MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by izyda | 2025-05-05 16:47:50+00:00
New Hedge fund | Sr Frontend/Fullstack Tech Lead, AI Engineer | On-site (NYC)

We are a new discretionary, tech industry focused hedge fund, founded by a portfolio manager with 15+ years of experience at a Tiger Cub. I lead the data/technology team here and previously spent ~6 years in a similar role at a well known Tiger Cub.

We are hiring for a frontend (or fullstack) tech lead for our internal research management web application.

We also are hiring talented engineers interested in applying AI to the investment research process, focused on

Our tech stack: * Frontend: Typescript, Vue3 * Backend: Cloudflare, Supabase/Postgresql, Typescript * Data Stack: S3/R2, Snowflake, Iceberg, Dagster, dbt

Obviously, we are not the only ones trying to figure out how to use AI in investing but in a world where there are lots of people trying to build picks & shovels, this is an opportunity to be one of the goldminers at a greenfield, new firm. This role makes sense for people who are interested in finance/investing (although you do not necessarily have to have experience in the industry). You can read a little bit about the type of data work we do here: https://magis.substack.com/p/how-to-do-alt-data-research

Target salary 180-250K, depending on experience + Bonus/Carry (hedge fund equity equivalent)

Contact: ai@nx1.com , I'm Alex.
by amarant | 2025-05-05 16:48:11+00:00
Nope! I reverted a commit once, since a colleague pushed something that didn't compile to master. Sent the guy a polite message notifying him that something seems to have been amiss with his last commit, and to please let me know if he wanted help fixing it.

Boss called me 5 minutes later and tells me off for creating "bad vibes" in the work environment.

Colleague then proceeded to forcepush his "fix" that still didn't even compile to master, removing a new feature I was about to roll out to production, because he didn't know how to merge his changes with the revert commit I'd added

This was when I decided to quit

Oh I should add this developer bragged he had 10+years working experience. Not that I believe him, but still
by dragonwriter | 2025-05-05 16:48:12+00:00
> That said, OP is referring to whether the resulting model is able to produce verbatim copies of the data.

While a tool being used to create infringing copies of some other work (whether or not it is the source material used to create the tool, and whether or not the infringing material is also verbatim copies) is relevant to whether the tool vendor is liable for contributory infringement for the infringing use of the tool, the absence of a capacity for creating such copies isn't usually enough to say that copying to make the tool isn't infringing.

(That said, generative AI tools, including LLMs specifically, have been shown to have the capacity to make such copies, to the extent that vendors of hosted models are now putting additional checks on output to try to mitigate the frequency with which verbatim copies of substantial portions of training-set works are produced, so arguing that LLMs can't do that is silly.)
by vlovich123 | 2025-05-05 16:48:43+00:00
Undefined behavior in C/C++ has been discussed for a very very long time. I'd say the impact of it when combined with optimizing compilers first came to broader public awareness around the 2010ish time frame (maybe 2013?) which is now about 12+ years old.

As for this paper, it's not about relying on a bug but rather presenting what might be possible with DRAM in the hopes of standardizing capabilities.
by GuB-42 | 2025-05-05 16:49:51+00:00
The latest, overpowered version with all the accessories is that pricey.

But you can do for much cheaper. For example: https://www.canakit.com/raspberry-pi-3-model-b-plus-basic-ki...

Add a MicroSD card (if you don't already have one) and a case (if you need one) and you get to ~$75.

You can do even cheaper by getting a $15 Pi Zero 2 W and an Ethernet adapter off AliExpress. You probably already have an old phone charger and microSD card somewhere, but if you don't they are less than $5 each on AliExpress, so maybe a total of around $30 plus shipping.
by klabb3 | 2025-05-05 16:50:12+00:00
It’s only lost revenue if the interactions were providing revenue in the first place. And for consumer tech, if you take away the ability to control the ad-funnels and engagement knobs, there is no revenue to gain. Why do you think all APIs got locked down? Nowadays even pure html delivery is getting locked down to prevent scraping. You think the SEO optimized recipe click holes are incentivized to deliver the content without the ads?

I mean, it’s not impossible that consumers will ignore sites and services that don’t play with their AI. But even so, the content providers would need to find alternative revenue streams – otherwise they’d be bleeding money.

My prediction is that tech companies will continue to compete for dominance over the entry points, apps and human interactions. It will be an adversarial space where coalitions of vertically integrated walled gardens can work. Basically how it is already.
by am3101 | 2025-05-05 16:50:13+00:00
That’s true though: (1) while Tolkien isn’t trying to write an allegory he is trying to tell a story and build a world that is internally consistent (he famously builds up from language, as a philologist) and so this kind of criticism is appropriate (perhaps more so than say GRRM or CS Lewis who are often much less internally consistent and thus harder to analyze) (2) there is a pretty compelling argument that when Tolkien argues that his world is tabula rasa / de novo (eg claiming it did not have “any influence” on the plot), he’s deceiving himself. Many Tolkien scholars (including his pal Lewis) seem to think WWI heavily influenced LOTR in particular (esp the sacking of the shire).

Agree it is very odd to ignore everything outside of LOTR. Like making claims about the gospels without reading the Old Testament or epistles
by Workaccount2 | 2025-05-05 16:50:37+00:00
The is a bar of usage built into the law, otherwise everyone who reads this wired article is violating copyright by making a full copy to their computer. Generally making non-lasting copies is fine, otherwise the internet wouldn't work.

AI doesn't need lasting copies to train, however I don't know what the actual implementation is. But if it's ruled that they can only use copyrighted data if it's not stored for more than the time it would take a human to consume, It wouldn't really cripple the models, but perhaps make training more logistically challenging.

It's important to understand that models are not data archives. They are statistical constructs made from getting quizzed, that uses human made content to generate the quiz questions.
by SoftTalker | 2025-05-05 16:50:50+00:00
Among the common vulnerabilities listed:

> Outdated Wordpress plugins and CMS systems

No surprise, having worked in edu the following scenario was very common:

1) Researcher gets a grant for a project

2) Grad student sets up a Drupal site for the project

3) Things are maintained and updated for a couple of years

4) Grant runs out, project wraps up, student graduates, everyone forgets about the server which sits unattended and unmaintained.

Still happens, but most universites have really clamped down on the ability to just stand up a web server on the network. Many are requiring everything to be on a centrally managed enterprise CMS which is a PITA but that's the fallout for too much sloppy administration.
by aaroninsf | 2025-05-05 16:50:50+00:00
It's absolutely the fault of the mechanics and submission of our society to surveillance capitalism,

one which has been intentionally cultivated, exploited, and capitalized, by Meta,

so yes, it is Instagram's fault. They are the primary party—though I do not excuse those complicit with surveillance capitalism, meaning every person who continues despite unending evidence for how sociopathic and destructive the company, its management, and its impact is, to use their products. Which use however is also traceable in significant part back to Meta, via the ugly mechanics of exploitative and amoral engagement-engineering and their exploitation of monopoly.

This is a front upon which they might and should be confronted... a class action on behalf of those have not consented to participate in surviellance would be a lovely thing.

Under the current political shitshow, also in measurable part the "fault" of Meta, however, we can expect no such thing.
by levensworth | 2025-05-05 16:50:51+00:00
Location: Dublin, Ireland [EU]. Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: Python, Pytorch, sklearn, Spark, Java, Javascript, Git, AWS

Résumé/CV: https://www.levensworth.com/santiago_bassani_CV.pdf

Email: santi@levensworth.com

I am a AI/ML Engineer. Developed micro services employing large language models, retrieval augmented generation, and classical, and deep learning techniques. I have experience taking projects from the research phase to operational deployment.

Looking for new opportunities to get into more product oriented teams.
by bullen | 2025-05-05 16:50:53+00:00
I did something similar, but I use these EXT4 requirements:

- hard links (only tar works for backup) - small file size (or inodes run out before disk space)

http://root.rupy.se

It's very useful for global distributed real-time data that don't need the P in CAP for writes.

(no new data can be created if one node is offline = you can login, but not register)
by tristor | 2025-05-05 16:51:22+00:00
I think phones/snapshot culture definitely creates a lack of engagement. It's more of a photo to say "I was there" than for any particular purpose. But creative photography, as an artform, actually connects you to your subjects and engages you in a way which doesn't happen approaching the same situation without the camera. The camera is just a tool, and its your intent that matters.
by Retric | 2025-05-05 16:51:38+00:00
> while many practical skills are at best learned as a side effect.

I strongly disagree, that’s the intent not a side effect.

It’s IMO a common misconception that early algorithm classes are just designed around learning algorithms. Instead basic algorithms are the simplest thing to turn abstract requirements into complex code. The overwhelming majority of what students learn are the actual tools of programming, debugging, etc while using the training wheels of a problem already broken up into bite sized steps.

Ramping up the complexity is then more about learning tradeoffs and refining those skills than writing an ever more efficient sorting algorithm or whatnot.
by klibertp | 2025-05-05 16:51:50+00:00
Hm, my impression is based on the lack of posts or articles with people demanding this to be a feature. I searched, and it just doesn't seem to come up in discussions, and when it does, it's invariably about cl-cont and problems with it.

The first implementation doesn't need to be production-ready. And the maintenance burden (along with polishing the implementation and porting to other architectures) could be shared by a few people and done over time. Having a starting point in the form of CMUCL code (already adapted to SBCL!) is the perfect opportunity for everyone interested to chime in: enough voices in favor could convince someone capable to continue the work. Yet, there are literally just 3 comments under the ESL presentation video, and it's not mentioned anywhere else...
by mrlongroots | 2025-05-05 16:52:08+00:00
Thoughts:

1. Distributed filesystems do often use databases for metadata (FoundationDB for 3FS being a recent example)

2. Using a B+ tree for metadata is not much different from having a sorted index

3. Filesystems are a common enough usecase that skipping the abstraction complexity to co-optimize the stack is warranted
by snoopertrooper | 2025-05-05 16:52:16+00:00
I’d like to inform you that I share your same anxieties. I read a book called “Difficult Conversations” (Patron, stone, heen). It didn’t remove all the anxiety, but it gave me A framework to lean on to get started, which was half of the stress. I think it will always suck having to fire people you like.
by sidewndr46 | 2025-05-05 16:52:35+00:00
The current "back to the moon" missions are built around the shuttle hardware, so I don't find this technical argument very convincing. The orbiter was just a convenient way to hang out in LEO and bring back some engines on each flight.

It's like saying that since my truck is rated to tow 7000 lbs, any discussion around towing 8000 lbs is impossible. Using shuttle hardware to get beyond LEO requires compromises and design changes, but it isn't impossible. The RS-25 on paper appears to have a higher specific impulse than the F-1 engine. The Saturn V rocket family isn't some once in a civilization accomplishment. It's mostly just unique in that the safety record of it is really, really good.
by crystal_revenge | 2025-05-05 16:52:55+00:00
> you can't but help think about the thing that is top of mind, anxiety be damned.

This really captures what I think is the main problem with our state of being constantly distracted: it feels at first like a relief from anxiety, but ultimately results in even small anxieties never properly being dealt with. The end result is a vicious cycle (or I guess virtuous if you sell online ads) of becoming more and more anxious causing us to rely more and more on the screen to distract us, which in turn only increases that backlog of anxiety.

I see this happen in a lot of younger people that are constantly on screens: they frequently mention their need to "chill for a bit" and yet spend most of their time doing nothing but staring at a screen. It's clear that they are living in a lukewarm vat of anxiety that they can't face while staring at a screen, but also one which causes them immediate stress when they do look away.
by randysalami | 2025-05-05 16:53:52+00:00
In the past 6 months, I’ve started working to support a software system with complexity much like the kind described in this article. When I started and saw it in all its glory, my naive engineer brain thought no way this can work. The system was very large, patchwork through outsourcing/turnover, and poorly documented both at the code and UX level. There were many critical bugs in the code and new features were constantly being introduced. Yet as the months went by, it continued functioning at scale as it had done for so many years. Many things were wrong and did break constantly but a combination of operators being careful/resourceful, support staff making in DB changes/hotfixes to recover from fail states 24/7, and just so much human labor in the system allowed it to work and scale across many clients. So many things could fail in a day, and even though the system was so complex, people made it work and it was very educational to me.

Now, seeing that up close as a loner engineer gave me nightmares and inspired me in developing the technology for my startup. I’m just one guy so I limit complexity, write as little code as possible, and protect myself like a paranoid person. Basically, I see the primary value I can deliver from an engineering perspective is solving my domain as much as possible while limiting the scope as much as possible. Then when scaling, the costs/risks presented in this article are delayed as much as possible. It’s not always possible because some domains touch the real world too much but I see competitors in my field not heed this, and they’re starting to topple over in my opinion.
by immibis | 2025-05-05 16:53:55+00:00
If you used it for fair-use purposes, it could well have been legal. The only way to find out for sure would be to have them sue you, and then successfully or unsuccessfully defend yourself with a fair use argument. Please keep in mind that the law is a kind of stochastic process; "how illegal" something is dependent on how many times someone is found liable for it, which is something that takes a bunch of lawsuits to actually know, and each lawsuit is unique. It's not a computer program where if(X && Y && !Z) then punishment(); (well it sort of is, but X and Y and Z aren't definite boolean values, but things that have to be estimated based on evidence). (I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice)
by valec | 2025-05-05 16:54:27+00:00
> Also taking SSRIs near MDMA administration is one of the worst pieces of what is doubtless intended as harm reduction advice I’ve ever seen. You don’t hand people a recipe for serotonin syndrome because of a small scale rat test or two.

you have a deep understanding of releaser pharmacology if you state this. don't take it from me though--matthew baggott, one of the leading researchers studying enactogen pharmacology recommends doing this exact thing
by dredmorbius | 2025-05-05 16:55:08+00:00
Oh, and there's the deadweight loss of those who would qualify for a benefit (under law) but fail either to jump through the proper bureaucratic hoops, or who do hoop-jump, but are still denied benefits, whether through bureaucratic error, inefficiency, corruption, or other reasons.

TFA describes the first circumstance.

Patio11 has noted that the optimum level of fraud is non-zero, a point picked up by Cory Doctorow as well:

Patio11: <https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/optimal-amount-of-fra...> (HN discussion: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38905889>).

Doctorow: <https://doctorow.medium.com/https-pluralistic-net-2025-04-24...>

Means-tested benefits are something you really want to think through before advocating. Gradient-benefits or sliding-scale benefits are forms of means testing.

I don't know if there's well-developed theory of when means-testing should or shouldn't be applied. There are some surprising arguments from surprising positions (a quick glance at the beginning of this National Affairs article, from a conservative position, is against means-testing, though it's also critical of social welfare programmes generally: <https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/means-te...>).

I'd suggest that means-testing / sliding scale works better or is more appropriate where:

- It's applied locally rather than globally, to small populations in regular contact and where even eyeball assessments are likely roughly accurate.

- Where resources and/or services offered are limited.

Provision of sliding-scale services (healthcare, dental, vision, legal assistance) often falls under such cases. School lunches might, but the risks of abuse and long-term community harm are high.
by arduanika | 2025-05-05 16:55:22+00:00
This is a good post.

Off-topic, but on your parenthetical about SMS "wrong number" texts "(That scam doesn’t even make sense...)", part of why they do it is what's called "warming up" their sending number so that it's seen as legit by carriers and SMS filters. They're also seeing whether you're a real person who responds, in which case they can come back later with a more sophisticated scam (or re-sell you number, which is now more valuable, to another scammer for that purpose).

But you're right that it doesn't make much sense as a text you might receive naturally. Best thing is to not reply so that you're not feeding the beast.

Incidentally, I used ChatGPT to refresh my memory about how this works, and in its initial response it got it backwards, saying that "warming up" is what it does to your number. You can't trust these things one bit! Your post calls it "automated irresponsibility", and I like that.
by dherikb | 2025-05-05 16:56:07+00:00
I know that this can sound counterintuitive, but the best strategy to keep the phone away from me is to be on my desktop computer.

Different from when I'm on my smartphone, I do not feel any anxiety to check social networks using my computer. So I can focus more on learning some stuff, coding, organizing my personal data, checking my appointments, checking the tech news, or even playing some games (to have some fun).
by captn3m0 | 2025-05-05 16:56:12+00:00
From what I know, Signal tries to block known bad clients. But guaranteeing such blocks is impossibly hard short of forcing attestations via things like SafetyNet that would legitimately impact users as well.

There was a case where a teenager in India rose to news media popularity by publishing a messaging app, which was a simple rebranding of Signal he made using some other tool which patches assets iirc.

It was blocked by Signal, but only after reports surfacing about it being an insecure rebrand.
by LicenseSpring | 2025-05-05 16:56:25+00:00
I feel like license management tools are following a similar trajectory to Project Management tools from 10 years ago, where every half decent developer figured they could just roll it up themselves after taking a look on the market and decided they could do better / faster / cheaper (I'm speaking from experience as the founder of LicenseSpring.com). Just ahead-up, new offers seem to appear in this space every 4-5 months, such as https://batchkeys.com, https://keyforge.dev/, schematic. Then there's the older players in this space, including keygen.sh, license4j, Labs64, Softwaredna, keyzy, etc. etc. Some grind it out for a while, others pivot.

And even at $20 / month, it doesn't seem to discourage new entrants in the market. Vibe coding seems to be making it easier than even to launch these sorts of services.

Anyway, I'm not going to suggest not to reinvent the wheel like so many others have (including myself), but be aware that it is a crowded space at every price point (even free / open source).
by _DeadFred_ | 2025-05-05 16:56:45+00:00
Tangentially related if you make music in the box and want some simple Daft Punk breakdowns to experiment from:

https://reverbmachine.com/blog/daft-punk-homework-synth-soun... https://reverbmachine.com/blog/daft-punk-discovery-synth-sou...
by jjulius | 2025-05-05 16:57:09+00:00
>... I do believe not giving one's brain a break is partly causative in depleting one's desire/ability to act.

The response I am flippantly tempted to argue is that it's good for people to not be acting/doing all the time and that downtime is essential, but, as we've both acknowledged, there's nuance there, and it all boils down to what the desire is and what the consequence(s) is/are should we not act.

>I find my mind to be quite active while daydreaming. But everyone is different, I suppose.

Totally! I mentioned elsewhere in this thread that I love backpacking in silence and without using my phone. These are 3-4 day trips deep in the wilderness, completely disconnected from the rest of the world and entirely in my own headspace. I love those moments, but I know plenty of people in meatspace who've expressed to me that they don't know how I can do that because of the way their own trains of thought run/work.
by Workaccount2 | 2025-05-05 16:57:47+00:00
They are in no way compression algorithms. They can be modeled like that in the same way you can model humans as lossy compression algorithms.

You would never use a human to backup your financial reports, but the human might be able to give a good overview. You would never use an LLM to backup your financial reports, but they might be able to give a good overview.

AI training data is disposable. There is nothing that could be called a compression algorithm that disposes all of the data you put into it. AI uses training data as examples of what the next token in a token sequence is. The examples are disposable reference points, not the model itself. That's how you get image models that are 20GB in size despite training on 20PB of data. It's 20PB of examples used to form the shape of a 20GB model. You could show it 5GB of training data or 500EB of training data and it would still be 20GB - because it is not a compression algo, it's a 20GB shape formed by external data.