MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by PaulHoule | 2025-05-29 18:02:44+00:00
I used to point people to

https://www.pinecone.io/blog/

as a great example of a startup blog although it's gotten more corporate and self-centered lately. I think they might have also cleared out their early posts. They were early to the vector database trend and were working on it before the ChatGPT revolution and they used blogging to get visibility. They did all the obvious SMO things, turns out I am wearing a "LOVE THY NEAREST NEIGHBOR" T-shirt today which they sent me because I gave some kind words.

In your case you have some concern about whether this should be public as you might be under NDA or just think that some of your stakeholders might rather keep things under wrap. You've mentioned investors but I'd think that other people involved might have concerns too.

Many people would say you should be thinking about what goals you want to attain: keeping investors sweet is important, but perhaps you could build buzz about a movie before it is released, or get messages out to people who might work for or with you, etc. Left to my own devices I would be inclined to "write a blog because I want to have a blog" but the people who advise me would want me to have specific goals in mind.
by tester756 | 2025-05-29 18:02:44+00:00
>I actually expect some of the rapid delivery networks to get a bit more like this - I predicted with friends about 5 years ago at some point your Amazon delivery is going to be in a locker on the back of a self-driving vehicle. You (and everyone else in the street), will get a notification that its outside for the next 30 minutes - miss it, and it'll go get delivered to a nearby pickup site. Imagine if there was dynamic routing so that the parcel just "finds me" if I'm at work, or a bar after work... obviously I might want choices and options and so on, but I think the idea of parcels just going to where you sleep, whether you are there or not, is going to look quaint in 30 years time.

Inpost - logistics startup in Poland managed to put lockers everywhere and you just receive sms when the parcel is there and you have 48h to pick it up

You can go whenever you want - simple and effective as hell

They disrupted delivery industry
by Sniffnoy | 2025-05-29 18:03:00+00:00
This is Polymarket, not Manifold. It's not "anyone can create a market and can resolve it however they want". Polymarket creates the markets and resolves them, so an unfair resolution could undercut their reputation and hurt their business. People know what "Jesus returning" means and if they interpret it some other way people won't just say "oh well I guess that was technically within the criteria".

Again, this is in the article! If you want to argue it's a problem, you should start by responding to what the article has to say on the subject, not just asserting it from scratch as if it isn't discussed!
by gs17 | 2025-05-29 18:03:13+00:00
They can't choose it, they didn't (necessarily) identify as it in the first place.

> the people that modern dominant (in the US, at least) political groups condemn for "socialism"

They weren't talking about actual socialists, they're talking about the right's propensity to call anyone else a leftist. For example, if you ask my dad if Biden was a socialist, he'd tell you yes, and then if you asked how, he would list many things that have nothing to do with economic policy.
by munificent | 2025-05-29 18:04:15+00:00
I've gotten into knitting over the past couple of years. (By the way, if you are a software type, I would highly recommend knitting. It's an excellent hobby. I can explain more why if people are interested.)

I'm well aware of the Emotional Support Chicken, though I haven't made one myself.

I think what we're witnessing here is simply another example of power laws[1] in effect. Say you have a set of objects that vary in desirability. Then you have a forum where people can talk about which objects they like. People will end up talking about the objects they like more, which will make them more visible to other people, who then end up also talking about them more. Meanwhile, slightly less desirable objects get talked about slightly less, which means fewer people discover them and talk about them.

Turn the crank on that iterative process many times and what was originally a linear distribution in object popularity will quickly become a huge spike on the few things at the top with a long tail of forgotten stuff.

In this case, Ravely is the center of the knitting world and has incredible impact on the fiber arts community. I'd guess that it's literally where most knitters across the world go to find patterns.

Emotional Support Chicken is currently the 3rd most popular knitting pattern on the site. It got there, I think by being cute and hitting the mental health zeitgeist at just the right time during COVID and then having the power law math work its magic.

Another pattern that hit the zeitgeist at just the right time and rocketed to popularity is the Non Cooperation Brick, released just after Trump was inaugurated.

For those who are curious, the top pattern is YSolda Teague's Musselburge hat. It's extremely common but also sort of generic looking so you probably don't realize how often people make and wear it. It's a good, simple start project, and Teague is a knitting celebrity.

Number two is PetiteKnit's Sophie scarf which is, honestly, not a very good article of clothing, but it is a very good tutorial project on how to knit. I suspect there are thousands of unworn Sophie scarves sitting in closets, having already completed their purpose of turning its owner into a knitter.

If one were to want to absorb knitting culture and be able to come across as "in the know" as quickly as possible, skimming the top patterns page on Ravelry is an excellent shortcut to get there.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_law
by antirez | 2025-05-29 18:04:16+00:00
Any Feistel Network has the property you stated actually, and this was one of the approaches I was thinking using as I can have the seed as part of the non linear transformation of the Feistel Network. However I'm not sure that this actually decreases the probability of A xor B xor C xor D being accidentally zero, bacause the problem with pointers is that they may change only for a small part. When you using hashing because of avalanche effect this is going a lot harder since you are no longer xoring the pointer structure.

What I mean is that you are right assuming we use a transformation that still while revertible has avalanche effect. Btw in practical terms I doubt there are practical differences.
by AStonesThrow | 2025-05-29 18:04:28+00:00
The problem here is that the HN URL encoding interpreted the period as the end-of-sentence rather than as part of the URL. It would be simply bizarre for any browser or web server to choke on a perfectly legal dot to end a URL.

Per the HN formatting documentation: https://news.ycombinator.com/formatdoc

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joffe_v._Google,_Inc.>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_or_Astro-man%3F is another story -- since "?" is a reserved character in URLs for CGI queries. Enter the question mark anyway, and the article comes up! Why? There's a redirect without it!

For Wikipedia's gory details on technical restrictions for article titles: (note that HN properly parses this article title ending in a right-paren)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(...
by vel0city | 2025-05-29 18:04:52+00:00
That's why Jesus said "Better pick up a stone otherwise you're just encouraging adultery!"

I'm not for encouraging people to get abortions. I think abortions are a terrible and sad thing. I wish for a world where nobody would ever need to have such a procedure done. I also think its terrible to have the state force people to carry risky pregnancies to term. I also think its bad for us to then go on and be hateful to those who have had an abortion, and I also think its wrong to firebomb places which give healthcare.

But many others disagree.
by Bukhmanizer | 2025-05-29 18:05:23+00:00
There are a couple people I work with who clearly don’t have a good understanding of software engineering. They aren’t bad to work with and are in fact great at collaborating and documenting their work, but don’t seem to have the ability to really trace through code and logically understand how it works.

Before LLMs it was mostly fine because they just didn’t do that kind of work. But now it’s like a very subtle chaos monkey has been unleashed. I’ve asked on some PRs “why is this like this? What is it doing?” And the answer is “ I don’t know, ChatGPT told me I should do it.”

The issue is that it throws basically all their code under suspicion. Some of it works, some of it doesn’t make sense, and some of it is actively harmful. But because the LLMs are so good at giving plausible output I can’t just glance at the code and see that it’s nonsense.

And this would be fine if we were working on like a crud app where you can tell what is working and broken immediately, but we are working on scientific software. You can completely mess up the results of a study and not know it if you don’t understand the code.
by bubblyworld | 2025-05-29 18:05:30+00:00
Thanks - I have to admit there's far too much jargon in there for me to make heads or tails of the main claims, let alone say anything sensible about your original reply. I can't even work out how your statement that no algorithmic process can increase the mutual information between two given strings is formalised in the language of the paper, since there seems to be an obvious counterexample - the mutual information between an infinite string of 0s and the halting sequence can be made arbitrarily large by a program with oracle access to the halting sequence by simply transforming each element into the corresponding element of the halting sequence. So of course I am missing something.

But it seems interesting, thanks for the link =)
by Cieric | 2025-05-29 18:05:43+00:00
I don't have enough time to read the paper in full right now. But I'm curious if using this they could possibly find the solution to the 3 sided coin problem. I haven't heard anything about it since I watched the matt parker video about it.

https://youtu.be/-qqPKKOU-yY

Or I guess if anyone else knows the answer, that would also satisfy my curiosity.
by Nevermark | 2025-05-29 18:05:51+00:00
Value impact is always hard to predict.

1) It is, of course, hard to predict major capability advances.

2) But it is also hard to predict capability -> value thresholds. Some large advances won't cross a threshold. While some incremental advancements do.

3) This is all made infinitely harder, because the value chain has many layers and links, each with their own thresholds.

Major capability advances upstream may cross dramatic thresholds, generating reasonable hype, yet still hit downstream thresholds that stymie their impact.

And crossing a few small downstream thresholds can unlock massive latent upstream value, resulting in cascades of impact.

(This is something Apple aims to leverage. Not over-prioritizing major advances vs. the careful identification and clearing of numerous "trivial", but critical, downstream bottlenecks.)
by aapoalas | 2025-05-29 18:06:12+00:00
Indeed, there's no guarantee that it will fit: I think it will but I don't know and want to find out.

There are strong (IMO) reasons to think it will fit, though. User code can indeed do whatever but it rarely does. Programs written in JS are no less structured and predictable than ones written in C++ or Rust or any other language: they mostly operate on groups of data running iterations, loops, and algorithms over and over again. So the instructions being interpreted are likely to form roughly ECS System-like access patterns.

Furthermore, it is more likely that data that came into the engine at one time (eg. one JSON.parse call or fetch result) will be iterated through at the same time. Thus, if the engine can ensure that data is and stays temporally colocated, then it is statistically likely that the interpreter's memory access patterns will not only come from System-like algorithms, they will access Component-array like memory.

So: JS objects (and other heap allocated data) are Entities, their data is laid out in arrays of Components (TODO laying out object properties in Component arrays, at least in some cases), and the program forms the Systems. ECS :)
by freedomben | 2025-05-29 18:06:51+00:00
Hypocrisy is always easier to see from the outside. That said I do think non-believers (such as myself) often have unreasonable and unrealistic "standards" for what they expect from a Christian.

That said many Christians I know are much harsher critics of other Christians who don't live their beliefs than most of the atheists I know, and IMHO that's how it should be.
by joshdavham | 2025-05-29 18:07:58+00:00
> In the near term, some CEOs and management teams will profit from the short term valuations

That's actually really interesting to think about. The idea that doing something counter-productive like trying to replace employees with AI (which will cause problems), may actually benefit the company in terms of valuations in the short run. So in effect, they're hurting and helping the company at the same time.
by bluefirebrand | 2025-05-29 18:08:20+00:00
Right below this is a comment

> you will almost certainly be replaced by an llm in the next few years

So... Maybe not. I agree that Hacker News does have a generally higher quality of contributors than many places on the internet, but it absolutely is not a universal for HNers. There are still quite a few posters here that have really bought into the hype for whatever reason
by benlivengood | 2025-05-29 18:08:40+00:00
In this particular case you would only have to push back the lack of meaning to the ~multiverse or whatever a sequence/family of child universes would be called.

I don't think Tegmark <IV had any simple parameters for goodness or meaning, and neither does logic or mathematics. We assemble our meanings out of more fundamental relationships but I actually think they concretely exist in a real way as real as the matter in this universe, but more in the way that galaxies and other complex structures exist. Meaning is a property of complex self-reflective systems and so inherent meaning will probably always be tied inexorably to context and environment, or in our case meaning is tied specifically to our human nature.

E.g. I will find it fascinating if universes do evolve from progenitor universes and therefore the guiding selection pressure is "make more black holes/universes" but that isn't the same thing as the human concept of "good" since our nature isn't aligned with entire (families of) universes.
by legitster | 2025-05-29 18:08:43+00:00
> Perhaps most surprisingly, you’ll hear Megan take great pains to differentiate private equity from venture capital, which is very different — and with very different problems.

Private equity is a pretty useless term at this point. 99% of the time people point to the ills of private equity, they are cherry picking some other definition. Usually, they make false equivalencies with Leveraged Buy Outs (LBOs) specifically.

In most of the cases discussed, whether the capital to do the deal came from private or public sources makes almost no difference.
Show HN: Nuxtbe SaaS Kit – AI Features, Directory Template, and First Customers
by Mr_Vlad | 2025-05-29 18:08:46+00:00
Hey HN!

A month ago, I shared Nuxtbe — my SaaS starter kit built with Nuxt and Supabase. The goal was simple: stop rebuilding the same auth, payments, and dashboard setup for every new project.

The response has been encouraging: - First paying customers came in - Added AI features (chatbot, image generation) based on requests - Built out a directory template for marketplace-style apps - Polished the docs and developer experience

I originally built this to scratch my own itch — I was tired of spending weeks on boilerplate before getting to the actual product. Turns out other indie makers had the same problem.

The kit handles the boring stuff (Stripe integration, user management, email systems) so you can focus on what makes your SaaS unique.

Would love to hear what other pain points you run into when starting new projects, or what features you'd want in an ideal starter kit.
by obscurette | 2025-05-29 18:09:22+00:00
The whole problem with China is only marginally about what it does (IP theft, manipulations of financial markets etc are real), but mostly about what the rest of the world doesn't do. Most of the world have stopped to solve the problems. My friend has a pet theory that it's about the rise of social media – we stopped to care about how things are and only care about how things look to others. People who do, make mistakes; building something is always somehow bad for environment etc etc. It's more rewarding for people to look better persons in social media than do something and risk with their image. While it's certainly naive, I think there is something in it.
by sofal | 2025-05-29 18:09:30+00:00
I don't acquire skills and apply them just to be able to apply them. I use them to solve problems and create things. My learned skills for processing audio are for the purpose of getting the audio sounding the way I want it to sound. If an AI can do that for me instead, that's amazing and frees up my time to do other things or do a lot more different audio things. None of this is scary to me or impacts my personal dignity. I'm actually constantly wishing that AI could help me do even more. Honestly I'm not even sure what you mean by AI doing audio editing, can I get some of that? That is some grunt work I don't need more of.
by devjab | 2025-05-29 18:09:33+00:00
LLM's do no software engineering at all, and that can be fine. Because you don't actually need software engineering to create successful programs. Some applications will not even need software engineering for their entire life cycles because nobody is really paying attention to efficiency in the ocean of poor cloud management anyway.

I actually imagine it's the opposite of what you say here. I think technically inclined "IT business partners" will be able of creating applications entirely without software engineers... Because I see that happen every day in the world of green energy. The issues come later, when things have to be maintained, scale or become efficient. This is where the software engineering comes in, because it actually matters if you used a list or a generator in your Python app when it iterates over millions of items and not just a few hundreds.
by Maxatar | 2025-05-29 18:10:01+00:00
Sure, but neither bcrypt or chess fall into the category of being unprovable, so having a halting detector doesn't help for those situations. The author is mixing up problems that are "hard" in the sense that we know in principle how to solve it but need a lot of resources, versus "hard" in the sense that we genuinely don't know how to solve the problem, even if we had access to infinite resources.

Mixing these two up is very misleading and detracts from what is otherwise a well written article.
by taormina | 2025-05-29 18:10:32+00:00
My problem with this usage is that the LLMs seem equally likely to make up a function they wish existed. When questioned about the seeming-too-convenient method they will usually admit to having made it up on the spot. (This happens a lot in Flutter/Flame land, I'm sure it's better at something more mainstream like Python?) That being said, I do agree that using it as supplemental documentation is one of the better usecases I have for it.
by Whoppertime | 2025-05-29 18:10:40+00:00
When I was growing up I knew a few families which worked in auto factories. They had multiple cars parked in their driveway. They could afford multiple kids. The ones I knew could afford to take vacations as well That's a level of consumption I do not see in people who work in the service sector in the 2020s. Obviously we cannot turn back the clock and even if those jobs are brought back they won't provide the same lifestyle or offer it to the same amount of people. But there's a perception that you cannot raise a family delivering food on Ubereats like you could working for Ford or GM
by aapoalas | 2025-05-29 18:10:48+00:00
Hmm, sorry, I'm not sure what you mean.

The engine is written with a fair bit of feature flags to disable more complicated or annoying JS features if the embedder so wants: it is my aim that this would go quite deep and enable building a very slim, simple, and easily self-optimising JS engine through this.

That could then perhaps truly serve as an easy and fast scripting engine for embedding use cases.
by itsNintu | 2025-05-29 18:11:16+00:00
This is awesome!

I’ve tried other visual AI dev tools like Bolt or Lovable, but I feel like the walled-garden approach they’ve taken is a bit limiting in terms of how I personally want to work. As someone who comes from design but is actively using Cursor and Windsurf, I’ve very much been missing that Webflow-like ability to just click, edit, and see things getting updated in real-time, while always knowing I can drop into the code for more complex stuff.

It looks like you’ve nailed this intersection. The fact that you’re taking what is basically a visual layer on top of the code, plus the inclusion of the in-browser code editor (and I assume terminal access for the sandbox eventually?), is a huge step in the right direction and feels like it could really cover some of that gap I want between design and dev.

I’m definitely keeping an eye on this, and when you’re able to allow import existing projects I'll be onboard.

Congrats on the launch!