MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jaza | 2025-05-27 11:43:08+00:00
Yes, I've tried AI image generation, and while it's impressive, it's also - at the end of the day - just as bland and unoriginal a mashup of existing material as AI text generation is.

All humans (I believe!) have the potential to be that amazing. And all humans come up with amazing ideas and produce amazing works in their life, just that 99% of us aren't appreciated as much as the famous 1% are. We're all valuable.
by Ayesh | 2025-05-27 11:43:16+00:00
- ISRG/LetsEncrypt: it's amazing how much if an impact they are having in HTTPS, and that's with a very small number of people and resources.

- PHP Foundation.

- Drupal Association - I started my career with Drupal. Although I rarely use Drupal anymore, it feels right.

I wish I could donate to uBlock Origin, but the developer doesn't seem to accept donations last time I checked.

I think the Open Street Map is also well worth donating, I'm going to pretty soon.
by noduerme | 2025-05-27 11:43:26+00:00
I'm not. I'm just making a comment about how people work. When you publicly compliment yourself, they tend to think you're an asshole.

Your comment reminded me of a teacher who told me to "put more sugar in your coffee" when I asked a pointed question. That's when I realized he was an asshole who had nothing to teach me. People say things like that (or "yuck"/"yum") to make themselves feel superior. A good word for it is smarmy. It's funny, 'cause my comment here only drew responses from people who needed to justify themselves - no reaction was required. I don't know you. I wasn't talking to you personally. I was only saying that no one likes a braggart.
by miki123211 | 2025-05-27 11:43:31+00:00
The issue here (which is almost always the case with prompt injection attacks) is that an LLM has access to attacker-controlled data, sensitive information, and a data exfiltration capability.

THe "cardinal rule of agent design" should be that an LLM can have access to at most two of these during one session. To avoid security issues, agents should be designed in a way that ensures this.

For example, any agent that accesses an issue created by an untrusted party should be considered "poisoned" by attacker-controlled data. If it then accesses any private information, its internet access capability should be severely restricted or disabled altogether until context is cleared.

In this model, you don't need per-repo tokens. As long as the "cardinal rule" is followed, no security issue is possible.

Sadly, it seems like MCP doesn't provide the tools needed to ensure this.
by morsecodist | 2025-05-27 11:44:48+00:00
It's not that I think model version doesn't matter. I switch between them all the time (often to downgrade as much as upgrade honestly). It's that I think people are misrepresenting the kinds of results you can get from these models and seem to take it as a personal attack and come up with excuses when you talk about limitations that you've encountered. It makes it difficult to engage in conversations about tools and I've gotten to the point where I don't believe anything anyone says about it anymore and I just try tools for myself.

I said people are saying the models are PhD level intelligent not that you need to be. I get a ton of value from them and I don't have a PhD.
by rads | 2025-05-27 11:45:10+00:00
There is often a misunderstanding that “REPL driven development” means typing things into the REPL prompt interactively and accumulating state that’s not easy to reproduce. Writing code down in comment blocks as you go is the solution to that, as you mentioned. With that technique I have no fear of restarting my REPL and getting back to where I was.
by ddtaylor | 2025-05-27 11:45:58+00:00
I think we should look at one even earlier: COBOL.

This was the response by non-developers to make it obsolete to need to spell out your business details to an expensive programmer who, we presume, will just change them anyhow and make up their own numbers!

That didn't work for shit either, although to the authors point it did create a ton of jobs!
by throw0101d | 2025-05-27 11:46:05+00:00
> Pension is a Ponzi scheme. Explained in terms of economic theory, if everybody works and saves in time period 1, and retires and receives pension in time period 2, then... their pension is worthless, because there's infinite inflation, because no more goods and services get produced.

Except if you take a portion of the contributions and investment in incoming-producing assets.

Kind of like what the Canada Pension Plan (CPP ~ US Social Security) does.

Not all pensions are the same or created equal.
by plainOldText | 2025-05-27 11:46:23+00:00
I think these are key thoughts worth considering going forward:

> Code is not an asset, it's a liability. > Every line must be maintained, debugged, secured, and eventually replaced. The real asset is the business capability that code enables. > The skill that survives and thrives isn't writing code. It's architecting systems. And that's the one thing AI can't do.
by cheschire | 2025-05-27 11:46:50+00:00
Maybe I misunderstood your phrasing, butI think with enough context an AI could determine what you want to do with reasonable accuracy.

In fact, I think this is the scary thing that people are ringing the alarm bells about. With enough surveillance, organizations will be able to identify you reliably out in the world enough to build significant amount of context, even if you aren’t wearing a pair of AI glasses.

And with all that context, it will become a reasonable task for AI to guess what you want. Perhaps even guess a string of events or actions or activities that would lead you towards an end state that is desirable by that organization.

This is primarily responding to that one assertion though and is perhaps tangential to your actual overall point.
by seethishat | 2025-05-27 11:47:13+00:00
Some US universities do this remotely via proctoring software. They require pencil and paper to be used with a laptop that has a camera. Some do mirror scans, room scans, hand scans, etc. The Georgia Tech OMS CS program used to do this for the math proofs course and algorithms (leet code). It was effective and scalable. However, the proctoring seems overly Orwellian, but I can understand the need due to cheating as well as maintaining high standards for accreditation.
Show HN: Simple Embedded Audio Codec (sea-codec)
by daninet | 2025-05-27 11:47:38+00:00
SEA is a low-complexity, lossy audio codec designed for embedded devices, inspired by the awesome QOA codec. Like QOA, SEA utilizes the Least Mean Squares Filter (LMS) algorithm, but it introduces variable bitrate (VBR) support and features slightly modified quantization tables. The reference implementation is written in Rust, and a compact ~250-line decoder written in C is also available for demonstration purposes.

You can test SEA in your browser here: https://daninet.github.io/sea-codec/
by n2d4 | 2025-05-27 11:48:18+00:00
> I feel that if AI companies themselves had security conscious designs in the first place, there would be less need for this stuff.

They do, but this "exploit" specifically requires disabling them (which comes with a big fat warning):

> Claude then uses the GitHub MCP integration to follow the instructions. Throughout this process, Claude Desktop by default requires the user to confirm individual tool calls. However, many users already opt for an “Always Allow” confirmation policy when using agents, and stop monitoring individual actions.
by _joel | 2025-05-27 11:49:04+00:00
Chances are you have an installation or several running in your pocket right now. It's one of the most widely deployed pieces of software in existence. It's not supposed to be a 'traditional' DB in that running a webapp for many users sense (although it can do that), but to back client based software that need a data store/query tool and don't want to implement their own.
by lmm | 2025-05-27 11:49:12+00:00
Defined contribution is far worse, it's just a way to shift the risk onto the individual who is far less able to manage it, and then tell them it's their own fault they don't get a pension.

Defined benefit pensions work great outside of massive frauds. A better way to address that would be a government guarantee paired with prudential regulation and prosecution of frauds.
by mrweasel | 2025-05-27 11:49:16+00:00
Precisely. I noticed that a previous intern of mine is now an "Enterprise Architect". He's a smart dude, no doubt about it, but from zero to architect in 3.5 years? There's no way this person has the experience to be an architect. That is a promotion because the company either needed someone with that title, or because he was "paid off" to stay onboard.
by overu589 | 2025-05-27 11:49:49+00:00
That’s actually a very good point.

You know, it really takes about tens years of thinking about something to really begin to understand it at a fundamental level (which should tell you something about the true pace of human understanding.)

Shannon said his part over fifty years ago now, and we’re still trying to interpret that.

Let’s see, what might LLMs confirm, deny, or help us ponder?

- the correlation between the volume of training materials and the size and accuracy of their output

- the proficiency and deviation of various training techniques

There is so much more of course, it’s questions like yours that get things rolling.
by orwin | 2025-05-27 11:50:09+00:00
Since the reform on University administration circa 2011, a big push was done towards 'evaluation continue' (basically regular tests), which now last until your third year in some Uni, to make public universities more like private schools, and against 'partiels' (two big batteries of standardized tests in person, with thousands in the same area, with only pen and papers, one early January, second in may, every year, over a week).

That push was accelerated because of COVID, but with the 'AI homework', it gave teachers a possibility to argue against that move and the trend seemed stopped last year (I don't now yet if it has reverted). In any case, I hope this AI trend will give more freedom to teachers, and maybe new ways of teaching.

And I'm not a big Llm fan in general, but in my country, in superior education, it seems good overall.
by _p2zi | 2025-05-27 11:50:19+00:00
> - Nick Clegg, former Meta executive and UK Deputy Prime Minister, has reiterated a familiar line when it comes to AI and artist consent.

> - He said that any push for consent would “basically kill” the AI industry.

> - Clegg added that the sheer volume of data that AI is trained on makes it “implausible” to ask for consent.
by maaaaattttt | 2025-05-27 11:51:33+00:00
Or, it could be the usual VC startup playbook playing out. Offer a great service with great quality for free -> capture users. Once you're happy with your number of users, slowly lower the quality of the free service (meanwhile continue capturing users). Once they start to complain about the quality, introduce a paid "premium" tier that is just the initial service restored to its original quality (with one or two smaller features added to not be too obvious).

You can re-apply the process later to move users to higher tiers.
by saithound | 2025-05-27 11:51:34+00:00
I don't even lean toward the worst-case AI narratives, but it sure feels like Economist journos will keep pushing our "here's why AI wont take your job" articles, even as their own writers get quietly pushed out by ChatGPT creeping across their open-plan office one desk at a time.

In this piece, they lean heavily on precious "official American data", and celebrate the increased number of people working in translation, while conveniently ignoring more telling figures, such as the total amount those translators actually earn now per unit of work.

My partner works in university administration, and their "official data" tells a much spicier story. Their university still ranks highest in our country for placing computer engineering grads within six months of graduation. But over just six terms, the number of graduates in employment within six months dropped by half. That's not a soft decline by any means, more like the system breaking in real time.
by fhd2 | 2025-05-27 11:53:00+00:00
I think a few revolutions are missing in the list, that weren't technical, but organisational:

1. The push for "software architects" to create plans and specifications for those pesky developers to simply follow. I remember around 2005, there was some hype around generating code from UML and having developers "just" fill in the blanks. The result I've observed were insanely over engineered systems where even just adding a new field to be stored required touching like 8 files across four different layers.

2. The "agile transformation" era that followed shortly after, where a (possibly deliberate) misunderstanding of agile principles lead to lots of off-the-shelf processes, roles, and some degree of acceptance for micro managing developers. From what I've seen, this mostly eroded trust, motivation and creativity. Best case scenario, it would create a functioning feature factory that efficiently builds the wrong thing. More often than not, it just made entire teams unproductive real fast.

What I've always liked to see is non-developers showing genuine interest in the work of developers, trying to participate or at least support, embracing the complexity and clarifying problems to solve. No matter what tools teams use and what processes they follow, I've always seen this result in success. Any effort around reducing the complexity inherent in software development, did not.
by danaris | 2025-05-27 11:53:27+00:00
Except that the problem here is that Cloudflare, specifically, is so widespread that blocking it is highly likely to block many very important things.

If the ecosystem were truly more competitive, it would be much more likely that, for instance, if you went to block the CDN serving one particular football piracy group, it would not block half your government websites at the same time.
by Alex-Programs | 2025-05-27 11:53:55+00:00
You might find my LLM translation research useful: https://nuenki.app/blog

Your best bet is probably:

- Produce the sentence with Qwen 3. I didn't test down to 8B, but its 32B variant does reasonably well (see https://nuenki.app/blog/claude_4_is_good_at_translation_but_...) and Chinese models are better at Chinese in general

- Then prompt Qwen 3 again, this time telling it to critique the translation and improve it

LLMs tend to be better at post-critique than generation, though I can't say I've tested with models that small. You may find https://nuenki.app/translator interesting.

You might also be able to use some hideous distil of Deepseek V3?
by dakiol | 2025-05-27 11:54:21+00:00
> but I think with enough context [...]

I think that's the key. The only ones who can provide enough accurate context are software developers. No POs or managers can handle such levels of detail (or abstraction) to hand them over via prompts to a chatbot; engineers are doing this on a daily basis.

I laugh at the image of a non-technical person like my PO or the manager of my manager giving "orders" to an LLM to design a high-scalable tiny component for handling payments. There are dozens of details that can go wrong if not-enough details are provided: from security, to versioning, to resilience, to deployment, to maintainability...
by the_af | 2025-05-27 11:54:21+00:00
Was this vibe coded with AI? Based on one of your replies here, and your post history, I think it is.

I also think some of your comments here are also AI-generated, e.g. this one where you both posted a submission and asked yourself to "stop posting AI generated garbage":

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36841921
by dannymi | 2025-05-27 11:54:38+00:00
>It has a lambda there. In many programming languages, and the way human beings read this, say that "when there is a lambda, whatever is inside is evaluated only when you call it".

What is inside the lambda is to the right of the ":". That is indeed evaluated only when you call it.

>But it is good that people are aware that it is an error in design, so new programming languages don't fall into the same error.

Python didn't "fall" into that "error". That was a deliberate design decision and in my opinion it is correct. Scheme is the same way, too.

Note that you only have a "problem" if you mutate the list (instead of functional programming) which would be weird to do in 2025.

>For an equivalent error that did get fixed, many Lisps used to have dynamic scoping for variables instead of lexical scoping. It was people critizing that decision that lead to pretty much all modern programming languages to use lexical scoping, including python.

Both are pretty useful (and both are still there, especially in Python and Lisp!). I see what you mean, though: lexical scoping is a better default for local variables.

But having weird lazy-sometimes evaluation would NOT be a better default.

If you had it, when exactly would it force the lazy evaluation?

def g(): print('HA') return 7 def f(x=lazy: [g()]): pass

^ Does that call g?

def f(x=lazy: [g()]): print(x)

^ How about now?

def f(x=lazy: [g()]): if False: print(x)

^ How about now?

def f(x=lazy: [g()]): if random() > 42: # If random() returns a value from 0 to 1 print(x)

^ How about now?

def f(x=lazy: [g()]): if random() > 42: print(x) else: print(x) print(x)

^ How about now? And how often?

def f(x=lazy: [g()]): x = 3 if random() > 42: print(x)

^ How about now?

Think about the implications of what you are suggesting.

Thankfully, we do have "lazy" and it's called "lambda" and it does what you would expect:

If you absolutely need it (you don't :P) you can do it explicitly:

def f(x=None, x_defaulter=lambda: []): x = x if x is not None else x_defaulter()

Or do it like a normal person:

def f(x=None): x = x if x is not None else []

Explicit is better than implicit.

Guido van Rossum would (correctly) veto anything that hid control flow from the user like having a function call sometimes evaluate the defaulter and sometimes not.
by ilker2495 | 2025-05-27 11:54:49+00:00
Great idea, played until I got a fullscreen clear, I really like it but the single rotation key is annoying, I suggest having separate clockwise/counter-clockwise keys. Also single bag randomization algorithm please (look up 7-bag, 7BR), bag makes even NES Tetris super chill since you never get overwhelmed or left waiting for a long piece. Another suggestion is to add a "ghost piece". Basically a display for where the piece is going to end up if you hit drop. Others in this thread are right. You should avoid the "-tris". My favourite Tetris clone calls itself "Shiromino" for example. Maybe "Slo'mino" to emphasize the slowness of it, or something like that, I'm sure you can come up with a way better name. I don't mean to be overbearing this is a very fun idea and I enjoyed my time with it!
by Barrin92 | 2025-05-27 11:55:04+00:00
> I have no idea how people are learning a language using an app for a few minutes a day

They don't but this is also not the point and seems to account for the frustrations expressed in the conversation. Before I decided to get serious about learning Japanese I spent a few months on Duolingo. It taught me hiragana, katakana, a few kanji, maybe 1k words but obviously I couldn't really speak Japanese. But I also didn't expect to, I looked at it as "it's better than wasting another 10 minutes on twitter". And for that it worked perfectly well, honestly better than I thought.
by bryanrasmussen | 2025-05-27 11:55:24+00:00
hmm, I thought Vonnegut and Kerouac were still OK among the elite thinkers, and Orwell on his way to being important again due to the state of the world and all that.

I do notice no mention of Sam Clemens or his pen name.

Finally, is Ginsberg really in the white middlebrow canon - and is Gertrude Stein as important as assumed.

Maybe my tastes are too scattershot to be able to be able to have a well-defined brow of any sort, but I'm just not sure I believe all the categorizations made.
by throw0101d | 2025-05-27 11:56:11+00:00
> But if you don't have kids, it's easier to save money to fund your own retirement. Kids are expensive.

Empirical studies have found the opposite: if you don't have kids you tend to spend more on yourself, which means you have (on average) a higher life-style during working years which you take in retirement. A higher / more lavish lifestyle means you need higher income and more savings… which many folks with a lavish lifestyle generally don't do.

People with kids spend less on themselves and so are in the habit of a less lavish life-style and so need less savings in retirement because their spending habits are lower.

As a general rule if you have kids you need 40-50% of your working-age income in retirement, but you do not have kids you need 50-60%.

* https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/retirement/re...

* https://archive.is/bzJMV

As for having kids and saving for retirement, there's ways to balance both:

* https://www.moneysense.ca/columns/retired-money/the-rule-of-...
by eadmund | 2025-05-27 11:56:18+00:00
> It also defends against random internet crazies who are mad at you because you scammed them.

Or think you scammed them! Crazies gonna crazy.

> how much attention of any sort does the average garage startup get?

I think that anyone who has dealt with the general public in any organisation (scouting, church, business, government) will tell you that a surprisingly large number of people (I have seen estimates as high as one in four!) are crazy to one degree or another.

I would very much rather not have my home address out there for every Tom, Dick & Harry who thinks that my software is making the aliens send radio transmissions to his teeth.
by mtmail | 2025-05-27 11:56:28+00:00
https://organicmaps.app/ is the only mobile app I have a subscription (monthly donation setup) for. I deleted Google Maps app. For my daily usage and in my region OpenStreetMap data is good enough. It's a fork of the maps.me app which started to add a crypto wallet feature, I hope with donation organicmaps can stay (crap-ware and cost) free.
by bhouston | 2025-05-27 11:56:31+00:00
Power and RISC-V are going after different markets.

While Power is IRSC has a lot of legacy baggage that makes it significantly more complex that RISC-V (which is clean slate and purposely simplified.) It is also definitely not optimized for low power situations / embedded.

It is basically super computer chip.

Also unlike ARM and RISC-V it isn't designed to be extensible/customized by users. It is more monolithic.
by xrtatee | 2025-05-27 11:56:52+00:00
Exactly. I can remember 2-3 teachers in my life that were good but most were absolutely terrible.

I even remember taking a Philosophy of AI class in 1999, something that should have been as interesting and intellectual stimulating to any thinking student, and the professor managed to clear the lecture hall from 300 to 50 before I stopped going too with his constant self-aggrandizing bullshit.

I had a history teacher in high school that didn't try to hide he was a teacher so he could travel in the summer and then made a large part of the class about his former and upcoming travels.

Most weren't this bad but they just sucked at explaining concepts and ideas.

The whole education system should obviously be rebuilt from the ground up but it will be decades before we bother with this. Someone above mentioned the Roman's teaching wrestling to students. We are those Romans and we are just going to keep teaching wrestling. I learned to wrestle, my father learned to wrestle so my kids are going to learn to wrestle because that is what defines an educated person!
by wrasee | 2025-05-27 11:57:01+00:00
Yes but is it not always that simple? You see this a lot. I mean, OpenAI is controlled by a non-profit. There are ways to structure things as a firm deems to their advantage and companies are very good at this sort of thing.

To me it just somewhat communicates a kind-of bad faith in company spending priorities and demonstrates that my donations might have greater impact elsewhere. That’s all.