamoring about for years. It was frustrating all these years (and even now) when Apple enthusaists come up with party-lines to justify why Apple should restrict browser engines on iOS, or some other stupid reason.

Apple has always wanted to have an upper hand, and it is refreshing to see Apple enthusiasts reflect and come around.
by jchw | 2025-05-30 17:36:29+00:00
I mean look, whether it makes sense or not, the proposition is you pay for the privilege of using things you already had for free so that you can help someone else bootstrap a sustainable business off of something (something that they didn't even make in that case, for what it's worth.) If there was a Linux Foundation fork, I'm pretty sure it would win out rather quickly.

With open source, I think what companies really want is an open source project that is maintained by people with stakes in the project, but complementary ones rather than primary. Helping pay for a new business seems like a worse proposition than just getting some major stakeholders to donate a headcount or two; yeah, it's expensive, but it's probably a better status quo and should nearly indefinitely cut out any concerns about rent seeking behavior.
by jtolmar | 2025-05-30 17:37:31+00:00
Gaussian splatting models the scene as a bunch of normal distributions (fuzzy squished spheres) instead of triangles, then renders those with billboarded triangles. It has advantages (simpler representation, easy to automatically capture from a scan) and disadvantages (not what the hardware is designed for, not watertight). The biggest disadvantage is that most graphics techniques need to be reinvented for it, and it's not clear what the full list of advantages and disadvantages will be until people have done all of those. But that big disadvantage is also a great reason to make tons of papers.
by grues-dinner | 2025-05-30 17:38:21+00:00
You can, as long as you don't need to know if/how something within the deinit failed. If you literally just want to know if the item is gone, that's exactly a weak_ptr.

File streams, say, do this by expecting users to close() the file themselves if they care if exceptions happen, but if you destruct without doing that first, any exceptions are caught and don't make it out of the destructor, so they're just gone and you'll never know.
by PaulHoule | 2025-05-30 17:39:11+00:00
(1) Unfortunately when the job market is the way it is right now hiring managers don't feel they can talk to everybody and will look for quick heuristics to eliminate people. Myself I have left experience off my resume which I thought would make me look overqualified and it's worked.

(2) Of course FAANG is not all the same. There's the story that AMZN is an awful place to work but I know some people who are happy and productive there who I'd love to snap up if I could. I've debriefed numerous ex-Googlers and they all seemed broken to me, a common story was "I thought I could have impact there, I thought I could learn something" but they couldn't. [1] I actually have a few cases of before and after interviews where I'm inclined to say "I told you so" I can't say I've really sampled Facebook, Apple or Netflix though.

[1] Google is less a company that does things better than other companies than it is a monopoly that doesn't have to do better on any metric, the one metric that matters is earnings, and they can always tighten the screws on their ecosystem to take a little more.
by koliber | 2025-05-30 17:39:17+00:00
I disagree. Many of the leet code problems can be solved by thinking them through and coming up with a solution without ever seeing the problem before. If the candidate gets stuck, the interviewer should act as a partner and offer occasional hints in case some sort of trick is involved.

Maybe we have different things in mind when we say "leet-code questions".

I don't know why leet-code style interviews would discourage the things you mentioned.
by macintosh-hd | 2025-05-30 17:40:17+00:00
So we do agree that at the time this video was recorded, the error message was at the bottom of the screen instead of at its current prominent location that cannot be covered.

(Your citation for the error message being placed in the more prominent location is from June 2024. Mouse over the "1 year ago" to see the date it was posted, June 27th 2024. This is after the video you reference, April 24th 2024.)

Only one error message can be displayed at a time at the bottom of the screen, and considering how frequently this specific individual has been dishonest, I would not put it past him to have removed the payment method to block the error message from being visible.

If your response to this is why does the message get blocked, I ask you what normal user would have paid $6,000 for FSD and not ever planned to use a supercharger? And if they were paying $99/mo for it as a subscription, there would have been a card to pay for superchargers. (Additionally, this error message doesn't appear until after the first time you supercharge, because that one will be allowed to start without payment attached as a courtesy.) This edge case is still one that should be fixed, and so it is good that it was.

I mean, the first video you posted just now doesn't even show the screen at the time of impact! At this point, either the guy is dishonest or stupid. And neither are trustworthy. It would be a better use of your time to defend people making videos to this effect not associated with The Dawn Project. They’re obviously not managing to convince Tesla, nor any relevant safety bodies that something needs to be done.

In any case, we are arguing over footage that is 14 months old. That version of FSD was and is never going to be used by unsupervised autonomous vehicles. I agree that their previous titling of the feature lacking “(Supervised)” was misleading, but it did still require full attention and constant confirmation of hands on the wheel.
by haeric | 2025-05-30 17:40:57+00:00
> I haven't done any graphics programming in years, but I thought you'd want to keep the number of draw calls down, do you need to cluster these triangles into fewer draw calls?

GPUs draw can draw 10,000's of vertices per draw call, whether they are connected together into logical objects or are "triangle soup" like this. There is some benefit to having triangles connected together so they can "share" a vertex, but not as much as you might think. Since GPUs are massively parallel, it does not matter much where on the screen or where in the buffer your data is.

> Is there any work being done to optimize a volumetric representation of scenes and from that create a set of surfaces with realistic looking shaders or similar?

This is basically where the field was going until nerfs and splats. But then nerfs and splats were such HUGE steps in fidelity, it inspired a ton of new research towards it, and I think rightfully so! Truth is that reality is really messy, so trying to reconstruct logically separated meshes for everything you see is a very hard way to try to recreate reality. Nerfs and splats recreate reality much easier.
by not_your_vase | 2025-05-30 17:41:05+00:00
Stackoverflow's meta forum has a lot of interesting things, and it gives a bit of a peek into the inner workings. While SO is not as open about itself as it was originally before Atwood et al. stepped down, there is still an unusual amount of openness (compared to other companies).

The most interesting thing is that most people think about toxicity, when it comes to SO. And interestingly this is also visible in the meta forums. Every time the company comes up with some change, some graybeard with 700k reputation (last Q/A activity: 4 years ago) comes, and starts ranting about SO going to hell, and everyone supporting the change is the embodiment of the devil. This goes on, the company post is voted down to -700, and finally SO gives in, and nothing changes. Graybeard is happy, he still won't answer any new questions, but at least no pesky new users will bother him counting his reputation.
by larrik | 2025-05-30 17:41:13+00:00
It's worse than that.

I got a call with the caller id of my (credit union) credit card company. They had my name and address, knew I had a card, and were claiming they were investigating fraudulent charges. It sounded more official than my actual credit card company. The only real things to tip me off was that the list of fraudulent charges kept changing, and they were super keen on me reading the entire credit card number back to them.

There were never any fraudulent charges, and the actual fraud department didn't seem to care.

I'm guessing it was due to the Experian leak.