MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mark-r | 2025-05-22 12:29:04+00:00
You're talking about the difference between Average amplitude and Peak amplitude. Yes, the peaks will be higher than the average, but not by a constant amount unless you're working with a pure constant sine wave. It will depend on the sound you're working with. The phase is part of that sound so generally you can't mess with it.

-20 db would just be a starting point, you could adjust up or down from there.
by dagw | 2025-05-22 12:29:33+00:00
It’s probably a pricing thing.

It really isn't or at least not just price. BYD, at least in Sweden, are not cheap cars in an absolute sense. Many car brands have cars that are cheaper than the cheapest car BYD sells in Sweden. MG, Peugeot, Citroen and others all have smaller and cheaper EVs if what you mainly care about is price. BYDs focus is much more on value for money at the mid level.
Show HN: Pure JavaScript library to connect LLMs with input/textarea elements
by yogeshjain999 | 2025-05-22 12:31:22+00:00
We extracted and open sourced a JS library which simply allows connecting LLMs to input/textarea within forms.

Main features are: LLM agnostic, HTML first, pure JS, stylable UI etc.

It's purpose is simple - Help users fill in input/textarea with predefined instructions, providing other form fields as a context, without leaving the form.

It's in early stage, but we have plans to add more features.

Please give it a try and let us know if you have any feedback or suggestions, here or on GitHub.

Thanks!
by rwmj | 2025-05-22 12:31:36+00:00
I don't know where you heard that? The source code for Red Hat's RISC-V developer preview will be released alongside the binaries, on 1st June. However almost all of it is already in CentOS Stream 10 and you can browse it here: https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream There are a few patched packages (and quite a large kernel patch), which is what we'll be releasing into a separate git repo when the developer preview is actually released.
by RowanVale1 | 2025-05-22 12:32:05+00:00
I’ve tried other checkers like AMLBot and WhoAML, but they often overload you with raw data. What Satoshi Eye gets right is clarity — simple scoring, tagged risk sources, and visual indicators. It's not just a tool, it's peace of mind before you press "send." And no KYC or logins makes it even better.
by jacob019 | 2025-05-22 12:32:22+00:00
I've refactored some files over 6000 loc. It was necessary to do it iteratively with smaller patches. "Do not attempt to modify more than one function per iteration" It would just gloss over stuff. I would tell it repeatedly: I noticed you missed something, can you find it? I kept doing that until it couldn't find anything. Then I had to manually review and ask for more edits. Also lots of style guidelines and scope limit instructions. In the end it worked fine and saved me hours of really boring work.
by gspr | 2025-05-22 12:32:24+00:00
I'm not trying to argue which distribution model is best, or whether one should avoid distributions altogether. That's messy, complicated, and full of personal variables for each individual.

I'm just trying to correct the notion that somehow a distro is an "app store" that "inserts itself" between the software and its users. A distribution is an attempt to make lots of disparate pieces of software "work together", at varying degrees. Varying degrees of modification may or may not factor into that. On one extreme is perhaps just a collection of entirely disjoint software, without anything attaching those pieces of software together. On the other extreme is perhaps something like the BSDs. Arch and Debian sit somewhere in between, at either side.

Thoughtful people can certainly disagree about what the correct degree of "work together" or modification is.
by lamename | 2025-05-22 12:35:29+00:00
I appreciate the sentiment, but I've found this resource [0] much more direct and comprehensive. It explains all of the nuance regarding dB and related terminology from audio engineering to perception (voltage, power, intensity, volume, loudness, etc.)

The format is a bit circular; just enjoy getting lost in it for half an hour.

https://sengpielaudio.com/TableOfSoundPressureLevels.htm
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF | 2025-05-22 12:35:45+00:00
> I said that people making blanket statements about LLMs being gimmicks need to be more creative. Then I listed a couple examples of how I find them useful, with the key point being that I don’t expect perfection.

I just want to point out that this is precisely how they described your perspective. It’s hard to see how you find their tone patronizing given they’re just explaining their point of view. It’s worth noting that others may find your words to be patronizing:

> These “AI is a gimmick that does nothing” articles mostly just communicate to me that most people lack imagination.

> Most of the critical arguments (like the link) are almost always from people that use them as basic chatbots without any sort of deeper understanding or exploration of the tools.

> I said that people making blanket statements about LLMs being gimmicks need to be more creative.
by infogulch | 2025-05-22 12:35:57+00:00
You know it's a good post when it starts with a funny meme. Seems related to the recent discussion: $20K Bounty Offered for Optimizing Rust Code in Rav1d AV1 Decoder (memorysafety.org) | 108 comments | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43982238
by al_borland | 2025-05-22 12:36:00+00:00
You say you try to stay away from “sleep less” terminology, but your central point so far has seemed to be that the idea of sleep duration and the 8 hour sleep window is junk science and should be thrown out. Anyone reading your dismissal of the 8 hour sleep window is going to take that to mean that your product doesn’t require 8 hours of sleep. The assumption will be fewer hours of sleep are required.

If this isn’t the take away, then I’m not sure why you spent so much time trying to dunk on sleep duration being the enemy and needing to move the conversation away from it.

It really sounds like what you’re trying to build compliments sleep duration and proper sleep hygiene. The way it’s been talked about makes it sound like someone can replace a full night’s sleep with a 20 minute power nap. That may not have been your intent, and you didn’t explicitly state that, but that’s sure what it seems like you’re trying to place in reader’s minds by dismissing sleep duration and hygiene as old and irrelevant ideas.
by djtango | 2025-05-22 12:36:03+00:00
Sight reading never really ends - I tested a friend (professional virtuoso) when he was drunk at a noisy party and he sight read one of the Chopin song transcriptions by Liszt (I deliberately chose something a bit obscure).

Nothing quite as crushing as seeing people sight read things that would take you months/years to learn with the score... :)

Thanks for sharing your journey!
by RetroTechie | 2025-05-22 12:36:42+00:00
> Telemetry is perfectly acceptable as long as it is opt-in and does not contain personal data

Telemetry contains personal data by definition. It just varies how sensitive & how it's used. Also it's been shown repeatedly that 'anonymized' is shaky ground.

In that popcon example, I'd expect some Debian-run server to collect a minimum of data, aggregate, and Debian maintainers using it to decide where to focus effort w/ respect to integrating packages, keeping up with security updates, etc. Usually ok.

For commercial software, I'd expect telemetry to slurp whatever is legally allowed / stays under users' radar (take your pick ;), vendor keeping datapoints tied to unique IDs, and sell data on "groups of interest" to the highest bidder. Not ok.

Personal preference: eg. a crash report: "report" or "skip" (default = skip), with a checkbox for "don't ask again". That way it's no effort to provide vendor with helpful info, and just as easy to have it get out of users' way.

It's annoying the degree to which vendors keep ignoring the above (even for paying customers), given how simple it is.
by paipa | 2025-05-22 12:37:35+00:00
The denominator isn't the issue. The context-dependent base of the logarithm is, which makes 1 Bel = 10x for some things and 1 Bel = 3.16x for others.

I've never heard of decibels used in probability theory. Did they adopt it with the same baked-in bastardizations? Please tell me +10dB(stdev) = +10dB(variance) isn't a thing.
by joshstrange | 2025-05-22 12:37:42+00:00
Wow, I completely missed this when it was published back in 2023. I watched every briefing by the KY Governor and I remember AppHarvest coming up multiple times (9 times according to the daily transcripts people made on Reddit [0]). I remembering thinking how cool of an idea it was and how I really thought this could help our more rural areas.

It’s incredibly disappointing that this is how it turned out. Selling workers on the vision that they did and then completely going in the other direction is gross verging on evil. Especially the parts about top execs cashing out while employees and their friends/family invested in what they thought could be their future.

[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/Coronavirus_KY/search/?q=Appharvest...
by apothegm | 2025-05-22 12:37:42+00:00
The inability to open links in a new tab is far too common, so sloppy, and I LOATHE it.

Too many e-commerce websites won’t let you do this, which means comparing items in the results is excruciating. Even worse, some disallow new tabs AND lose your search results or sorting/filtering when you hit back to return to the list view.

SPA-as-default is a plague on humanity.
by imiric | 2025-05-22 12:37:46+00:00
From my experience as a SWE over the past ~15 years working in teams ranging from 10+ engineers in large companies doing daily in-person standups, to ~5 engineers in small remote-first companies doing daily videocall or async standups, and everything in between: the standup ceremony is a waste of everyone's time. Its only purpose is social/political as with any meeting, and giving micromanaging managers something to do and something to report to their higher-ups (I've been part of teams where the "Scrum Master" and even "Product Owner" attends the standup...). Which is fine if that's the way the company works and the participants enjoy the ceremony for personal reasons, but there are no tweaks to the standup formula that makes teams more productive or functional.

If I'm working on a solo project, nobody cares about the details of my progress besides the users I'm building it for. Whether this is an API for someone who is part of the standup, or a feature for someone in the company, I would communicate with them directly when needed. They would already be aware of my progress, and they usually don't need to be informed of it on a daily basis. If I'm stuck on something, then I would also communicate directly with the person who can help me.

If I'm working on a team project, the team members would already be aware of the project status, whether that's via pull requests, issues, or direct communication (in-person, chat, email, etc.). The users of the project would be notified of the progress as needed in this case as well.

So the standup ceremony is redundant for the few people familiar with the context, and completely useless for those who are not. The standup assumes that teams aren't communicating already, which is ludicrous.

It's about time that the industry accepts that the Agile manifesto, while noble in principle, has been completely misunderstood and corrupted in all its implementations, and that the modern software development process is not an improvement over the Waterfall one it aimed to replace.

To me the only process that makes sense is giving engineers autonomy, assuming they're self-sufficient and capable of making good decisions, and providing them with a very lightweight set of tools for collaboration (issue/task tracker, code review, chat, email, meeting, etc.). A process that works best for that team will emerge by consensus. Anything that's imposed from the top down or by cargo culting some process that worked for some other team will inevitably cause friction and be of little practical value.
by thrway482119 | 2025-05-22 12:40:03+00:00
I haven't used this technique myself but I can ignore it most of the time, and I think that's an important place to get to. For me, I feel that a big part of it is simply acceptance. If I'd get worked up over it every time I'm noticing it, I think it would be a lot harder to ignore over time. It sucks but this way it sucks a lot less.

It's a funny thing - like a bear in the woods type thing. Sometimes, when its existence gets called to my attention, like when I started reading this story and the comments just now, I suddenly realize how loud it is - but also how I've gone about my whole day without any problems, despite it having been there all the time. Not sure if that makes sense, but that's my experience and it's - fine, really.

Not saying that you shouldn't try other things, and I also don't really know how to get there beyond going easy on yourself. I'm just saying that to me being able to ignore it makes a huge difference in my life quality and so I think it's very worth pursuing. Good luck!
by richardsondx | 2025-05-22 12:41:10+00:00
I got tired of AI assistants confidently giving me broken code. So I built Checkmate. It’s a test-driven dev tool that forces your AI coding agents (like Cursor) to prove their code works before you hit run.

It’s open-source, fast to set up, and built to keep AI output honest.

How it works: - You define specs and rules in plain text - The AI writes code and self-checks against those rules - Checkmate independently verifies that the evidence matches the logic - If the AI cheats or misses something, Checkmate rejects it - The agent has to fix it and retry until it passes

It’s like putting an assert statement around the entire prompting process.

I use it now daily with Cursor. Now my AI-generated code I trust, ships faster, and there’s less back-and-forth.

There’s a WIKI in the repos https://github.com/richardsondx/checkmate where you can learn more about it

Would love feedback, contributions, and bug reports. It’s early but I think this should be a default part of any AI dev workflow.

0.1.7 coming soon with Checkmate Dashboard. I’ve shared some preview on X.
by simpaticoder | 2025-05-22 12:41:36+00:00
It would seem that Pixar's Wall-E took more than a little inspiration from The Machine Stops. The ending of the original is better, since it acknowledges the universality of decay. The ship in Wall-E, the Axiom (the rough analog to The Machine) is in excellent shape even after 700 years, and long since any living human knew anything about how it works. A rosy picture indeed! But The Machine is wordless, humming, utterly inhuman, and it decays in the end. Interesting that the mechanisms that compose Axiom are all sentient and expressive and individual - a hallmark of Pixar's "anthropomorphize all the things!" approach to story-telling. But the central theme about human dependency on technology is exactly the same.

I wonder if humanity could/should have its cake and eat it to. Imagine a world where different communities intentionally live at different technology levels. At the lowest level, you don't have electricity, just man- and animal-power. At the mid-level, you have steam engines and electricity, but no computers. At the high-level you have everything. Ideally one could choose which level to live at, perhaps at the coming-of-age. The nice thing about such a civilization is that it's resiliant to damage - for example, a Carrington event (e.g. massive solar flare) might destroy the high-level civ, damage the medium-level civ, but leave the low-level civ untouched. There might even be instructions/commitment/duty for civs to rebuild each other after disaster. (I believe we badly overestimate our ability to "drop down" a tech level in an emergency; such lifestyles must be maintained by practice.)
by mrnoone | 2025-05-22 12:41:44+00:00
I agree with your point, we need common abstractions across different TEE architectures!

The CoVE specification addresses fragmentation in the RISC-V ecosystem by defining a unified confidential computing architecture that scales across embedded, edge, and cloud use cases. Higher layers of the software stack, for example Linux KVM and QEMU, implement the defined ABI, enabling support for a variety of CoVE-compliant implementations. Currently, there are two CoVE implementations: ACE, targeting embedded systems, and Salus, aimed at cloud deployments. Additionally, there are efforts underway to port OP-TEE to the CoVE architecture.

Within the Linux kernel, there is ongoing work to unify internal interfaces across different TEE implementations (x86,ARM,Z,PowerPC) and harden the guest kernel. The CoVE patches are designed to align with these abstractions, though they have not yet been upstreamed. Remote attestation is still the pain point, since the CoVE spec proposes formats that are not compatible with Intel/AMD/TPM style. On the other hand, the ACE's local attestation re-uses the format from OpenPOWER PEF and opens it with versioning to new algorithms and properties.

From an end-user standpoint, VM-based TEEs are more agnostic to the underlying hardware technology compared with process-based TEEs, as they rely on the virtualization boundary for isolation. What does still change is the guest kernel and its supporting libraries, which must be adapted to leverage platform-specific attestation mechanisms.
by rusk | 2025-05-22 12:42:25+00:00
You are bounded by a minimum floor for the hot water. Below a certain point you can get legionnaires.

To me it seems like one of two things: external pressure between hot and cold is mismatched so a small change to one side overwhelms the weaker flow.

Alternatively it might just be a broken or poor quality mixer that isn’t providing the appropriate ‘nuance’ of control, and that may indeed be expressed as some sort of non-linear relationship.
by glitchc | 2025-05-22 12:42:28+00:00
Expert Systems (TM) was trademarked (abandoned now) way way back in 1982. It was a licensed term that meant something very specific to those with a long background in technology. You sound new to the space and thus want to reinvent the term for your own purposes, which is a fine thing really, but an understanding of the history behind it may save you a great deal of grief.

tl;dr, expert systems as a concept was hot! As an actual implementation, it was a colossal failure. The new AI hype train has always contained echoes of expert systems, and I was giddy with excitement to see someone complete the loop. The serpent eats its own tail after all. Which just goes to show that folks would be considerably more enlightened if they just read a bit more history.
by bonoboTP | 2025-05-22 12:43:52+00:00
It never really worked otherwise. Even before formal peer review and journals, social standing and political squabbling, finding patrons etc. definitely affected science. The grade school textbook ideal version is a literal lie-to-children. The problem is that threading the needle correctly, without falling over to the other side, of quackery and "the academic mafia is suppressing this perpetual motion machine" and "Big Science" doesn't want to admit that ESP exists etc. can be incredibly hard.
by westoncb | 2025-05-22 12:45:26+00:00
I spend so much time just finding/moving context pieces around these days i bought a physical macro pad and have been thinking about designing some software specifically to make this quicker, basically like rapidly finding/selecting context pieces and loading into buffers and relaying to conversation context. I think it’ll have to be backed by agentic search, voice controlled, and not sure how to best integrate with possible consumers… I dunno if that makes sense. I started building it and realized I need to think on the design a bit more so I’m building more like infrastructure pieces now.
by fred_terzi | 2025-05-22 12:45:29+00:00
I think you've identified a good pain point here. Do you have plans on your road map for imports and exports of the manuals? Starting fresh in your system seems like a clean workflow, but for my day job we would need to be able to take existing manuals and convert them. The idea of an easy conversion from antiquated to digital would be great selling point I think. Best of luck!
by Rochus | 2025-05-22 12:45:57+00:00
The article argues that America is experiencing cascading systems failures across multiple domains because of a systematic prioritization of diversity over competence in institutional hiring and promotion practices. Though it does so without establishing a clear causal relationship. While presenting temporal correlation, it fails to demonstrate that diversity policies indeed are the primary cause of these failures, rather than numerous other factors like budget constraints, management decisions, or technological changes.

Even without bringing diversity into the equation, the Peter principle already well explains why hierarchies tend to converge toward incompetence, and thanks to the Dilbert principle, we know that the most ineffective workers are systematically moved to the management ;-)
by xtracto | 2025-05-22 12:46:01+00:00
>Tinitus is misfiring nerves firing along the path somewhere from ear cochlea to cortex

I've had tinnitus in both my ears for 25 years.

Knowing that tidbit you mention, I've always wo dered if it would be possible to invent a "switch" that completely "cuts" the communication between the ears and the brain (making you temporarily deaf . So that you can turn it on at nights while in bed, and turn it on in the morning.

That would be a huge relief. And can be "rougher" than trying to stop the specific misfiring nerves
by diggan | 2025-05-22 12:46:19+00:00
> Telemetry contains personal data by definition

Why it has to include PII by definition? I'd say DNF Counting (https://github.com/fedora-infra/mirrors-countme) should be considered "telemetry", yet it doesn't seem to collect any personal data, at least by what I understand telemetry and personal data to mean.

I'm guessing that you'd either have to be able to argue that DNF Counting isn't telemetry, or that it contains PII, but I don't see how you could do either.
by lucasacosta_ | 2025-05-22 12:46:27+00:00
Definitely. For now the "frontier-level" papers (working with repository-level coding maintenance) need to necessarily depend on previously (and statically) generated Code Knowledge Graphs or Snippet-Retrieval systems, which makes the scalable and fast aspects complicated, as any change in the code would represent a change in the graph, hence requiring a rebuild. But given the context limit, you need to rely on Graph queries to give relevant parts and then at the end of the day it just reads snippets instead of the full code, which makes the consistent an issue, as it can't learn from the entirety of the code.

Papers I'm referring to (just some as example, as there're more):

- CodexGraph [https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.03910] - Graph

- Agentless [https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.01489] - Snippet-Retrieval
by edvaldodfreitas | 2025-05-22 12:47:14+00:00
How many times have you dropped the same comment in a code review?

→ Don’t use new Date() directly. Inject a Clock. → This code is duplicated. → We don’t use lodash here.

Feels like we’re doing reviews on repeat in 2025.

That’s exactly why we built one of the most used features in Kodus: Kody Rules.

Team rules, your way, right inside the PR flow.

And the best part?

Kody learns from your team’s reviews.

It watches the comments you leave on PRs and starts suggesting those same things on the next ones.

No config upfront. No model training.

I recorded a quick video showing one of the rules we use: https://youtu.be/0J4TtooYDHU

→ “Avoid using new Date() directly in services. Inject the Clock.”

Simple, but it prevents annoying bugs, saves repetitive back-and-forth, and keeps standards in place without anyone having to remember them.

If you could automate just ONE comment you keep repeating in reviews, what would it be?