MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by isaacimagine | 2025-05-28 19:47:18+00:00
Yes and no. I wasn't expecting to be able to reproduce the work, so I'm just content that it works. I was very surprised by how much hyperparameter finagling I had to do to get the DLGN converging; the tiny relu network I trained at the beginning, in comparison, converged with dead-simple SGD in a third of the epochs.

The speedup was surprising in the sense that the bit-level parallelism fell out naturally: that 64× speedup alone was unexpected and pretty sweet. There's likely still a lot of speed left on the table. I just did the bare minimum to get the C code working: it's single-threaded, there's no vectorization, lots of register spilling, etc. Imagine the speedup you'd get running the circuit on e.g. an FPGA.

But no, it was not surprising in the sense that yeah, multiplying billions of floats is going to be much slower than a handful of parallel bitwise ops. Physics is physics, doesn't matter how good your optimizer is.
by beeflet | 2025-05-28 19:47:20+00:00
>right, don't do that. Withdraw to your wallet. Wait several days. Transfer elsewhere in different denominations.

Unfortunately, it doesn't work like that. The EAE attacks only require that the end destination is colluding with the start destination.

Like everything with decoys, privacy is stochastic. So I wouldn't go around making absolute claims about the privacy as many proponents of monero like to do. The developers advise against making these sorts of claims. Monero makes privacy a lot easier, but it's not perfect.

>There are court cases that give the confidence necessary. It is also something to stay abreast of. Always just ask yourself who the transaction is intended to be hidden from.

In the free world, we have the concept of innocent-until-proven-guilty and evidence-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt. Decoy-based approaches give you plausible deniability, but this often isn't enough for more domains where a lower standard of proof is needed.

Fortunately, all this and more will be fixed in FCMP++ upgrade.
by EA-3167 | 2025-05-28 19:47:40+00:00
Lovely little article, a good story and some interesting history. My grandfather fought in WWII in the Pacific, in the Navy, and he was the only guy on board who couldn't stand the ice cream. Turns out he was a skinny kid and his grandmother made him drink milkshakes to fatten him up, even when he REALLY didn't want to touch them; so a lifelong aversion to ice cream was born.

Oh, and Max Miller of 'Tasting History' fame has a very entertaining video on this very topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qiyo8D0nH70
by superultra | 2025-05-28 19:48:07+00:00
I am not a trademark lawyer. I'm guessing you aren't either or you would have said so. But multiple lawyers on multiple projects with multiple brands have mentioned this to me, and we have sent C&Ds to protect trademarks. With at least two of those lawyers, sure, it might just be more billable hours. But two were pretty decent guys and wouldn't have done it if they didn't think it was necessary.

At least within my corner of the business world (and not just "the internet"), it seems this is common knowledge among lawyers.

My guess is that, sure, would a court throw out a trademark? Maybe not, but the law works on a fine line between actuals (precendent) and hypotheticals, and it's just cheaper to issue a C&D than it is to fight a prologned legal battle about predcedent.

Also, it's interesting you mention Frisbee. There's a term for that: "genericide," and it's the term used to describe that exact scenario. Frisbee is one brand that didn't actively protect against trademark erosion and now we call every flying disc a Frisbee. Retrospectively, Frisbee might have wished they'd sent more C&Ds. Nintendo is one brand that has actively protected brand erosion, which is why we don't call it a Sony Nintendo.
Show HN: Replace Twitter with AI that reads 10k+ daily sources for you
by last_dunyain | 2025-05-28 19:48:07+00:00
Hey HN! Why I built this: Over the last 10 years I relied heavily on Twitter as my primary source of information. I could get a wide range of information in one place, and each information nugget came in a small format of about 280 characters which was good for summarizing. But recently due to algorithmic changes and the AI frenzy, Twitter has become very noisy and hard to keep up with. So I built GoldenScoop. It takes personalized information requests and runs a swarm of agents in the background. Our swarm reads multiple news sources every day and provides customized information based on user requests. With just a click of a button, users can convert these scoops into podcasts presented by our AI podcasters. They can keep generating podcast episodes, editing and presenting a wide range of information personalized for each user. What it does:

AI agents process 10,000+ sources daily Creates personalized Twitter-style feeds with original source references One-click conversion to HD AI podcasts Continuous content synthesis based on your interests

Try it: [https://goldenscoop.live/] You can listen to our intro podcast episode on the home page.

See a screenshot(https://pkwtjnzsjqxaeavnjyrk.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/p...)

Our top sources: TechCrunch, Reuters, Bloomberg, Hacker News, Wall Street Journal, BBC News, The Verge, MIT Technology Review, Nature, Financial Times, ArXiv, Scientific American, Washington Post, GitHub Trending, Y Combinator Blog, Fast Company, Wired, CB Insights, InfoQ, CNN, Associated Press, Forbes, The Guardian, NPR, Ars Technica

Built with: Google Gemini, Mistral Medium 3, ElevenLabs for HD voice synthesis, React and AGNO agentic framework

Open to feedback and questions!
by CraigJPerry | 2025-05-28 19:48:20+00:00
I'm in a different direction on this, worktrees don't solve the problem for me, this is stuck in 1 agent = 1 task mode. I want a swarm of agents on 1 task.

There's a couple of agent personas i go back to over and over (researcher, designer, critic, implementer, summariser), for most tasks i reuse 90%+ of the same prompt, but implementer has variants, one that's primed with an llms.txt (see answerdotai) for a given library i want to use, another that's configured to use gemini (i prefer its tailwind capabilities) rather than claude etc.

To organise these reusable agents i'm currently test driving langroid, each agent contributes via a sub task.

It's not perfect yet though.
by tines | 2025-05-28 19:49:03+00:00
Your list of examples is telling; all those things do indeed make life easy. But is easy equivalent to good? I don’t think so. People have more capabilities to connect, and have more “friends” than ever before, and people are more disconnected and lonely than ever before. Life is not good for a lot of people, despite being easier than ever for a lot of people.
by jwpapi | 2025-05-28 19:49:41+00:00
I see that point but now discussing approaches with AI replaces that most of the time, not because the AI is genius but because me formulating it helps me to think and me getting challenged helps as well (I ask for it)

The input speed on keyboard is just way faster than with pen:/

Sometimes I still use notebook but it becomes less unfortunately.

But my my challenges are just not challenging
by godelski | 2025-05-28 19:50:14+00:00
> Chaotic energy haha, I like it

My boss says I'm eccentric. I say that's just a nice word for crazy lol

> normally in markdown files scattered across the codebase or in comments

I used to do that too but they didn't end up helping because I could never find them. So I moved back to using a physical book. The wandb reports was the first time I really had something where I felt like I got more out of it than a physical book. Even my iPad just results in a lot of lost stuff and more time trying to figure out why I can't just zoom in on the notes app. I mean what is an iPad even for if it isn't really good for writing?

But the most important part of the process I talked about is the logging of all the parameters and options. Those are the details you tend to lose and go hunting for. So even if you never write a word you'll see huge benefits from this.

> re:w&b

Wandb's best feature is that you can email them requesting a feature and they'll implement it or help you implement it. It's literally their business model. I love it. I swear, they have a support agent assigned to me (thanks Art! And if wandb sees this, give the man a raise. Just look at what crazy people he has to deal with)

> lol "pretentious perfectionist" I'm glad to finally have some words to describe my design aesthetic

To be clear, I'm actually not. Too chaotic lol. Besides, perfectionism doesn't even exist. It's more a question about personal tastes and where we draw the line for what is good enough. I wish we'd stop saying "don't let perfectionism get in the way of good" because it assumes like there's universal agreement about what good enough is.
by everfree | 2025-05-28 19:50:16+00:00
> A degraded fleet is worse than no fleet here, there is no 2 are down, 8 are up here.

Ethereum runs at 100% throughput with 100% of its security guarantees, all the way up to a 33% outage of its validator set. So it stays running at 100% capacity even in a 3 down, 7 up scenario. This has been the case since EIP-1559 was implemented in 2021, and it has been empirically tested.

That's more favorable than Bitcoin, which degrades in capacity (though not security) during partial outages. A 30% miner outage means a 30% reduction in transaction throughput.

The entire point of blockchains is that they are able to thrive and run robustly in a "2 down, 8 up" scenario. That's the sole property they sacrifice so much to achieve compared to centralized database software.

> A better yet strained analogy is 10 cars with different parts that are not interchangeable, work differently and need different drivers. Maintenance nightmare.

Every client is drop-in interchangeable. You don't need different skills to run each one, any more than you need different driving skills to drive a Honda than to drive a Toyota. The only difference is their internals.

To continue with your analogy, you start reaping the rewards of diversity when one car is revealed to have a manufacturing defect and the whole world needs a specific replacement part all at once. This isn't that uncommon. What happens is that the part goes out of stock.

Car diversity causes no maintenance nightmare, because good mechanics are everywhere and they can fix the 500 most popular car models very cheaply despite their varying internals. With Ethereum client diversity, if one of the ten clients breaks down, the fix arrives within hours, for free over the internet - no mechanic trip needed.

> Contrast with say, an Airline fleet all of the same type of plane, interchangeable parts and pilots qualified in that model.

If an airline bought all Boeing 737 Max, which didn't seem like a bad choice at the time, their entire fleet would have been grounded from March 2019 to November 2020.

Southwest suffered a $435 million loss. Everyone who bet on a single aircraft, lost. Everyone who diversified their fleet pulled ahead.

> I am getting more concerned about physical threats after the recent incidents. I’m going to burn this identity now.

It's never a bad idea to burn an identity. But after these conversations, I'm not convinced of the reason.
by marcosdumay | 2025-05-28 19:50:16+00:00
> The power of this is really hard to overstate

A really useful heuristics when you are designing programming environments is: the more power you give to a team of developers, the more problems you will have.

Technically, atomic commits are not more power, they are less. But it does empower the team to work with bad interfaces. And that's a power that creates problems.
by Spooky23 | 2025-05-28 19:50:24+00:00
This is why companies come on strong like this.

The dude made in good humor, a website and pushed it on social media at a time that attracted a bunch of attention. It included graphics close enough to the trademark to be confusing to visitors, and did something that the company didn’t want done for reasonable reasons.

They incurred cost. People handled phone calls, their counsel billed for the response, the web agency had to modify the website. Waffle House sells greasy diner food, every aspect of dealing with this is zero value to them.

Rather than beat around the bush, they said “stop”. He did, and wrote a funny blog about it. But for every 10 situations like this one, there’s probably 1-2 where the counterparty is a prick and wastes everyone’s time.
by danielbln | 2025-05-28 19:50:38+00:00
What I don't like about this approach is that it mainly improves the chances of zero-shotting a feature, but I require a ping pong with the LLM to iterate on the code/approach. Not sure how to parallelize that, I'm not gonna keep the mental model of 4+ iterations of code in my head and iterate on all of them.

For visual UI iteration this seems amazing given the right tooling, as the author states.

I could see it maybe useful for TDD. Let four agents run on a test file and implement until it passes. Restrict to 50 iterations per agent, first one that passes the test terminates other in-progress sessions. Rinse and repeat.
by nc0 | 2025-05-28 19:50:39+00:00
For the people interested in a good VCS system to achieve such monorepos, have a look at Ark [0]. It works really well for huge codebases, it is really fast, faster than Perforce Helix, it has an ethical and respectful pricing scheme, with a self-hosting mentality. Also it's indie, which is typically better than greedy corporate.

[0]: https://ark-vcs.com
by rvz | 2025-05-28 19:51:50+00:00
All of this agreed.

Now in the age of AI, many students entering into CS need do this NOW, otherwise any answer they come up in the interview, will be assumed that it was from an AI and they need to show that they something useful came out of their blogpost or research.

It is what it now means to know how to experiment, understand and build knowledge, rather than spitting out the answer because it it from stack overflow or ChatGPT.

The mistakes are raw, all the learnings in a blog post which is what makes us human yet, 90% of candidates do not do this which is why most of them cannot explain an AI's mistakes an interview if they use it.
by overfeed | 2025-05-28 19:51:55+00:00
Musk was the PR, press and Marketing departments rolled into one for Tesla and X, so much so that he fired the PR team at Twitter.

"The public doesn't care who the CEO is" is certifiably not true for Musk ventures, and Musk exploited that brand value in the past positively. The inauguration Seig Heil, and the subsequent DOGE misadventures are the other side of that "personal brand" coin, which very much exists for this CEO.
by tantalor | 2025-05-28 19:52:48+00:00
Nice idea but (according to the article) that's not how it works:

> Under the system, users can input these seven-digit codes on online shopping websites, and their addresses will automatically appear on the sites.

So the sites still use the physical address. In fact, the postal service itself doesn't even use the code.

The purpose is to simplify form input on websites, which was already solved by browser autocomplete.
by SamScout | 2025-05-28 19:52:53+00:00
Great food for thought! We will discuss this approach as we find our evolving AI-crawler should ideally be able to recognize when a site we visit needs more vs. less queries.

For context, we're samaritanscout.org a search engine that is attempting to provide a comprehensive view into all local volunteering opportunities posted on a range of nonprofit websites.
by platevoltage | 2025-05-28 19:53:20+00:00
I did the same thing with one of my projects. I built a simple webcam viewer that is optimized for USB microscopes as I couldn't find anything out there for this purpose. Basically all of the functionality was implemented in the renderer. As I was planning for App Store submission, I realized that a 500mb webcam viewer might not be the best thing. I decided to port it to Tauri V2 and got it down to about 15mb.
by dmoy | 2025-05-28 19:53:31+00:00
From a lawyer perspective though, a cease & desist is a threat of escalation.

A lawsuit is the escalation. A cease and desist is a strongly worded letter that isn't really legally binding or anything.

The issue here is just impedance mismatch on the language. The legal department is used to doing things in legal terms, and probably sends out like a lot of cease and desists. And most of the targets of those also have lawyers who are speaking the same language, so it works. Just when it's a random individual getting the letter, there's a lot more confusion.
by johnea | 2025-05-28 19:53:45+00:00
> On the right, this manifested itself as various forms of xenophobia and a wholesale mistrust of institutional figures; on the left, as much of what came to be called cancel culture and its censorious milieu. Both were attempts to police the boundaries of us—to identify, in other words, those within our circle of trust and those outside of it.

The author is describing a widely discussed trend, and using everything but the correct names for the two groups: wing-nuts and woke-nuts.

Two sides of the same coin.

The inter-networked hand-computer era has all but killed attempts at autonomous thought, and even the idea that pushing oneself toward intellectual autonomy is a good thing to do...
by porridgeraisin | 2025-05-28 19:53:57+00:00
> reduce to purely economical

I didn't. Please read the multiple qualifiers I added to that phrase.

>> If you collect enough people, with sufficient heterogeneity, you will find that the GCD is always financial self-interest.

What that means is that if you scale groups of people too much, the only common interest you'll find among _all_ of them will be financial self interest. Hence GCD - "greatest common divisor". Of course people do things without monetary incentives. But these interests don't overlap within a sufficiently large and diverse group of people, as much as financial self-interest does.
by aleph_minus_one | 2025-05-28 19:54:39+00:00
> Unfortunately, Keccak and sponge constructions in general are inherently sequential.

Couldn't you simply using BLAKE3 instead? To my knowledge BLAKE3 exactly was designed to solve this "parallelism problem" by combining the "cryptographic ideas" of BLAKE2 with the binary tree structure of Bao (the latter was designed to make the hash construction easy to parallelize).
by PerilousD | 2025-05-28 19:54:53+00:00
So I HOPE you cant mis-type an email address and get it sent to someone else. I get so many bank account statements, library book and device rental notices, car is ready for pickup, or from repair etc notices. ALL APPARENTLY from Bozos who dont know their OWN email addresses. On the other hand on the 2nd notice *I usually do not get a third) when I tell garages/ car impounds / parking spaces to sell the damn thing as Im done with it.
by notahacker | 2025-05-28 19:54:56+00:00
Yeah. The article feels like an AI trying to work out from first principles what human families must be like. More adults = more efficient, right?

Same with the argument that a miracle of coliving is having grandparents to help with the kids. You get that by living near your parents, which has the added advantage that your parents aren't constantly observing you and your relationship and choosing everything from your interior decor to your entertainment... and when you want your grandparents to look after the kids so you can have some peace, the kids actually go to a different building! And it turns out the fun, community-oriented bit of your friends' kids is meeting them at events or when you invite the family round and being impressed by how much more confident they've got since last time you saw them, not being woken up in the middle of the night by them.
by beeflet | 2025-05-28 19:54:58+00:00
Check out feather wallet (https://featherwallet.org/) on desktop or cake wallet (https://cakewallet.com/) on mobile.

Once you create a wallet and write down the seed phrase, generate a "view key". Creating a new wallet from this "view key" allows you to see incoming transactions to your addresses, but not spend them. So you don't need as much security for "view-only" wallets.

You can generate an address from either wallet. It's a long string of numbers and letters that begins with an "8", under "Receive".
by WorldMaker | 2025-05-28 19:55:01+00:00
Windows Update's slowness is a feature more than a bug. The underlying Background Intelligent Transfer Service (BITS) is still such a cool piece of tech even if it has been ages since any web browser let you send low priority downloads to it or an RSS reader was built on top of it. (Both things that existed and were cool, especially in the dialup era where bandwidth was scarce and irregularly connected.) It's designed to prioritize active user needs over pending downloads, throttling itself based on CPU activity and bandwidth usage and download quotas and battery state and expected runtime and now things like estimated energy mixtures (why not download big things when energy is greener?). (It really does download faster when you are not looking, that's what it was designed to do.)
by nickpsecurity | 2025-05-28 19:55:19+00:00
I thought that. Then, I remembered PayPal straight up paying people to use their platform. We saw how that worked out.

So, the question is whether they should pay to generate demand in a new market. Then, who to pay and how much?

I'll also note that OpenAI took the market by offering an expensive service for free (ChatGPT). Then, they offered a monthly plan that may or may not have been profitable. One could argue that OpenAI has been paying people to use its service for a long time.

I also wonder if xAI gets something out of it. For instance, they might get all the conversations with the AI. I believe ChatGPT similarly put free, user conversations to use internally in ways that boosted their paid apps. xAI might have some plays like that.
by PaulHoule | 2025-05-28 19:55:29+00:00
There is the possibility that black holes larger than the usual stellar size black holes could have formed early on

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_collapse_black_hole

but the gap between those and supermassive black holes is huge and it is not so probable that 100 or 1000 of those would merge in the time available.
by superultra | 2025-05-28 19:55:32+00:00
I think you're missing some nuance in your understanding of trademarks with all due respect.

The core use of trademark protection isn't a commercial use, necessarily. Rather, it's the act of infringing on the trademark holder's commercial use. So, if Waffle House is selling Waffle House t-shirts, and a business next door is giving away free Waffle House t-shirts that they printed - then yes, Waffle House would very likely win a lawsuit against someone giving away waffle house t-shirts.

Basically if someone is giving away or, especially, selling something that causes a confusion against the original trademark, then yes, the trademark "must" be protected.

By "must" I don't mean it's legally required. I just mean you're going to have a harder time in court if you need to pursue legal action against a company or person if there's a precedent you have not actively protected the trademark in other instances.

edit: and in this case, the site was causing confusion, so they sent a C&D. Also as the other commentor mentioned, the logo is trademarked.
by bluGill | 2025-05-28 19:55:41+00:00
That idealism isn't how families happened. Traditoinally you split the farm when the sons (it need not be sons, but sexism generally comes in somehow as someone needs to leave home for genetic diverstiy reasons and the entire culture needs to follow the pattern in general so lets just talk about sons with the understanding that sometimes it was daughters) until the farm was too small to support the family at which point the oldest son got the farm and the other kids were sent off on their own. If you were lucky enough to be the oldest son you got to stay home and raise your own family with your cousins nearby in the village - but for your brothers who knows where they went, if they had a family it wasn't in sight and they didn't have the family.