MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Dylan16807 | 2025-05-08 22:48:52+00:00
> Cost to ship widget A from China, which includes the cost to get it to their port, on to the boat, across the ocean, off the boat, inspected by customs, resorted, put on a truck, and sent to your home is probably several times cheaper than from that warehouse, sorted, put on a truck, and delivered to your house. Delivered by the same truck, sorted at the same parcel sorting facility.

What's "several times cheaper" in terms of dollars?

How does it change if both packages get sent to Chicago instead?

While I agree shipping from China shouldn't be cheaper, boats don't add much. Getting a 40 foot container to the port, across the ocean, and away from the port is several thousand dollars of costs. For small packages averaging 1 liter and .4kg, you can split that bill across 50 thousand of them. That leaves customs, but how many man-hours does it take to inspect a container of mail? Half the point of de minimis is that there's no detailed inspection per package.

As far as the price to ship cross-country versus cross-town, that's a whole different can of worms I don't want to open very far. Let's focus on "shipped from China" versus "shipped from a warehouse next to the US port".
by josephg | 2025-05-08 22:48:53+00:00
Yeah, the problem with OO isn’t really in the languages. The problem is in the community, and what people consider “best practice”. C#, Java and C++ are all arguably multi-paradigm languages. They give you a lot of flexibility in how you structure your code. C# and C++ support value types. Modern Java has great support for a lot of FP concepts too.

So I agree with you. You can write good C# if you want to. The problem is that a lot of people - for some strange reason - actively choose to make their programs heavily OOP.
by aylmao | 2025-05-08 22:48:56+00:00
> It feels like everyone and their mother is building coding agents these days.

For real. I think it's because code editors seem to be in that perfect intersection of:

- A tool for programmers. Programmers like building for programmers.

- A tool for productivity. Companies will pay for productivity.

- A tool that's clearly AI-able. VC's will invest in AI tools.

- A tool with plenty of open source lift. The clear, common (and extreme?) example of this being forking VSCode.

Add to that the recent purchase of VSCode-fork [1] Windsurf for $3 billion [2] and I suspect we will see many more of these.

[1]: https://windsurf.com/blog/why-we-built-windsurf#:~:text=This...

[2]: https://community.openai.com/t/openai-is-acquiring-windsurf-...
by coldpie | 2025-05-08 22:50:09+00:00
I don't think that's a fair analogy. Unlike Lynx, which lacks a ton of modern browser features, KeepassXC is a fully functional Passkey client. There is no technical reason to reject KeepassXC logins, while there are legitimate reasons to reject a browser that doesn't support graphics or javascript. Yet the Passkey spec authors are making threats about KeepassXC being banned and listing it on their non-compliant client page, because it allows users to handle their own data in a way the spec authors dislike.

A better analogy would be a website blocking Firefox users because Firefox stores cookies in a way the website owner dislikes. A website intended for use by anybody, that chooses not to serve content based on the user's browser client, would be correctly considered broken. On the other hand, the Passkey spec authors are explicitly saying RPs should make rejection decisions based solely on the client. I agree implementations can be all over the map here, but what's giving me pause is the explicit endorsement of banning clients by the authors of the spec.

> I don't see an "incompatibility" with Open Source here. There are open source Passkey providers.

The incompatibility is that the spec requires the client software to behave in a certain way, or RPs may choose to reject logins from it. Open source software simply cannot make those guarantees. I have the freedom to make my implementation non-compliant. If an RP wants strict compliance from the providers they accept (which is a position explicitly endorsed by the spec authors), then they must only accept closed-source software.
by slrainka | 2025-05-08 22:50:45+00:00
Agent mode without rails is like a boat without a rudder.

What worked for me was coming up with an extremely opinionated way to develop an application and then generating instructions (mini milestones) by combining it with the requirements.

These instructions end up being very explicit in the sequence of things it should do (write the tests first), how the code should be written and where to place it etc. So the output ended up being very similar regardless of the coding agent being used.
by dgunay | 2025-05-08 22:52:17+00:00
Code review makes this a lot less scary. Honestly it seems like mostly a win. A while ago at my day job, a moderately technical manager on another team attempted to contribute a relatively simple feature to my team's codebase. It took many rounds of review feedback for his PR to converge on something close to our general design guidelines. I imagine it would have been way less frustrating and time consuming for him if he could have just told an AI agent what to do and then have it respond to review feedback for him.
by ChristopherDrum | 2025-05-08 22:53:24+00:00
I have seriously mixed feelings about this kind of philanthropy. Yes, it is good that he's going to give his wealth away like this. I do not want to diminish his efforts in that!

But also, why collect such wealth in the first place? What was the point? Was the money really better off being hoarded by one person with the fingers crossed hope that they'll spend it altruistically someday? The existence of the wealth imbalance itself, and the general practice of wealth hoarding, are frustrating counterbalances to the good of giving it away.
by sepositus | 2025-05-08 22:54:01+00:00
> You keep ignoring the main point in that the canonized book was done so by men that selected writings that they felt represented the views they held

No, you're trying to trivialize changing the canon of the Bible. It's a pointless argument if you're not going to adopt the understanding of the Catholic tradition and then argue within it as the subject of this conversation is the Pope.

I was under the impression we were arguing why it's important for the Pope to have an accurate view of the Bible. Instead it seems like you're just wanting to say that it's all man-made anyways so might as well change it which is a completely foreign thought process to a genuine Catholic.
by sepositus | 2025-05-08 22:54:02+00:00
> You keep ignoring the main point in that the canonized book was done so by men that selected writings that they felt represented the views they held

No, you're trying to trivialize changing the canon of the Bible. It's a pointless argument if you're not going to adopt the understanding of the Catholic tradition and then argue within it as the subject of this conversation is the Pope.

I was under the impression we were arguing why it's important for the Pope to have an accurate view of the Bible. Instead it seems like you're just wanting to say that it's all man-made anyways so might as well change it which is a completely thought process to a genuine Catholic.
by mp5 | 2025-05-08 22:55:52+00:00
This is a great suggestion. We're actually storing the input/output costs of most models, but aren't computing cost estimates yet. Definitely something to add. My only hesitation is that token-based cost estimates may not be accurate (most models do not provide their tokenizers, so you have to eg. estimate the average number of characters per token in order to compute the cost, and this may vary per model).
by Animats | 2025-05-08 22:56:41+00:00
The long de-fueled reactor vessel was removed just last year.[1] Sent to Texas as a final resting place. The containment dome was still in place then. The next step is to restore the Vallecitos complex to "conditions suitable for productive reuse for other commercial or industrial purposes."[2]

So that's the aftermath of the first commercial small nuclear power reactor.

[1] https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Vallecitos-react...

[2] https://www.northstar.com/northstar-closes-ge-hitachi-vallec...
by andrewpareles | 2025-05-08 22:56:59+00:00
Thanks for writing! Can you try mentioning the file with "@"? Smaller models sometimes don't realize that they should look for files and folders, but "@" always gives the full context of whatever is in the file/folder directly to them.

Small OSS models are going to get better at this when there's more of a focus on tool-use, which we're expecting in the next iteration of models.
by bsder | 2025-05-08 22:57:17+00:00
> Are the current owners of the mineral rights the same people that dug the mines?

Almost certainly not.

> Owning mineral rights doesn't create liability for existing mines.

I was under the impression that it generally does. However, the documents are generally old paper records (often missing) and fragmented between multiple polities in Pennsylvania. The owners of the mineral rights obviously know who they are but reconstructing the trail from public records is quite time consuming and provides a lot of "plausible deniability".

But, boy, once fracking made those mineral rights worth something, the owners sure showed up and found those "missing" records in a real hurry.
by vsgherzi | 2025-05-08 22:57:30+00:00
I get that. In general for something like a production server in cpp versus rust do you think the rust version is going to just have more lines of code associated with it or is it just the way I'm thinking about it? I love the Oxide podcast where you guys talk about your favorite crates and some of the ones you guys use in production. Are the dependencies something you guys really stress and investigate before pulling one in? I know things like axum are replaced with dropshot since you guys deemed it critical to your business (super cool crate!).
by solardev | 2025-05-08 22:57:35+00:00
PS: You can also just keep using Sublime Text without a license indefinitely. Maybe save $10 a year and if you end up using it for 10 years, then pay them them money lol.

I'm still using an expired v3 license because I can't justify paying $80 for the v4 upgrade... but it still works fine.
by ramoz | 2025-05-08 22:58:45+00:00
Yes. For small apps, as well distributed systems.

You have to puppeteer it and build a meta context/tasking management system. I spend a lot of time setting Claude code up for success. I usually start with Gemini for creating context, development plans, and project tasking outlines (I can feed large portions of codebase to Gemini and rely on its strategy). I’ve even put entire library docsites in my repos for Claude code to use - but today they announced web search.

They also have todos built in which make the above even more powerful.

The end result is insane productivity - I think the only metric I have is something like 15-20k lines of code for a recent distributed processing system from scratch over 5 days.
by zahlman | 2025-05-08 22:59:08+00:00
> and was instantly downvoted and then voted to closed.

The outstanding vote to close is on the grounds of "needs details or clarity". Based on the comment that was left, I assume that the other party doesn't understand why you are asking a question, because it comes across that your motivation for asking is that you don't understand what to do, but it also comes across that the error message is already telling you exactly what to do.

If you have a different question - for example, why you should have to do the thing being suggested, or you don't understand how to do the thing being described - then you should edit the question to clarify that. With this clarification, it may be that your question is identified as a duplicate (of a more general question regarding why such "inherited conformance" must be restated in Swift, or what that means, etc.). I don't know Swift, so I can't advise there - I can only rely on my general understanding of programming languages in this general syntax family.

Regardless, the question would be improved by a proper minimal reproducible example (https://stackoverflow.com/help/minimal-reproducible-example). Minimal is a key component of this; please proactively try to remove irrelevant parts of the code example, so that you show only what directly causes the reported problem. This helps (https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/333952) other people understand and recognize the question - not just people who might answer it, but other people who have the same question who are looking for an existing Q&A.

> There's no hits on the warning I was getting.

I guess you mean that you tried searching for the warning and came up empty handed. I'm not sure why this happened for you. If I try copying and pasting into a search engine - e.g. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Class+must+restate+inherited+%27Cl... - I get seemingly useful results off the top - including issues in the GitHub repository for Swift itself, such as one proposing and automatic "fix-it" for this error (I assume this concept is meaningful to Swift developers generally). I also see official Apple documentation at https://developer.apple.com/documentation/swift/sendable , several blog posts talking about the use of `@unchecked Sendable` with fully worked examples, etc.

> I do not think this question was worth downvoting or closing. People on SO nowadays seem way too eager to downvote and close.

Nobody ever thinks their own questions are worth downvoting or closure - they wouldn't ask if they did. But the standards aren't set by the OP; they're set by policy and surrounding discussion such as https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/417476 and https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/252677 and https://stackoverflow.com/help/closed-questions and https://stackoverflow.com/help/why-vote and https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/429808. And they're set this way because the site isn't about answering your question in the moment; it's about building up a searchable, useful repository of high quality questions and answers.
by pclmulqdq | 2025-05-08 22:59:41+00:00
It's pretty simple: that usage in 5 min is probably at least $10 worth of API credits in that time (maybe $100).

A year has 2000 working hours, which is 24000 5-minute intervals. That means the company spending at least $240,000 on the Claude API (conservatively). So they would be better off having $100-200k you do nothing and hiring someone competent for that $240k.
by F7F7F7 | 2025-05-08 22:59:56+00:00
I've tried every variation of this very thing. Even managed to build a quick and dirty ticketing system that I could assign to the LLM of my choosing. WITH context. Talking Graph Codebase's diagrams, mappings, tree structure of every possibility, simple documentation, complex documentation, a bunch of OSS to do this very thing automatically etcetcetc.

In the codebase I've tried modularity via monorepo, or faux microservices with local apis, monoliths filled with hooks and all the other centralized tricks in the book. Down to the very very simple. Whatever I could do to bring down the context window needed.

Eventually.....your return diminish. And any time you saved is gone.

And by the time you've burned up a context window and you're ready to get out. Now you're expeciting it to output a concise artifact to carry you to the next chat so you don't have to spend more context getting that thread up to speed.

Inevitably the context window and the LLMs eagerness to touch shit that it's not supposed (the likelihood of which increases with context) always gets in the way.

Anything with any kind of complexity ends up in a game of too much bloat or the LLM removing pieces that kill other pieces that it wasn't aware about.

/VENT
by trhway | 2025-05-08 23:02:03+00:00
partially. The very efficient lasers from alibaba don't have short pulse/high power, so they can potentially be used only as the part of the system - the pumping lasers. The final nanosecond-laser is still a one-off build which though seems to be pretty doable even by a small company if they set their mind to it.

Btw, NIF achieved those recent results by adding strong magnetic field around the target (penny-shrinkers knew that tech for 20+ years :). There are other things like this around that can potentially be similarly useful. Only if somebody had money and interest ...
by dylan604 | 2025-05-08 23:02:48+00:00
The catholic tradition of changing the canon? They modified the 10 commandments to allow for idols. Moses's own brother got in trouble for making an idol. You think that was some small change? They did it to increase their membership and income streams. Allow the pagans with their mother/son idols to keep them with a Mary/BabyJesus rename, and bada-bing, new members. So excuse me if I don't hold their respect for canon quite so sacrosanct as you apparently do.
by like_any_other | 2025-05-08 23:03:42+00:00
I read the article. I merely reject its premise, and it's blinkered perspective. The authors think the main threat to democracy is a strongman dictator, and do not distinguish appearance from substance. Just because a country isn't headed by a Generalisimo that's jailing his opponents, doesn't mean the people's will isn't getting trampled. It's just done by a large and boring bureaucracy and business interests, without any one obvious culprit. But because that bureaucracy was doing what the authors want, they confuse it (or conflate it) with democracy.
by Buttons840 | 2025-05-08 23:04:09+00:00
I don't know if it's a security nightmare any more than other editors that have "plugins" (or the like).

One advantage for Emacs is it's both easy and common read the code of the plugins you are using. I can't tell you the last time I looked at the source code of a plugin for VS Code or any other editor. The last time I looked at the code for a plugin in Emacs was today.
by fallard | 2025-05-08 23:04:13+00:00
Hey, I'm one of the co-author of Bullfrog. As you say, a sophisticated and targeted attack could indeed bypass our action. It's meant for blocking mostly opportunistic attacks.

I don't think any egress filtering could properly block everything, given actions will need to interact with Github APIs to function and it would always be possible to exfiltrate data in any private repo hosted on Github. While some solutions can access the outbound HTTP requests payload before it gets encrypted using eBPF, in order to detect egress to untrusted Github org/repos, this isn't a silver bullet either because this relies on targeting specific encryption binaries used by the software/OS. A sophisticated attack could always use a separate obscure or custom encryption binaries to evade detection by eBPF based tools.

So like you say, it's better than nothing, but it's not perfect and there are definitely developer experience tradeoff in using it.

PS: I'm no eBPF expert, so I'd be happy if someone can prove me wrong on my theory :)
by b3ing | 2025-05-08 23:04:47+00:00
The founders probably assumed people would elect ethical people so no ethics are in our system. Even businesses have rules about conflict of interest, hiring relatives, etc, but our government, nothing.

Without that it’s been failing and perhaps those ethics should rest on a popular vote and not representatives so it doesn’t get ruined, but then mob rule could always ruin it, which is why we have a republic that is slow to change with all these checks and balances but no ethics.
by phoronixrly | 2025-05-08 23:04:54+00:00
Maybe that's a bad example, as your build can fail because of a breaking change in a dependency regardless of whether you use a statically typed language.

Also your statement is only partially correct. Breaking changes in dependencies end up in production only if you don't have tests. And I know this is news to many people using static types but in many Ruby shops for example there are test coverages in excess of 90% and at the very least I never approve a PR without happy path tests.
by ndileas | 2025-05-08 23:05:17+00:00
Well, "compelling" isn't a good organizational principle. I'm not saying we should evict grandma at the first hint of insurance prices rising. There could absolutely be compensation for property, negotiated buyouts and moving costs, or other good policies.

For better or worse, markets are the clearest signals we have in a hugely messy world. That shouldn't prevent us from doing the best thing available, but the world is not inherently fair and safe, and it's not possible for it to be perfectly fair and safe with our current technology and psychology.
by Nyr | 2025-05-08 23:06:43+00:00
I have no doubt that other providers use latency from probes as a data point. But IPinfo allows way more weight from this in their calculations, probably because they have developed their own reliable network, unlike most competitors.

Your service, like many others, accepts as valid most intentionally fake geolocation data provided by networks. I am sure you know this anyway, so no need to mislead saying "we do the same".
by wahern | 2025-05-08 23:07:15+00:00
This 2003 paper by the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation, "The Filioque: A Church Dividing Issue?: An Agreed Statement", goes into much greater detail and nuance about the filioque and how it differs (if at all) from Orthodox theology: https://www.usccb.org/resources/filioque-a-church-dividing-i... TL;DR: It argues that the filioque is consonant with well-accepted Eastern Orthodox theology, but also recommends that it be dropped from the Latin version of the creed in the interests of ecumenism. There's always been alot of shared doctrine between all the (little-o) orthodox churches--Western, Eastern, Oriental, Syrian, etc--that was left out of the Nicene Creed. The creed was never meant to be comprehensive/exclusive, only the minimum necessary to refute perceived contemporary heresies, similar to earlier versions of the creed and the creeds it was derived from.
by opo | 2025-05-08 23:07:35+00:00
>Too many well-intentioned organizations wind up milquetoast tax-exempt hedge funds aimed primarily at self-preservation because the received wisdom is that they should focus on building endowments and keep their withdrawal rates below 4% in order to achieve immortality.

Which charities are giving away less than 4% a year? Charitable foundations in the US are required to give away at least 5% of their endowment a year:

https://www.ncfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/The-Five-Per...
by bdhe | 2025-05-08 23:07:52+00:00
> There's always something to learn from everyone. Elon reiterated one thing frequently - "We have to get to Mars soon because I don't want to be dead before it happens"

I understand the idea of learning from everyone, even those whose values I strongly disagree with.

But after learning about everything Elon has done in the public sphere, would this statement be more likely just narcissism rather than a deep and inspiring virtue?
by BeetleB | 2025-05-08 23:08:29+00:00
> At least you seem to be admitting that aider is useless with local models. That's certainly my experience.

I don't see it as an admission. I'd wager 99% of Aider users simply haven't tried local models.

Although I would expect they would be much worse than Sonnet, etc.

> I'm getting really tired of AI advocates telling me that AI is as good as the hype if I just pay more (say, fellow HNer, your paycheck doesn't come from those models, does it?), or use the "right" prompt. Give some examples.

Examples? Aider is a great tool and much (probably most) of it is written by AI.
by bhelkey | 2025-05-08 23:08:33+00:00
Cats are one of five categories with >100x the rate of wind turbine bird deaths [1].

If your position is that all five of these factors don't impact larger birds, the onus is on you to back that claim up.

[1] https://www.statista.com/chart/15195/wind-turbines-are-not-k...