MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by veleek | 2025-05-26 14:48:43+00:00
Because you can’t search that without physically looking at each box. There could be a bunch odd reasons that many boxes remain unpacked; downsizing, temporary housing. It’d be nice to be able to finds the one thing you need (you could even label the issue with the box location!).

Anyway, a fun solution but I think it’s more effort than I would have been willing to put in even if I would have appreciated the outcome.
by therealmarv | 2025-05-26 14:48:53+00:00
I just hope you keep still trying with whatever tool you want. I see among many developers to see frustration once after some deep testing of AI coding tools and then they never look back and never try again. This means they will be stuck with soon outdated knowledge and experiences.

The LLMs advance and so does the quality. What e.g. OpenAIs o3 can do is so much better than what GPT 3.5 can do.

I'm convinced every developer who does not stay up to date with AI coding tools and know how to use them will become obsolete sooner or later.
by lm28469 | 2025-05-26 14:49:09+00:00
> pensions are not a vacation sponsored by the government but a way to provide for those who can't provide for themselves.

If you had the chance to find a nice job that paid well and played your cards right it definitely is, why do we need to pay high pensions to people who own multiple properties, have millions on the side and could EASILY thrive just from their passive income ?
by tomsmeding | 2025-05-26 14:49:51+00:00
This caught me by surprise:

> Contrary to popular belief, unwrapping the IO constructor is deeply unsafe and can violate memory safety, even if State# tokens are never duplicated or dropped.

Does ANYONE believe that unwrapping the IO constructor is normal and safe? I must live in a very sheltered bubble. Isn't it extremely obvious that once you get that state function out of the IO constructor, you can build your own unsafePerformIO?
by rainsford | 2025-05-26 14:50:22+00:00
If your premise was right, it makes even less sense as a justification for using other peoples' IP without compensation.

AI companies are for profit organizations in a largely capitalist world. If what they're providing is so massively more valuable to humanity than artists' IP, then the AI companies should easily be able to monetize that value in a way that allows them to fairly compensate the artists for the crucial role they're apparently playing in AI development.

Of course scale is the real problem here, because we're not just talking about AI companies compensating "some artists", but likely "all artists". This probably is financially untenable since the current value AI is providing to society seems unlikely to be greater than the value of all IP that exists in the world.

But that's not some critical feature of AI, it just speaks to the way current AI models work where you take every bit of text and images that exists and throw it into a data center full of GPUs to burn through a large city's worth of electricity until something approximating human text and image generation pops out. Arguably that approach is driven by the fact that GPUs and electricity are affordable and the input data is "free" if you're willing to steal it. I see no reason to believe less wasteful models couldn't produce good results without requiring the input being all human knowledge, and you'd save some electricity and resources in the meantime.

Edit: I'm not an AI researcher, but I also think incentivizing more efficient approaches to AI model development and training might yield more human-like AI (i.e. actual AI rather than turbo charged autocomplete). Humans also develop our cognitive abilities by absorbing external information but we manage to do it by absorbing a fraction of the information as a large-scale AI model with significantly better results. Focusing on whatever difference is behind that rather than building ever larger data centers with ever more powerful GPUs might be an interesting shift.
by TimPC | 2025-05-26 14:50:23+00:00
My CPAP does the first two. But generally if you get event the tiniest leak (and it's hard to stop all the leaks) it's very noisy for my partner. My masks leaks so little that I have between 0 and 1 events per hour but it's still annoyingly loud so my partner usually sleeps in our guest bedroom. If I could take a pill instead I would do so gladly. That being said my CPAP machine typically reduces events by 98% or so, so 56% just isn't going to cut it.
by cvoss | 2025-05-26 14:50:26+00:00
Yes, my intention was to point to the host of comments taking the most extreme postures. If they are weak strawman arguments, that's their own doing, not mine.

GP said they had never seen any of these, so a cherry pick is exactly what was asked for.

I cannot understand how you misread my post as a claim that there is widespread support for torture on HN.

> I doubt anyone sane who defended the guy in your latter HN post link would also justify imprisoning someone in a homemade dungeon to mutilate them until they give you their private keys.

Thanks. You are making my argument for me. I wish all 11 people I quoted earlier could hear this.
by mike_hearn | 2025-05-26 14:51:28+00:00
It's fundamentally different in any society with strong private property rights. A private pension is a set of investments, i.e. something that ultimately is owned by you. How much those investments pay off, if at all, is unknown, but if they do pay off then it's yours.

A state pension would be illegal for anyone except the state to run, because it'd be classed as a Ponzi scheme. Those are recognized as being unstable, hence why you're not allowed to run one. There is no investment into owned assets that pay out, just the appearance of it.
by arghwhat | 2025-05-26 14:51:32+00:00
> because they don’t have knowledge like humans do, they rely on pattern-matching, not understanding.

I don't think this comparison makes sense - humans do not have knowledge as a unique thing differentiating us from LLMs. "Knowledge" is just the ability to produce relevant/"correct" results in some interaction, and some of us have acquired experiences that involve dealing with a particular subject and other knowledgable people within that subject for years or even decades, granting us (very fallible!) "knowledge" within that specific area.

Humans hallucinate answers, even within their area of knowledge. Our memory is imperfect, so we're creating an answer based on bits and pieces, while anything missing is subconsciously glossed over and filled in with something plausible. It's just that the more experiences you have in an area, the better your hallucination. Those weird moments when your parents assure you of some fact that challenge the limits of just how wrong something can be would then be an example of hallucination in the extreme polar opposite end.

(Note that I am not implying that the human brain works like an LLM, but rather just challenge the concept of "knowledge" being fundamenetally different from LLM behavior.)
by PeterWhittaker | 2025-05-26 14:51:32+00:00
I tend to do something like this. Normally, I wouldn't include the extra jobs calls and extra echo calls, these are just to show what is happening.

#!/usr/bin/env bash runUntilDoneOrTimeout () { local -i timeout=0 OPTIND=1 while getopts "t:" opt; do case $opt in t) timeout=$OPTARG;; esac done shift $((OPTIND - 1)) runCommand="$*" $runCommand & runPID=$! echo checking jobs jobs # just to prove there are some echo job check complete while jobs %- >& /dev/null && ((timeout > 0)); do echo "waiting for $runCommand for $timeout seconds" sleep 1 ((timeout--)) done if (( timeout == 0 )); then echo "$runCommand timed out" kill -9 $runPID wait $runPID else echo "$runCommand completed" fi echo checking jobs jobs # just to prove there are none echo job check complete } declare -i timeopt=10 declare -i sleepopt=100 OPTIND=1 while getopts "t:s:" opt; do case $opt in t) timeopt=$OPTARG;; s) sleepopt=$OPTARG;; esac done shift $((OPTIND - 1)) runUntilDoneOrTimeout -t $timeopt sleep $sleepopt
by binoct | 2025-05-26 14:51:38+00:00
Those who can tolerate the general CPAP experience, have bed partners who tolerate it, and don’t experience detrimental effects should absolutely use it when there are no comparable solutions. However there are lots of perfectly legitimate reasons why not everyone can, and having alternatives (which do also come with side effects) to consider is amazing for the community overall. It’s legitimately great that it sounds like CPAP treatment has been effective for you (as it has for me, mostly), but your comments end up sounding quite dismissive of the challenges faced by other patients.

Careful skepticism of new treatments is always warranted, but even if it only helps 5% of patients with OSA in absolute terms that’s a huge population impact.
by stickfigure | 2025-05-26 14:51:53+00:00
This conversation repeats itself ad infinitum around DI, ORMs, caching, security, logging, validation, etc, etc, etc... no, you don't need a framework. You can write your own. There are three common outcomes of this:

* Your framework gets so complicated that someone rips it out and replaces it with one of the standard frameworks.

* Your framework gets so complicated that it turns into a popular project in its own right.

* Your app dies and your custom framework dies with it.

The third one is the most common.
by freeone3000 | 2025-05-26 14:52:00+00:00
Condensation of water is exothermic. If you add a cold thing to the environment, ie, remove heat from the water, the water will condense all on its own. This reaches steady-state when the cold thing is warm and the water is condensed. No thermodynamics issue!

They’re claiming they have a material that will do it at higher temperatures. Assuming such a material gets hotter as it works, there’s no thermodynamics problem here.
by ofjcihen | 2025-05-26 14:52:22+00:00
Also a security professional, pentester, bug bounty hunter, multitude of other irrelevant self-imposed titles owner here.

You’ve demonstrated impact by small amounts of enumeration. If you had any real experience in bug bounty contracts you would know 2 things:

Almost all contracts ask you not to enumerate the entire data set as 2 or 3 records is enough (again, that’s how security controls work) and no one is interested in hearing about rate-limiting on public bounties. Pentesting sure, but that’s not what we’re talking about.

Source, 2 decades in the security industry at large in all kinds of positions.

And a note for future reference. If you think I’m out of line for my snark then don’t give what you can’t take.

Edit: Oh, and as someone on both sides of the fence enumerating an entire data set against scope is in the top ten reasons people get booted from programs. To anyone else seeing this chain: don’t do it. YOU DO NOT NEED TO TO PROVE IMPACT. Respect people’s privacy.
by speleding | 2025-05-26 14:52:23+00:00
If someone does leave a message we get an email from the voip service with that message as an attachment, and we listen to it. I figure that should be good enough to comply with the law. That's better than trying to call e.g. Google.

(We provide email support, of course. Setting up a call center would make our $9 SaaS product more than twice as expensive. We figure that customers rather pay a low price than have phone support. And there are many competitors they can go to if they really want to talk to someone.)
by necovek | 2025-05-26 14:52:55+00:00
Yes. I've been at companies serving millions of requests per hour with Python backends.

There are some gotchas to be wary of, and obviously running costs are higher than some other languages/runtimes, but the lower cost of project iteration and development still makes it worthwhile.

OTOH, because of the reputation of being easy to pick up, and thus tons of people murking around with it, you'll get all sorts of crappy code and developers with many years with Python, but no real experience writing production quality code.
by roenxi | 2025-05-26 14:53:00+00:00
> EU directives have forced banks to modernize at a pace that wouldn't have been possible if we just let the free market decide

1) Is that automatically good? Damn those capitalists and their slow and steady approach to major changes, I suppose. Wouldn't want to proceed too thoughtfully.

2) The free market in banking looks pretty much exactly like the crypto ecosystem. As people often put it, speedrunning banking history. The only thing slowing the financial institutions down is the regulation (which is pretty much the pro-regulation argument of "if we don't regulate it they'll do a bunch of stupid things too quickly").

There isn't something of a free market in banking but the limitations are extreme enough that it is more of a heavily mixed to centralised one. Interest rates are managed by a central committee and banks provide any colour of service you like as long as it is black. Typically heavy KYC regulations to link the system to law enforcement and state intelligence systems. There is enough freedom to keep the fees fair and a bit of flexibility in what the money gets invested in which is pretty good. But for transaction speed I'd actually be a little surprised if the banks were allowed to control their own settlement timelines; I assume going to quickly would start running in to KYC-style compliance problems.
by Jensson | 2025-05-26 14:53:16+00:00
Healthcare share of economies is just trending up and up over time, there is very little cutting there. At best you go back a year or two sometimes, as you can see here.

So what you are asking for is already happening.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/health-expenditure-and-fi...

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Healthcare-spending-as-a...
by jrslv | 2025-05-26 14:53:42+00:00
I’m working on https://rejobs.org - a job board dedicated to careers in the renewable energy industry.

It aggregates job ads from various sources and lets employers post directly. The goal is to help more people find meaningful work in wind, solar, BESS, etc.

Built with PHP, PostGIS, and a swarm of GPT-assisted cron jobs. I’d love your feedback.
by loudmax | 2025-05-26 14:54:10+00:00
Along the same lines, it's often useful to think of an LLM's "understanding" a question or a context. Sometimes responses from smaller models show a shallower "understanding" of the question than you'd get from a bigger model.

Obviously, we shouldn't anthropomorphize too much here, and even the most powerful LLMs don't "understand" or "reason" or "think" the way humans do. But whatever they're doing, it's at least analogous to what we do. These concepts are genuinely useful for making better use of these tools.
by david-gpu | 2025-05-26 14:54:29+00:00
> I don't mean to offend anyone, but if you've never heard of most of that stuff, then I think that you don't deserve to call yourself a professional programmer [...] i.e. you're an amateur.

Every person is going to have a different idea of what knowledge is essential, and as you point out, we don't know what we don't know.

It is easy to look down on people who don't know what we consider fundamental, but it takes a little bit of humility to realize that we are ignorant of what other professionals value the most. Different roles require of different knowledge.
by chasd00 | 2025-05-26 14:54:36+00:00
Tangent but this may solve a mystery of mine. When I make scrambled eggs I add a little bit of water to make them fluffy. When I turn off the heat there’s a puff of steam I can’t explain. Since it seems to me more heat is needed to produce that extra puff of steam. However, maybe the fast condensing of the water vapor that happens when I turn off the stove produces a. I start of extra heat and therefore the steam?
by epistasis | 2025-05-26 14:54:53+00:00
This is very similar to the economic destruction wrought by those who block housing in the most highly productive geographic regions of the country.

By taking what would be a positive sum situation and changing it into zero sum, productive capital growth is shifted into rentier capital growth. It shifts wealth from those who use use capital to make us all wealthier to those who hoard capital and reap the work of others.
by jqpabc123 | 2025-05-26 14:55:32+00:00
it might be to actual consciousness as iron pyrite is to gold — shiny, but not the real thing.

You can program a computer to simulate, display and express all sorts of things.

For example, certain characteristics of self awareness.

But this doesn't make it truly self aware. A huge gap in functionality exists between expression and genuine awareness and understanding. I think AI fans tend to lose sight of this.

An LLM is still just a programmed computer. Much of it's programming is derived from statistics and examples instead of explicit logic/code but it is still programmed and as such is still constrained to playback of some variation of it's input.

My favorite example of LLM understanding and "awareness" (of rather the lack thereof) --- a chatbot accused a pro basketball player of vandalism because it found references to him "throwing bricks" during play. In other words, any real understanding just isn't in the cards yet. Further examples/programming may statistically correct this particular nuance but many more unexpected cases will likely still remain.
by wronglebowski | 2025-05-26 14:55:46+00:00
Housing doesn’t benefit the local community(from most NIMBY perspectives). It makes housing more affordable lowering their property values, creates the need for more infrastructure and creates change in their environment.

The motto seems to be, “Neighborhoods full, I like things the way they are. No more change please.” Doesn’t matter if it’s a data center, housing, or any type of development.
by bisby | 2025-05-26 14:55:57+00:00
Much of the gaming population doesn't replay games. Why should I care if Major Game doesn't work any more, I've been playing Major Game 2. I had no intention of playing Major Game 1 again. The fact that their old game doesn't work anymore doesn't "burn" them, and they genuinely might not even notice. As long as they keep the game servers up and running long enough for the vast majority of people to get their enjoyment out of the game, no one feels robbed, and no one stops buying games as a result. The average person is not that savvy of a consumer.

Can I play CoD4 on xbox 360 anymore? Single AND multiplayer? I genuinely don't know the answer to that because I haven't tried within the past decade(+). Should I be able to? Absolutely yes. But I have a sneaking suspicion all the multiplayer servers are shut down.
by BurningFrog | 2025-05-26 14:56:10+00:00
I've been using CPAP for 10 years, and it's pretty much the best thing that ever happened to me!

The morning after my first real sleep in ~5 years was an unreal improvement. It felt like I was snatched from my death bed and back to normal.

I use the nostril mask, and it doesn't really bother me. The full face mask experience is a lot worse.

PS Technically, it blows!
by akacrobat | 2025-05-26 14:56:11+00:00
I think at the hedge funds, AI will play out similar to how quant has in the past, i.e. as a technology that will still have alphas unlockable by good usage.

High-performing funds may "beat the market" at models, data, fine-tuning, RAG or even figuring out which AI tool should be deployed for which tasks.
by linsomniac | 2025-05-26 14:56:23+00:00
There's also a new "KPAP" (KairosPAP) that is a different air delivery algorithm that people tend to find much more comfortable. Rather than being a constant air delivery, it's a little kick at just the right time, is my understanding. https://sleepdoctor.com/pages/cpap/kairospap-kpap
by kstrauser | 2025-05-26 14:56:37+00:00
That seems reasonable. If you want to keep building software on by now ancient hardware, they’ll still give you the tools to do it. They’re just not going to slow down development for the platforms most people use to accommodate it anymore.

For context, that platform had 76K downloads. x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu had 135M, or about 1800x more.
by Drunkfoowl | 2025-05-26 14:56:39+00:00
I spoke with my ENT about this. I was treating anxiety triggered shortness of breath, and found that nose breathing was able to calm me if I box breathe.

She laughed, and said of course taping your mouth is stupid. Which I assumed, but had a friend of mine suggest it because it "changed his life". It's manosphere stuff.
by GenerocUsername | 2025-05-26 14:56:43+00:00
At a macro level, people from the former group might be doing better than you think.

I have gone from Senior II, to Lead Architect, to Principal Engineer in the years LLMs have been available.

It's not literally a 100x multiplier, but I have leveraged their ability to both fill in details where I lack specific knowledge, and as a first point of contact when researching a new space.

LLMs have enabled me to widen my sphere of influence by deepening my abilities at every point of my T-shaped knowledge curve.
by lkbm | 2025-05-26 14:56:48+00:00
I moved a couple weeks ago, and was quite confused when--after repeatedly searching through every kitchen box--we were missing the flour, sugar, and pasta.

Turns out one kitchen box got placed at the bottom of in a pile of book boxes in the living room.

If you unpack in a day, it's no big deal, but if you spent a week unpacking, you may find yourself having to eat something other than spaghetti for lunch, which is normally fine, but not when you really want spaghetti and the lack of spaghetti merely makes you more determined to find it.
by growthwtf | 2025-05-26 14:56:58+00:00
I'm not familiar with the situation and so was curious about the assertions of scale increases in the article, and disappointed in the lack of citations.

Here are a few resources I found on the subject:

- https://www.mining.com/copper-industry-needs-to-invest-2-1-t...

- https://cilive.com/commodities/metals-mining/news-and-insigh...

- https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/chiles-copper-mi...

Sounds like a tough situation, although I remain skeptical about how much of it is due directly to AI as the author is trying to assert versus other growth technologies.
by thunkle | 2025-05-26 14:57:18+00:00
Just pointing out https://www.worldlibertyfinancial.com/ 60% owned by the trump family and also Steve Witkoff (special envoy to the middle east) just got funded $2B by the UAE. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Liberty_Financial No conflict of interest here??? Who runs the justice department? Who is not supposed to receive gifts from foreign nationals

[Edit] corrected website URL.
by vessenes | 2025-05-26 14:57:38+00:00
As always Dwarkesh gives the best interview in tech. The whole episode is worth a listen, but some of the highlights for me were:

Learning that an earlier Opus was highly committed to animal welfare and they’re not sure why; other versions and models have not been

Hearing that their mechanistic interpretability groups recently beat an internal red team quickly, using Claude’s help

Speculation on de-risking AI growth for nation states that aren’t building frontier models

Real real profound comment near the end noting that even if we get no more algorithmic improvements ever, current tech is sufficient to replace most white collar jobs, given enough data.

That last one is a super profound and interesting point to me. We’re at the inflection point where white collar jobs will at the very least be implemented by this tech and overseen by humans, and the current tech and economics make it desirable to do so for companies that pay for a lot of white collar work.

Feels like it’s time to buckle up. Not AI2027 buckle up, but still time to buckle up.
by scyclow | 2025-05-26 14:58:37+00:00
I think what a lot of people are missing about stablecoins is that it's not just about clearing transactions faster than SWIFT. With stablecoins you get programable money without having to deal with the wild fluctuations of crypto.

A simple (and contrived) example: Let's say I want to send you $100 on Tuesday, but only on even-numbered hours. This is a trivially easy smart contract to write. Sure, you could do this with crypto, but if you want to protect yourself against price fluctuations it makes sense to use a stablecoin.