MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by gsgermanok | 2025-05-22 01:52:08+00:00
I just published a new article covering 4 essential Ruby debugging tools every developer should know:

irb – for quick tests pry – pause + explore your code interactively byebug – classic step-through debugging debug – the modern built-in debugger for Ruby 3.1+

Whether you're a beginner or a seasoned dev, mastering these tools can save hours and make your development workflow smoother.
by VladVladikoff | 2025-05-22 01:52:21+00:00
I have been to a lot of very loud electronic music shows in my life. For most of it I was young and foolish and did not wear hearing protection. Later in life I started to wear earplugs. I occasionally get waves of tinnitus in one ear. It comes on randomly and only lasts about one minute. I’m always afraid it will not go away. One day the wave will decide to just stay? I haven’t been to any loud shows in over a decade. I have no idea what triggers the waves, I can just be sitting in a quiet room and suddenly it will hit. And then nothing for a few weeks. Ears are strange.
by jacob019 | 2025-05-22 01:52:22+00:00
I've been building agentic systems for my ecommerce business. I evaluated smolagents. It's elegant and has a lot of appealing qualities, but adds a lot of complexity to the system. For some tasks it's perfect, dynamic reporting environments that can sort and aggregate data without schema might be a good one. For most tasks it's just overkill. Gemini and OpenAI both offer python interpreters as tools, which can cover a lot of the use cases for code agents. It's true that cramming endless message on a stack of tool calls and interactions is not scalable, that is not a good way to use these tools. Most agentic workflows are shortlived. Complexity is managed with structure and discipline. These are well known problems in software development, and the old lessons still apply to the new tools. Function calls can absolutely scale well in an agentic system, or they can become a mess, just like they can in any codebase. Personally, building a system that works well is as much about managing cognitive load as the developer as it is about managing control flow and runtime performance. A simple solution that works well enough is usually superior to a clever solution with great performance. Composing function calls is the simple solution. Structured data can be still be parsed and transformed the old fashioned way. If the structure is unknown, even the cheap models are great at parsing. Managing complexity in an agentic system can be broken down into a problem of carefully managing application state. The message stack can be manipulated as needed to feed the models the active context. It's memory management in a constrained environment.
by philipkglass | 2025-05-22 01:55:37+00:00
When I started the download this morning I was able to use wget without authentication, but I see that Zenodo has added a login-wall now.

The decompressed data appears to be JSONL, but at least the version I downloaded has a little binary garbage at the front. The first readable JSON object has the author "Fortnite Germany".

Size as .zst: 117,962,356,699 bytes

ZST SHA384: b8863645654610f1fde2859bb20bd87d913865af7791e0ec33741402944d5b9bdfdaaf65c2dc610730efb01f446e2588
by godelski | 2025-05-22 01:56:39+00:00
> your typical casual user needs 2TB of local storage (outside the cloud)? that’s news to me.

That is *NOT* what I said... and you know it...

I don't believe 256GB is sufficient for the typical casual user. Apple knows it too. But $200 to upgrade FROM 256GB TO 512GB is, as you asked "too expensive".

It is "too expensive" BECAUSE comparable off-the-shelf hardware is significantly less AND has better performance. We're also talking about a level of performance most people will not notice the difference between.

I cannot find a 512GB NVMe drive that is PCIe 5.0, but here is a 1Tb one that costs $170[0]. They key point here being that you get twice the storage for 85% the price OF UPGRADING. That drive suggests it gets 14.7GBps reads and 13.3GBps writes while this Reddit user shows their Mac Mini M4 gets UNDER 3GBps for both read and write[1]. It definitely would go higher with the 512 variant because those disks are suffering from the same issue that the M2 Air suffered from... but that doesn't change the price that you pay more for less. You pay more for SIGNIFICANTLY less.

> I think we’re losing sight of the topic here. CASUAL USERS :)

It wasn't me... The question wasn't what you'd recommend to your less tech savvy friends and family, the question was if something was over priced.

P.S. iPhones won't capitalize a singular "i", as would be the proper grammatical usage.

P.S.S. External drives aren't just annoying, they're slower too.

[0] https://www.newegg.com/samsung-1tb-9100-pro-nvme-2-0/p/N82E1...

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/macmini/comments/1gmxrzc/base_m4_ma...
by int_19h | 2025-05-22 01:56:51+00:00
I was also one of the people who preferred Gnome back when it was KDE3 vs Gnome2, and I concur - the situation is very different today. Using Gnome feels like being force fed some kind of bland paste while being assured that it's healthy and good for you. With KDE, I can actually set it up in such a way that things are where I expect to find them, and then forget that it's even there.
by igouy | 2025-05-22 01:57:50+00:00
> … other control flow features like "redo", "retry", "next", "rescue", "finally", and others.

At-a-glance afaict Smalltalk provides those features too, so I would guess Smalltalk blocks may have access to the call stack too?

https://drcuis.github.io/TheCuisBook/The-Debugger.html
by paffdragon | 2025-05-22 01:59:59+00:00
Nice. One thing that I am concerned about is giving my emails to Gemini (or any other third party). The article mentioned that they wrote a new MCP server because they didn't trust existing third party tools. For me it is the same, but including third party LLMs. Someone told once that if optimizing your algorithm is to much work, just wait until computers get faster. Maybe I'll wait until I can do this on-device.
by BugheadTorpeda6 | 2025-05-22 02:00:16+00:00
Yes it's going to cause many problems forcompanies I think, but at least they will deserve it (the employees won't unfortunately unless they've drank the kool-aid, I rarely meet ICs that have drank it fwiw, which means I'm either in a serious bubble, or this is being pushed from the top down). The only clear winners are going to be chip companies.

There's never going to be an industry standard measure either. Measuring productivity as I'm sure you know is incredibly dumb for a job like this because the beneficialness of our work product can be both insanely positive and put the company on top or it can be so negative that it goes bankrupt. And ultimately a lot of what goes into people choosing whether they like the work product or not is subjective. A large part of our work is more of an art than a science and I say that as somebody that works about as far away from the frontend as one can get.
by crq-yml | 2025-05-22 02:01:14+00:00
It's built into the premise of productivity, which ultimately derives from Locke's "labor theory of property" - if you put labor into something, you have a claim on its ownership. Later philosophers studying trade and economy built this up to mean: "if we can increase the quantities of things that are legible as assets, optimizing their production on the balance sheet signals increased labor productivity". We've been awkwardly gluing that concept onto everything ever since and trying to measure things like teaching, wildlife management and "designed in California" electronics as productive activities.

Locke was thinking in agrarian terms, about how farmers work the land, or how many ships a nation has in its fleet - he was building off the mercantilism of prior centuries which was also balance-sheet driven, but in a pure trading sense, with no connection between labor/ownership. That connection was important to ushering in coherent industrial policy, since it expressed the idea of importing raw materials and then exporting finished ones at a profit - when you come up with new categories of asset to sell, or optimizations on existing ones, the economy provides more goods and services, it experiences a gain in material wealth. The real limitation is that it's too localized: commons goods are persistently attacked by it because they don't figure into the balance sheet.
by CGMthrowaway | 2025-05-22 02:01:58+00:00
A regulator's job is the protect the public interest, nothing more. Certainly not shareholder interest, except to the extent that it overlaps with the public interest. They don't run the company and they don't make decisions for the company or stop decisions because something might be a bad deal for the shareholders. Conflicts of interest and self-dealing are not illegal if properly disclosed.
by rubitxxx10 | 2025-05-22 02:02:27+00:00
I can hear the high frequencies of cathode ray tubes, and generally feel like I hear much higher frequencies than others.

That’s just normal, but when I’m tired or stressed, my blood pressure is up, or I’m sick, it’s what most people probably classify as tinnitus and is at a much lower frequency, more of a high pitched tone.
by forgotoldacc | 2025-05-22 02:04:24+00:00
it's not to stand out when every person types like this

the real reason is it's conversational. it's casual. it removes the gap between the reader and the writer

it's how people talk in a chat with their friends

in pretty much every language across the world, writing was always "formal" and lacked the voice of a couple of people having a chat. at some points, writing was even a separate language. east asian people did lots of their correspondence in classical chinese instead of using their own languages. the catholic church hated the idea of people reading the bible in anything but latin

then people chilled out and realized writing how we speak makes it more accessible to everyone. and that's not a bad thing, it's a good thing. novels started taking a more conversational style and some people looked down on that decades ago. now those novels are considered classics, and honestly, i'd attribute half of that to their writing seeming "formal" in retrospect because formal speech today is yesterday's casual speech. now people will revolt against modern writing and think it's below them. in 5 decades people will think this kind of writing is very formal

basically, it doesn't make it harder. it makes it easier. people write how they think and they don't worry about being perfect. and as another commenter said, autoformatting and autocorrecting tools just break shit more than they fix it these days. i can't even type "i have 5 pennies" without my phone correcting it to "I have 5 Pennie's" for some reason.
by BugheadTorpeda6 | 2025-05-22 02:04:25+00:00
I don't know. I guess it depends on what you classify as being change. I don't really view software as having changed all that much since around maybe the mid 70s as HLLs began to become more popular. What programmers do today and what they did back then would be easily recognizable to both groups if we had time machines. I don't see how AI really changes things all that much. It's got the same scalability issues that low code/no code solutions have always had and those go way back. The main difference is that you can use natural language, but I don't see that as being inherently better than say drawing a picture using some flowcharting tools in a low code platform. You just introduce the same problem natural languages always have had and why we didn't choose them in the first place, i.e. they are not strict enough and need lots of context. Giving an AI very specific sentences to define my project in natural language and making sure it has lots of context begins to look an awful lot like psuedocode to me. So as you learn to approach using AI in such a way that it produces what you want you naturally get closer and closer to just specifying the code.

What HAS indisputably changed is the cost of hardware which has driven accessibility and caused more consumer facing software to be made.
by __aru | 2025-05-22 02:04:27+00:00
> The software is 100% compatible with hardware, and in many cases, the Play Store is included to address the lack of software

The problem is that the Play store and Linux environments on ChromeOS are both run in VMs.

On a machine with good specs, this is perfectly fine. But when cheaper ChromeOS devices ship with 4GB of RAM, older mediatek APUs, and emmc instead of SSDs, it's just an outright bad experience.

If Google starts pushing Android Desktop as a replacement for ChromeOS, I think that could be interesting. Being able to run the Play store without the overhead of a VM will make Android potentially a much better experience than ChromeOS.
by noman-land | 2025-05-22 02:05:38+00:00
The Raspberry Pi 500 series with the CPU built into the keyboard are very capable little computers and extremely easy to setup, maintain, and re-image. I could literally mail them a new microSD card to plug in if they needed a new system but it's never been a problem. They use the default Raspbian image or whatever it's called these days, Raspberry Pi OS. It's perfectly suited for their needs and is rock solid.
by godelski | 2025-05-22 02:05:49+00:00
Same about AI

Could have happened 5 years ago. Could have happened 5 years before that. But it won't ever happen if the techy people that have the capabilities of making it happen are too busy self-righteously laughing about how it hasn't happened yet. Luckily that doesn't stop progress, but it sure doesn't let it get to the speed it could.

Meanwhile, I hope you're happy with the state of things. You have every right to point and laugh if you are happy with the direction Microsoft, Apple, and Google have led us. But if you aren't, it isn't too late to make efforts to change those directions.

If we're going to reference the past, let's not hyper-fixate on every failed "call to arms" while ignoring how future they were trying to fight actually happened...
by spyrja | 2025-05-22 02:06:38+00:00
Personally I'd just go the wrapper approach and ignore errno entirely.

#include <assert.h> #include <ctype.h> #include <limits.h> #include <stdbool.h> #include <stdint.h> #include <stdlib.h> bool copy_str_to_long_long(const char* str, long long* ptr) { while (isspace(*str)) ++str; if (*str == 0) return false; char* parsed = NULL; long long value = strtoll(str, &parsed, 0); while (isspace(*parsed)) ++parsed; if (*parsed != 0) return false; *ptr = value; return true; } long long str_to_long_long(const char* str) { long long result; assert(copy_str_to_long_long(str, &result)); return result; } bool copy_str_to_long(const char* str, long* ptr) { long long buffer; if (!copy_str_to_long_long(str, &buffer) || buffer < LONG_MIN || buffer > LONG_MAX) return false; *ptr = buffer; return true; } long str_to_long(const char* str) { long result; assert(copy_str_to_long(str, &result)); return result; } /* ...define copy_str_to_short, copy_str_to_int32, etc... */
by alabastervlog | 2025-05-22 02:08:06+00:00
> it's not to stand out when every person types like this

Yeah, OK, I should have written "for social signaling".

> basically, it doesn't make it harder.

Iassureyou,capitalizationisn'tbecauseit'spretty.Aspectsofwrittenlanguageareoftenthereforverygoodreasonsrelatedtomakingreadinglower-effort.
by indigodaddy | 2025-05-22 02:09:43+00:00
Dang, I'm not the author, so do not think this should be a show HN, at least not with me remaining as the submitter. I did not submit it as such, and then later an admin edited it to a show HN, and put my comment (that I added for context later for how I made use of the tool) as the description. That blurb currently as the description should probably be returned to a plain comment. All I did was stumble upon Derek's repo when I was looking for something to stitch together for a particular use-case.
by labadal | 2025-05-22 02:10:57+00:00
I feel terrible because I never did anything wrong. I never went to a concert. I never worked around loud things for prolonged periods. I never listened to music too loud. I have tinnitus. It seems to go up in intensity when my TMD acts up, but it never goes completely away. Mine isn't nearly debilitating, but I worry that it's going to get worse with time.
by dtagames | 2025-05-22 02:12:10+00:00
The answer is the answer the LLM predicted. LLMs don't give out (or even collect) stats about what questions folks have asked or not asked. And they certainly don't have volition or wishes.

This is the ChatGPT equivalent of the Miss America answer to what you wish for... World Peace. The product just gave you an answer you were likely to think is a match, because that's how all LLM interactions work.
by mrandish | 2025-05-22 02:13:07+00:00
So the handwritten note literally said $150M? Did it specifically state August 1997? Did it discuss the amount of equity in Apple that MSFT would be getting and the terms for triggering redemption, conversion or repayment of the loan? No? Okay.

Huge tech frenemies like MSFT and Apple tend to have one or more lawsuits between them at any given time and that doesn't stop them doing other cooperative deals and transactions. If Steve said to Bill "Hey, I need you to invest in Apple or we're not gonna survive. I'm gonna launch these awesome candy colored Macs and you'll make a shit ton of money. Oh, and BTW, it might also be a good look for you to still have Apple around if that DOJ investigation turns into an anti-trust suit" and then Bill said "Okay Steve, I'll do it but I want a good chunk of equity so let's make it a loan secured by equity in the form of convertible note... oh, and if there's any other legal spats going on between us, let's bundle settling those in too." That would be completely normal and unsurprising. I'd be more surprised if an "all outstanding disputes" clause wasn't included.

The transaction was still reflected in their respective audited financials as a LOAN. If the loan T & Cs also included settling any existing lawsuits AND Steve washing Bill's car every other Saturday - that doesn't make it not a LOAN. It's just routine everyday business between two huge companies. Of course the loan had lots of other provisions and conditions and since Apple was near death, any other terms would have been highly favorable to MSFT. However, the existence or favorability of any such conditions have nothing to do with my point - which was about the Amiga computer not surviving the tectonic industry-wide apocalypse of the 90s no matter what Commodore did. The well-documented fact Apple barely survived the 90s and was close to bankruptcy, surviving only by extraordinary external intervention, was only a minor tangential aside. It's irrelevant to the point I was making what that extraordinary external intervention involved other than it being extraordinary. All that matters is that Apple's near-death survival was definitely NOT a plan Commodore could also have used to keep the Amiga platform alive to see Jan 1, 2000. I'm quite done with this off-topic digression and won't be responding further.

And may Gail Wellington rest in peace. Every time I met her back in the day, she was a pleasure to be around and nothing but helpful and kind.
by bionhoward | 2025-05-22 02:13:09+00:00
Still feel like you’d have to be an ignoramus to use this beyond toy bullshit projects since they train AI on your work, humans read your work, and “You may not use the Services to develop [ML|business|mental] models that compete with the Services (e.g., Gemini API or Google AI Studio).”

What kind of smooth brain hears, “they train AI on your ideas and code, humans read your ideas and code, and you agree not to compete back against this thing a multi trillion dollar company just said can do everything, which competes with you,” and says yes? Oh, the smooth brain who doesn’t even realize, because it’s all buried in “additional” legal CYA documents.

ChatGPT still dominates the reach test since I can at least opt out of model training without losing chat logs, even though I have to agree not to compete with the thing that competes with me. Google is like a corporate version of a gross nerd you tolerate because they’re smart, even though they stalk you weirdly.

What a disgrace, we all ought to be sick about creating a legalese-infused black mirror dystopia, racing to replace our own minds with the latest slop-o-matic 9000 and benefit the overlords for the brief instant they count their money while the whole ecosphere is replaced by data centers

It’s like somehow the most magical tech in history (LLMs) comes along and gets completely shafted by elite grifter-tier scumbaggery. Chat bot speech is more protected than human speech these days, Google doesn’t give a crap about privacy, it’s all about the slimy hidden-opt-out of getting everything fed into the slop machine, and break everything if you do.

“Gee, should the app break if the user doesn’t want us to read their shit?” “Yeah, that sounds good, ain’t nobody got time to categorize data into two whole buckets, ship it!”

“How about we make a free better app that doesn’t even have the option of us not reading their shit?” “Oh, yeah, that’ll really help the KPIs!”
by forgotoldacc | 2025-05-22 02:13:17+00:00
saying "the way i write is correct. the way they write is signaling (and that's implicitly wrong)" is not a stance any serious linguist will support.

it is an interesting point to take, to claim that lowercase makes reading difficult. 12 year olds have no problem communicating this way and it's very easily understood. same with 30 somethings such as myself. it's not really the responsibility of the youth to limit their expression for the comprehension older people who don't engage with things they consider below them

german has even more extreme capitalization and english tossed out those rules. Maybe We could return to Something Similar to the Rules that German uses and That could be helpful for easy Reading?

or maybe english speakers just decided those rules were annoying and dropped them and people never missed those rules decades later when we forgot they ever existed
by throwup238 | 2025-05-22 02:13:40+00:00
Energy. Creating a single anti-hydrogen atom requires an absurd amount of energy to first create a collision in a particle accelerator and then capture that anti-hydrogen before it eliminates against another atom.

Only about 0.01% of the energy used to operate the particle collider creates antimatter, the vast majority of which is impossible to capture. All in all, the efficiency of the entire process - if you were to measure it in the e^2=(pc)^2+(mc^2)^2 sense - is probably on the order of 1e-9 or worse.
by nodja | 2025-05-22 02:13:57+00:00
This is insanely fast, my guess is that the tradeoff here is that the GPUs will always be working at max capacity and there will be minimal compute savings from batching, which I realize now is not really a tradeoff.

My only worry is that the diffusion objective will be worse than AR in terms of model capabilities, if that's the case hopefully multi-token AR models will perform as well as diffusion, or we can use this as a draft model for speculative decoding.
by neom | 2025-05-22 02:14:29+00:00
I have zero affiliation with the company, I don't know anybody there, never talked to anyone there, no kick backs, nothing. I also think I'm a pretty reputable member of this community...I don't particularly appreciate being called a shill. I don't know much about this Coffeezilla gentleman, he's a tech reviewer? Those videos are a year old. I've been using their R1 device for about 6 months now, I like it...?
by BugheadTorpeda6 | 2025-05-22 02:15:09+00:00
No not most people. A much larger percentage (I would wager greater than 50% of professionals) aren't using AI in any capacity in their professional work. It's banned in a lot of places for good reasons, and many more teams haven't found a use case.

So no I don't think any of this is normal. That's why it made the top of HackerNews, because it's very abnormal.