MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by tpmoney | 2025-05-28 04:16:48+00:00
> The actual belief is that they are somehow more pleasant than my own home.

Is it? Or is the belief something more like “there are real benefits that accrue from putting people that work together into the same physical meatspace location and as a consequence of that we want to have a single location that all people working together will be at, so as long as we’re doing that, we might as well make the location a pleasant place to be”

It’s also probably worth remembering that for some people depending on where they are in their lives or what else is going on, that yes the office might just be a more pleasant place than their actual home. Not every person working in an office lives in a detached home with separate office space and a yard. Sometimes you live in a crappy apartment that’s too small for you and your roommates to all comfortably work from home. Sometimes you live in a fixer-upper that you’re working on, but is currently in a state of disrepair. Sometimes your home life isn’t great for various personal reasons. Sometimes you live alone and hearing other peoples voices is a novelty.

No not every office is a great place to work, and not every person has a better place to work from. I truly do not understand this mindset that views trying to make a place you’re going to spend any amount of your time - whether it’s one day a month or five days a week - into some grand conspiracy to trick you or abuse you. I’m all about flexibility but you’re not going to get anywhere by pretending there’s nothing for about office spaces.

If remote was good enough, we wouldn’t have conventions. We wouldn’t have meet ups. We wouldn’t have conferences. We wouldn’t have user group meets. Even some of the most famously remote forest companies like gitlab have a budget for people to visit their co-workers locations. Meet space matters and has real tangible benefits
by vouaobrasil | 2025-05-28 04:17:15+00:00
> AI was supposed to make life easier

No way, AI was supposed to make the rich even richer

> AI-generated content, deepfakes, fake news—how do we even trust anything anymore?

It's all the fault of technology. Inventing more technology isn't going to solve anything. The benefits that we are getting are diminishing and the problems are getting worse.

I think we need to create new communities less dependent on technology, where we are more dependent on each other.
by motorest | 2025-05-28 04:18:06+00:00
> I still don't really get it. Surely the older, simpler, and better cardinal rule is that you just don't expose any service to the Internet that you have given access to your private data, unless you directly control that service and have a very good understanding of its behavior.

This scenario involves a system whose responsibility is to react to an event, analyse your private info in response to the event, and output something.

The exploit is that, much like a SQL injection, it turns out attackers can inject their own commands into the input event.

Also, it's worth keeping in mind that prompts do lead LLMs to update their context. Data ex filtration is a danger, but so is having an attacker silently manipulating the LLM's context.
by timschmidt | 2025-05-28 04:18:24+00:00
Space shuttle development can be traced to the Boeing X-20 Dyna-Soar ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-20_Dyna-Soar ) which began in 1957, the MiG-105 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan-Gurevich_MiG-105 ) from 1965, and the Silbervogel project ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silbervogel ) from 1941. The space shuttle didn't fly until 1981. Try again.
by vouaobrasil | 2025-05-28 04:21:07+00:00
Don't know if my advice will help, but if life is really short and the physical disability is making it worse, I would consider just quitting tech/data science altogether and doing something cool. Or maybe I'm just projecting, which I guess can't be helped since you didn't provide a lot of background. But I really feel that there are so many beautiful things in life like spending time in nature, exploring stuff beyond advancing tech, that you might miss out on if you don't have a lot of time.
by jraph | 2025-05-28 04:22:07+00:00
Ossification comes from os, ossis: bones in Latin. Turning into bones. Stops being flexible. Common behavior becomes de facto specification. There's stuff that's allowed by the specification but not expected by implementations because things have always worked like this.

It's not related to open source software. The seemingly matching prefix is coincidence :-)

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/ossification
Our society values unique takes
by chandan_maruthi | 2025-05-28 04:22:18+00:00
Just realized. Our society values unique takes on subjects. They do not penalize bad takes; both good and bad takes receive the same value.

To me, this seems to make sense. If everything is an experiment, then every unique take adds to the corpus of knowledge. Whether a take is good or bad does not affect the value added to the total knowledge.

What do you think?
by singron | 2025-05-28 04:22:32+00:00
Note that this workload is a worst case for iops and you will get higher iops in nearly any optimized workload. E.g. postgres needs to sync the WAL in order to commit (which does look like this test), but there are a ton of other writes that happen in parallel on the heap and index pages in addition to any reading you do. IME the consumer drives that benchmark at 500K iops and get only 500 iops on this test might get 10K or 20K iops on a more typical mixed workload.
by Retric | 2025-05-28 04:23:41+00:00
I’m not sure you’ve really thought that argument through to it’s conclusion.

> the MiG-105 ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan-Gurevich_MiG-105 ) from 1965, and the Silbervogel project ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silbervogel ) from 1941.

Starship can trace its development back to the 1920’s seeing as the team leveraged that research, if you’re going to use such a meaningless definition including USSR projects as a legacy here Starship loses simply because of the much later launch date.
by intended | 2025-05-28 04:24:35+00:00
I’ve been recommending network propaganda recently. The book has the data that makes the case better than I can about structural issues in the information ecosystem.

Also started going through this legal essay (paper?) recently, Lies, Counter-lies, and Disinformation in the Marketplace of Ideas

https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a...
by vouaobrasil | 2025-05-28 04:24:50+00:00
I feel like the 1.38B is probably worth it to Google, if they can use these privacy violations to enhance their advertising scheme. It would be great if we had a better thing than just fines to discourage privacy violations.

When one person gets a fine, it's annoying and it works. If a small company gets a fine they are sure to behave better because they have a limited budget. But if a major, soulless tech corporation gets a fine, they have a highly efficient team of lawyers and optimizers to just make sure it's worth it because the transactional overhead is minimal for them.
by monkeyelite | 2025-05-28 04:26:35+00:00
4k jumped the gun. It’s just too many pixels and too many cycles. And unfortunately was introduced when pixel shaders starting doing more work.

Consequently almost nothing actually renders at 4k. It’s all upscaling - or even worse your display is wired to double up on inputs.

Once we can comfortably get 60 FPS, 1080p, 4x msaa, no upscaling, then let’s revisit this 4k idea.
by mmooss | 2025-05-28 04:26:54+00:00
Who wrote this book? I don't see that information.

The Internet is an odd place. Imagine a printed book without an author listed (even 'anonymous', which is a rare edge case). Imagine a non-fiction book without a clear thesis, and one stated up front.

In addition, we are overwhelmed with information and options on the Internet in ways humans with only printed material couldn't imagine. We need these things - especially theses clearly stated up front - even more. I'm not willing to read things without it - I just have too much to read and too little time.
by ggm | 2025-05-28 04:27:42+00:00
To be fair, Apple has had some. Newton, and the electric apple car.

The thing is, Apple has no desire to be overt in public about the failed at launch, and rarely pre-commits, And Apple sits on a pile of cash which would feed this level of failure until fusion energy arrives. Meta does not have this luxury and throws money hand over fist at Datacenter and data transport costs. All it can do is trade capex for opex.

Apple used to think it might play in hosted solutions, but icloud is run thin, and very little is added that can be avoided.
by Agentlien | 2025-05-28 04:27:59+00:00
A few years ago I did something similar in a group chat with some friends. No rhyme, but video game titles reworded using rough synonyms.

Here are some examples with answers in rot13:

Strange, this reunion = Zntvp gur Tngurevat

Boat pork refuge = Nexunz Nflyhz

Donkeybutt taverns gospel = Nffnffvaf Perrq

Caring for the elderly = QBGN

Belongs to me create = Zvarpensg

Superclock = Birejngpu

Top Stories = Ncrk Yrtraqf

Skyline no morning = Ubevmba Mreb Qnja
by ggm | 2025-05-28 04:29:56+00:00
"Sun Stones" refers to two things.

1) crystals with an interesting polarised effect which allow you to identify the vertical plane of the sun in cloudy skies, and therefore effect navigation at sea in overcast daylight, modulo some basic idea of the time.

2) quasi religious carved stones, "sacrificed" by burial, in attempts to placate the gods over the awful horrors of a post-eruption landscape and climate.

The article is about the second kind.
by tayo42 | 2025-05-28 04:32:18+00:00
Working with a well maintained mono repo is so nice, any other workflow just sucks to go back to. Working with a "lets do a monorepo" monorepo, where who ever set it up didn't understand the points in this article and more is a nightmare.

I think this is a business opportunity, if someone could sell the polished monorepo experience and tools to companies with engineering organizations but can't pull off a successful "we need to fork git" project to support their developers.
by saulpw | 2025-05-28 04:33:39+00:00
> What if there was something wonderful and curious that you could explore and someone else would actually pay you money while you were exploring that thing?

The days of patronage are basically over; no one pays you real money to explore anymore. Corporations only pay you money to exert your brain towards some goal. There may be an exploration phase but well over half the work will be the grind of bugfixing and maintenance (or equivalent in other fields) that is the actual reason for your employment.
by tanelpoder | 2025-05-28 04:36:27+00:00
Throughput with enough I/O concurrency, yes. That's actually why I wrote this blog entry, just to bring attention to this - having nice IOPS numbers do not translate to nice individual I/O latency numbers. If an individual WAL write takes ~1.5 ms (instead of tens of microseconds), this means that your app transactions also take 1.5+ ms and not sub-millisecond. Not everyone cares about this (and often don't even need to care about this), but worth being aware of.

I tend to set up a small, but completely separate block device (usually on enterprise SAN storage or cloud block store) just for WAL/redo logs to have a different device with its own queue for that. So that when that big database checkpoint or fsync happens against datafiles, the thousands of concurrently submitted IO requests won't get in the way of WAL writes that still need to complete fast. I've done something similar in the past with separate filesystem journal devices too (for niche use cases...)

Edit: Another use case for this is that ZFS users can put the ZIL on low-latency devices, while keeping the main storage on lower cost devices.
by nathan-barry | 2025-05-28 04:36:57+00:00
Thanks for your input. Lots of good points on the technical side. Will go through and make some edits later tonight or tomorrow.

> You're not hijacking anything, you are using the old APIs as intended and using the right terms in the description that follows.

When it comes to the use of the word "hijacking", I use it in to refer to the fact that using graphic shaders for general computation wasn't initially intended. When NVIDIA allowed programmable vertex and pixel shaders, they had no idea that it would be used for anything else other than graphics rendering. So when I say I "hijack" a fragment shader to compute layers of a neural network instead of as a part of a rendering pipeline, this is what I mean. I don't see a problem with this use of language.
by timschmidt | 2025-05-28 04:37:05+00:00
Well, I've provided plenty of links and facts. You've provided your unique opinions, little else, and seem wholly unaware of the development history of these vehicles you claim to know better than rocket engineers about.

Even if I use your example and timeline:

Shuttle: 1968 (project announced) - 1981 (first launch): 13 years

Starship: 2012 (project announced) - 2022 (first launch): 10 years

Starship's several years ahead of Shuttle development.

Hilarious conversation. Thanks for providing laughs for the evening.
by mmooss | 2025-05-28 04:38:26+00:00
Yes, I have. You are living in an Internet disinformation unreality - just like the nonsense the right wing craps out about how horrible and dangerous NY is. As empirical data, look up real estate prices and tourism to the three cities, and see how Warsaw compares. Remember, people in Europe can easily go to Paris or Warsaw; going to London is a bit harder.

And that is with massive disinformation campaigns against immmigrants and 'liberal' cities.

(No offense to Warsaw - maybe only NY and Tokyo measure up to London and Paris.)
by bracketfocus | 2025-05-28 04:38:35+00:00
What’s with the hate for proof-of-stake? Seems like the hate is directed towards the fact that those have more to stake, benefit more.

Can’t the same argument be made about proof-of-work? Those who have the ability to buy more compute, also benefit more.

Instead of buying GPUs/ASICs for mining you’re buying into the network you’re trying to secure.
by dragonwriter | 2025-05-28 04:39:50+00:00
The title correctly uses a semicolon to divide two independent clauses that are used in a single sentence; a colon is sometimes an option for this (but never to the exclusion of the semicolon), such as where the second independent clause is a summary, explanation, or example of the first—in this case, the first explains the second, which is the inverse of a relationship for which a colon would be appropriate.
by ykjs | 2025-05-28 04:40:03+00:00
We have a customer who has zero technical background and was vibe coding using Cursor. Basically hitting "Accept" all the way. At some point, Cursor suggested to install the JigsawStack SDK which then eventually prompted for an API key.

Naturally, he put his credit card down and got the API key on a $27/mth Pro Plan which includes 8m tokens of usage every month followed by $1.40 per million tokens.

A week later, he's on our support email surprised by a $200+ charge on his card. He was pissed, angry demanding a refund. Typically for situations like this, we do a partial refund to cover the cost for first-time customers if they honestly made a mistake and used more than intended.

That's when we realized, we didn't have a single $200+ charge tied to his account, only the $27/mth charge and we were so confused. We asked for the bank record/statement/invoice ID or anything that can help us find this charge.

That's when he sent an attached Cursor support email and invoices! And then all the pieces came together. He thought Cursor and JigsawStack were the same company because Cursor suggested to install the JigsawStack SDK. He got a $200+ charge from Vibe coding too hard! He was using max mode which is like 0.05 a prompt or something around those lines.

As you can see we have a language barrier as well. We tried our best to explain how these are two different companies and we weren't the ones who charged him. I think he got it since he's still a paying customer :)
by pj_mukh | 2025-05-28 04:41:17+00:00
" taking one or two art pieces and then turning around and creating something brand new, like a human brain might do."

I don't think the human brain is doing this at all (except maybe if you're writing a satire or homage). Your writing is the sum total of all your experiences which includes everything you've ever read, a number that might (depending on your age) at least approach millions of tokens.

And just like an LLM you'd find it difficult to piece together your influences.
by mmooss | 2025-05-28 04:41:27+00:00
Thank you. How did you find it?

For others:

Core authors / editors ...

Robert Yang is the founder of this project. As an indie game developer, he is most well-known for his Radiator games about sexuality and intimacy. In the past, he also contributed levels to projects like Black Mesa Source, and conducted interviews with level designers for Rock Paper Shotgun. (https://debacle.us)

Contributors ...

Andrew Yoder has worked on Paladins and Warframe, and specializes in multiplayer social spaces and combat design.
by wmf | 2025-05-28 04:41:49+00:00
Unlimited 8GB symetric I/O: I'm not sure what that means since GB is not a unit of I/O (and check your spelling).

Residential proxy IP available: Mostly spammers, scammers, and scrapers want this; it's a red flag for normal customers.

Phone support directly with the CTO: This kind of indicates that you're not intending to scale.

I stopped reading after that.
by kragen | 2025-05-28 04:43:52+00:00
I took film photos of my family's color TV in the 90s with a fast shutter speed. About 20% of the screen was fading at any given time with the (NTSC) 60Hz field rate, the rest being black, so to get a screen that was physically flicker-free with those phosphors, you'd have to refresh it at somewhere around 500Hz. I doubt color CRT monitors had faster-decaying phosphors than my color TV.
by eGQjxkKF6fif | 2025-05-28 04:44:11+00:00
As ethical hackers and for the love of technology, yes we can make a convincing argument for security over convenience. Don't look too much in to it I say; there will always be people convincing talent to do and make things and disregard security and protocol.

Those younger flocks of execs will have been mentored and answer to others. Their fiduciary duty is to share-holders and the business' bottom line.

Us, as technology enthusiasts should design, create, and launch things with security in mind.

Don't focus on the tomfoolery and corruption, focus on the love for the craft.

Just my opinion
by ack_complete | 2025-05-28 04:44:35+00:00
There's a subtlety -- word adds are only 8 cycles when adding to an address register. They're 4 cycles to a data register. This is because the 68000 always does address computations in 32-bit, and 16-bit operands are sign extended to 32-bit when adding to an address register. A word add to a data register, on the other hand, only produces a 16-bit result. This is reflected by the canonical instruction being ADDA.W instead of ADD.W for address register destinations.
by Cyphase | 2025-05-28 04:46:48+00:00
I clicked into the Overview from the Book menu in the main nav. That only shows the sections in "Book 1, Process", not books 2-4 and the appendix.

Overview took me into the content, which has a sidebar; I scrolled to the bottom of that and found the link to the page. It took me a moment to realize it did show that info about the author/contributor.
by vitalnodo | 2025-05-28 04:48:02+00:00
Just wondering — has anyone come across a course or resource that explores how cryptographic systems are built up from smaller building blocks?

Like, using something like SageMath for algebraic structures, a prover like Lean to verify properties — to get a feel for how things actually fit together.

There's something cool about trying to reimplement known standards just to understand them better (with the usual "don’t roll your own crypto" warning, of course). By the way, it would be nice to have a kind of sandbox for the more formal path to explore how to build my own SP-network, prove that the Decisional Diffie-Hellman assumption holds or something.

I've seen cryptopals and cryptohack.
by jasonwatkinspdx | 2025-05-28 04:48:20+00:00
AFAIK the Symas version is the official now. It's part of the OpenLDAP repo but they have a read only mirror on github for people who want to use it stand alone.

OpenLDAP is very heavily used by a lot of companies, in particular mobile operators that put it under very heavy load, so I'd be reasonably confident of its reliability.
by theamk | 2025-05-28 04:48:21+00:00
it's a replacement for checkout + patch process.

The main advantage over plain "patch" is that it is more powerful in the face of upstream changes. For example if you rename the upstream file, you have no good way to represent this in .patch, but that project allows is. There also a way to specify patch using function name, which should make it more robust in face of upstream changes.

As for my opinion, this seems like an incremental improvement over existing tools. I'd prefer a simple shell script that does "git checkout ... && mv ... && cp .. && patch ..." over something fancy like this.
by Genego | 2025-05-28 04:48:43+00:00
I was building an multi-agent system connected to Telegram. There is one agent that synthesises a response through 5+ other agents. Initially I was tweaking the system through my IDE, making small adjustments to promps to ensure that patterns and workflows where followed better. But I also started to interact while on the road, or just from the bed. And I got very frustrated by seeing some multi-step / multi-agent interactions go completely wrong, so I build in an additional architecting agent, which can make adjustments to the agents prompts (in terms of executing logic of tool calls) on the fly.

So if I saw something went wrong, I would say: "Next time don't do that, please do this instead" - Architect agent then reviews the entire tool and agent call chain, and makes a new adaptation to each agent (if necessary).

I was calling this "Poor man's RLHF" - it has been quite fun to interact with. Ended up making it so that this is a JSON file that I could later (potentially use for finetuning). But I was always wondering if there was a name for this? Is it the similar as DPO? I called it "behavioral adaptation". For a small system it was quite effective. But I also didn't bother to research it.
by fallinditch | 2025-05-28 04:49:13+00:00
If you fed archive video of many parade rings, together with the results of that race, then you could use deep learning to develop a neural net program that could (maybe) beat the odds by interpreting a live video feed of a parade ring to predict the likely winner.

So what do you think, could this work? Presumably the technology to build this system is reasonably accessible these days.
by rbitar | 2025-05-28 04:49:58+00:00
Excited to try this out, it will solve two problems we’ve had: applying a code diff reliably and selecting which files from a large codebase to use for context.

We quickly discovered that RAG using a similarity search over embedded vectors can easily miss relevant files, unless we cast a very wide net during retrieval.

We’ve also had trouble getting any LLM to generate a diff format (such as universal diff) reliably so your approach to applying a patch is exciting.
by atlasunshrugged | 2025-05-28 04:50:01+00:00
Thanks! I think one of the main differences is timing -- Estonia started 20+yrs before Ukraine so in a way they're quite far ahead in terms of systems/process maturity. However, because Ukraine started later they were able to skip over desktop and build just for mobile which is where the vast majority of folks interact with e-services these days, so in a way Diia (at least from a user interface perspective) if probably further ahead than Estonia which had to invest in both desktop and mobile platforms and was a bit slower to move on the latter. Overall, I find Diia and the pace of innovation from the team building it incredibly impressive.