MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by TZubiri | 2025-05-21 22:51:38+00:00
I feel this is part of a larger and very old business trend.

But do we need 20 companies copying each other and doing the same thing?

Like, is that really competition? I'd say competition is when you do something slightly different, but I guess it's subjective based on your interpretation of what is a commodity and what is proprietary.

To my view, everyone is outright copying and creating commodity markets:

OpenAI: The OG, the Coke of Modern AI

Claude: The first copycat, The Pepsi of Modern AI

Mistral: Euro OpenAI

DeepSeek: Chinese OpenAI

Grok/xAI: Republican OpenAI

Google/MSFT: OpenAI clone as a SaaS or Office package.

Meta's Llama: Open Source OpenAI

etc...
by com2kid | 2025-05-21 22:51:41+00:00
The rabbit OS project is literally the only correct path forward for AI. Hopefully they go for local on device inference, as they removes cloud costs, solving the burning pile of cash problem most AI companies have.

Directly driving a user's device (or a device hooked up to a user's account at least) means an AI can do any task that a user can do, tearing down walled gardens. No more "my car doesn't allow programmatic access so I can't heat it up in the morning without opening the app."

Suddenly telling an agent "if it is below 50 outside preheat my car so it is warm when I leave at 8am" becomes a simple to solve problem.
by gwking | 2025-05-21 22:51:47+00:00
It seems to me that you need to think about your server as the production database, rather than a web server instance that can be trivially spawned by a management layer.

When I deploy a new version of my python/sqlite web app, I do not replace the whole machine. I just upgrade the python package and restart the systemd service.

If I wanted to reduce downtime I could probably figure out a transition using SO_REUSEPORT. During the transition the old and new processes would be using the db concurrently, so the app would have to respect that case. If part of the upgrade requires a db schema change then I’m not sure how you could avoid some downtime. But I don’t know if it is possible with traditional dbs either.
by zdp7 | 2025-05-21 22:52:53+00:00
I'm pretty sure this is false. Here's my reasoning.

A google search claims water use uses 12.7% of US energy.

Another search gave 11.7% US energy goes to powering AI (projected to increase to roughly 25% by 2030).

Taking into account hydropower power provides 6.2% of US energy, I feel comfortable saying your statement isn't true.

To further strengthen my statement, I would like to point out another statistic. NPR gives us an estimate of 300K gallons of water use/day to cool the average data center. That pretty much guarantees an LLM query produces more carbon than my filling a cup from a gravity fed water system filled by rain.
by neom | 2025-05-21 22:53:04+00:00
Developers have faced in the confidential computing space, particularly with x86 TEEs, fragmentation leading to vendor lockin and a difficult developer experience due to multiple, somewhat incompatible standards/approaches. Does the CoVE effort, and IBM's involvement in it, aim to prevent a similar situation in the RISC-V world, fostering a more open and standardized TEE ecosystem? Are you using CCC to align RISC-V CoVE with efforts to improve the developer experience? I hope we see common abstractions across different TEE architectures!!!
by cosmic_cheese | 2025-05-21 22:53:26+00:00
Not in the fullest sense. It can be turned off (for now), but its behavior once enabled is subject entirely to Microsoft’s whims.

Full user control is what you’d have if e.g. you were running a FOSS Recall analogue powered by the local LLM of your choice on some flavor of Linux. That setup will only ever do what the user intends it to and barring supply chain exploits, cannot go rogue.
by ggm | 2025-05-21 22:53:50+00:00
I think this is entirely reasonable. If you replace visible by close and accessible it's what I've done for most of my recent longhauls anyway which makes it easier to concur.

(Zendure 28,000 mAH brick. Wish I'd found the one with usbC which can power macs, I got the prior model before they cut the product line)
by gf000 | 2025-05-21 22:54:48+00:00
I mean, a Furby could respond to you all day, each hour, but that doesn't make them any more useful..

Not saying that LLMs are useless, but that's a false equivalency. Sure, my auto complete is also working 0-24, but I would rather visit my actual doctor who is only available in a very limited time frame.
by alexjplant | 2025-05-21 22:54:51+00:00
> Did you know wood has next to no influence on the sound of an electrical guitar, despite being called "tonewood" by the press?

Yes it does. I have two EC-1000s made in the same factory with the same electronics that sound different because one has a maple top and neck whereas the other is straight mahogany. I have two guitars from another brand with similar (but not identical) construction that sound different because one's made out of ABS plastic instead of plywood like the other. Hell, I've swapped necks on a guitar or two and that had a fairly pronounced effect on sound too. I think this "counter-myth" has blossomed because people are tired of the cork-sniffery about collector grade PRSes and such. As a guy that plays sub-$1000 guitars that are modded to hell and back for live use I don't blame them one bit for being put off by some of the more ridiculous internet discourse around collector's grade instruments.

That being said pretty much everything affects the tonality of an electric guitar even before you get into the signal chain. To me the more pertinent questions are whether 1) more expensive or exotic woods consistently sound "better" and 2) wood is the biggest contributor to the tonality of a solid-body guitar. I would answer "no" to both of those but then again I haven't played a tube amp live in the past decade so I clearly have no taste :o).
by steamrolled | 2025-05-21 22:55:07+00:00
> I wonder if 2025 will be the year of Linux.

I know it's a running joke, but we had a decade (+) of Linux in many other consumer use cases, such as smartphones. The problem is that if you're selling a consumer computing platform, you're subject to the same exact incentives as Microsoft. You want to be Microsoft! You want their revenue, their profit margins, their nice offices, their talented engineers.

Android is Linux, but your typical Android phone ships with invasive AI features, has a locked bootloader, a variety of components that collect data about you... and unless you jump through hoops, it only lets you install apps from the company store.
by miffy900 | 2025-05-21 22:55:12+00:00
That's probably overstating it; it is definitely true that his redesign of iOS 7 (2013) was truly awful - he really should not have been anywhere near software, and was able to take advantage of Scott Forstall's then bad reputation and recent dismissal to insert himself in an area he had no real qualifications for. Before that, he was purely a hardware guy and it was clear from the outset he was in over his head with software. Apparently he had no idea what 'HCI' (human computer interaction) even meant; wasn't even familiar with the abbreviation itself. Now with the benefit of hindsight, we can judge that iOS 7 had some truly terrible design decisions that ended up making the iPhone much harder to use (very light, unbolded text everywhere, removal of borders on everything especially buttons, over use of color tints on text).

What I always found crazy was that Ive seemed to just take design ideas from then Windows 8 and Windows Phone more than trying to create his own thing. It showed that he had no original ideas of his own; even just iteratively improving on iOS 6 would've been better.

On Mac hardware, he definitely needed some sort of editor to stay his hand post Jobs. The era of crappy butterfly Macbook keyboards is still something I remember that was clearly his responsibility, driven by obsession on thinness and it seemed for a while that Apple was in denial about the issue.

Still, the Apple Watch is a definite hit for Apple now and it's clearly his baby, so his legacy isn't all bad.
by tzs | 2025-05-21 22:56:15+00:00
To get some idea of how efficient we can be look at studies of the Hadza, a tribe of hunter-gatherers in Tanzania, described here [1]. The men spend the day walking around hunting, or if they can't find game climbing trees to get honey, yet burn about the same amount of calories as sedentary men in western industrialized societies. The women spend all day moving around foraging and the results are similar.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exercise_paradox
by ggm | 2025-05-21 22:56:25+00:00
Welcome to your new life. This upgrade is not optional and a reboot will not clear it.

Tinnitus has many causes. Most of them are avoidable but some (antibiotics) less so.

People's ability to internalise a coping mechanism also varies. My own ability rises and sets like the tide. Some days it's all encompassing and some days it's just the liveness check for the nuclear storage tank alarm which reassures me I'm not dead yet.

White noise can help. Tuned noise can help. Other sounds can help. Apple ipods are said to help. It's all subjective. Do you want to test a rather odd mouth fitted electrode plate and a series of tuned sounds? It might help, and is being licenced with Food and Drugs.

Seeing "the Who" live in Glasgow twice in the 70s probably triggered mine. Or a number of other over-amped gigs. But my GP assured me the drugs for blood pressure, or antibiotics, or any number of situations were just as likely or what is known as "idiopathic" which is Latin for "who knows"

My partners tinnitus is much more intrusive and causes her more grief, since she now misses much ambient bird song lost in the ear soup. Beyond commiserations there isn't much I can say, inside my own kilohertz whine sound bath.
by rasz | 2025-05-21 22:56:47+00:00
>I didn't see anything in the linked document saying the transfer of $150M pictured in Time Magazine was quid pro quo settlement

That part was in court documents from DOJ probing Microsoft:

> handwritten note by Fred Anderson, Apple's CFO, in which Anderson wrote that "the [QuickTime] patent dispute was resolved with cross-licence and significant payment to Apple." The payment was $150 million

"handwritten note by Apple's CFO" uncovered in 1998 pretrial discovery
by CPLX | 2025-05-21 22:57:04+00:00
I’m as much of a deep Ai skeptic as anyone but I can definitely think of use cases for while driving or walking, like asking questions about my own schedule or what people have emailed or asked me for in the last hour, or where I can get something specific to eat nearby and so on.

Not sure it’s worth the hype but there are use cases. I do think it’s an interesting contrast with crypto, where there aren’t really.
by jackpirate | 2025-05-21 22:57:12+00:00
> We tested all of the methods in the Python Optimal Transport package (https://pythonot.github.io/) and reported the max in most of our tables.

Sorry if I'm being obtuse, but I don't see any mention of the POT package in your paper or of what specific algorithms you used from it to compare against. My best guess is that you used the linear map similar to the example at <https://pythonot.github.io/auto_examples/domain-adaptation/p...>. The methods I mentioned are also linear, but contain a number of additional tricks that result in much better performance than a standard L2 loss, and so I would expect those methods to outperform your OT baseline.

> As for the name – the paper you recommend is called 'vecmap' which seems equally general, doesn't it? Google shows me there are others who have developed their own 'vec2vec'. There is a lot of repetition in AI these days, so collisions happen.

But both of those papers are about generic vector alignment, so the generality of the name makes sense. Your contribution here seems specifically about the LLM use case, and so a name that implies the LLM use case would be preferable.

I do agree though that in general naming is hard and I don't have a better name to suggest. I also agree that there's lots of related papers, and you can't cite/discuss them all reasonably.

And I don't mean to be overly critical... the application to LLMs is definitely cool. I wouldn't have read the paper and written up my critiques if I didn't overall like it :)
by drnewman | 2025-05-21 22:57:22+00:00
It seems you're pretty upset about your experience with Ruby. I'm sorry that's been the case for you.

However, in Ruby blocks aren't just about flexibility, more importantly they're about generality. They're not there to resolve an edge case at all (Ruby also has keywords for loops). They're a generalization of control flow that is just slightly less general than continuations. In practical use they provide an alterative to Lisp macros for many use cases.

These were some of the problems Matz was trying to sort out with his design of Ruby--creating a language that was fun and easy to use for day-to-day programming, with as much of the meta-programming power of Lisp and Smalltalk as possible. Blocks are one of his true innovatations that came from trying to balance that tension.
by araes | 2025-05-21 22:59:06+00:00
Thanks, it helps quite a bit to be able to visualize what they're talking about.

Out at 90 AU, and by the year 3000 is out at 500 AU, and that's still not anywhere near maximum distance. Looked like it was going to be 10,000+ years orbits or longer, and probably out at several 1000 AU at maximum.

Little skeptical it would even orbit normally with how heavily eccentric it is, and the extreme distance at maximum. Way... out beyond the heliopause / heliosheath / termination shock.
by darkteflon | 2025-05-21 22:59:34+00:00
Not sure if I correctly understand your question. I was saying that Sonnet 3.7 in the desktop app is good out-of-the-box at orchestrating tools exposed as MCP servers and asking whether that behaviour is also present over the Anthropic API or, if not, whether copy-pasting the exfiltrated system prompt gets you there.
by joshstrange | 2025-05-21 23:00:07+00:00
I thought this was going to be some hit-piece tweet then I saw it was a tweet from Sam Altman himself. That video... Wow. I got in 2min before I had to stop. I thought you might be over-exaggerated but full of /themselves/ doesn't even begin to describe it.

Ship something, then you can create a video like that, not before.
by bhuwanaryal1404 | 2025-05-21 23:00:07+00:00
I hear your concerns about content quality, and I appreciate the honest feedback.

Trendly AI is built for marketers, researchers, and creators who want to discover trending topics and articles to inform their content strategy — not to replace thoughtful content creation. The goal is to help users understand what their audience is currently interested in, especially across different languages and regions.

It’s not just about generating posts—many use Trendly purely for research purposes, like finding emerging articles, studying cultural shifts, or planning campaigns. The creativity and value still come from the user—Trendly is just the discovery and acceleration layer.

That said, I’m open to ideas on how we can keep it focused on responsible, high-value use cases.
by mcdeltat | 2025-05-21 23:00:53+00:00
Different .c/.cpp files being a barrier to optimisation always struck me as an oddly low bar for the 21st century. Yes I know the history of compilation units but these days that's not how we use the system. We don't split code into source files for memory reasons, we do it for organisation. On a small/medium codebase and a decent computer you could probably fit dozens of source files into memory to compile and optimise together. The memory constraint problem has largely disappeared.

So why do we still use the old way? LTO seems effectively like a hack to compensate for the fact that the compilation model doesn't fit our modern needs. Obviously this will never change in C/C++ due to momentum and backwards compatibility. But a man can dream.
by mistercheph | 2025-05-21 23:00:57+00:00
You think kids have brand loyalty to the vendors that scam/muscle/bribe their way into the classroom?

Most of the EDU software is trash, the incentives are all aligned to spend billions on acquiring the contract and close to zero on execution and most of these kids are traumatized from sitting in a classroom with some clueless dope at the front yelling at them to IPad IPad IPad algebra
by csallen | 2025-05-21 23:00:59+00:00
When I say "I can't imagine" or "it's hard to image" I don't mean that literally. Obviously in reality I can imagine and it's easy to imagine, as evidenced by my example of movie credits.

What I'm saying is that it's not realistic. Humans are wired to remember and share highly specific things, especially names. It's been like this since the dawn of time -- the Illiad is about Achilles, not all the nameless soldiers. So this seems to be the natural order of things, rather than something designed, or something easy to change. And it makes sense, because it's practical -- our memories are limited. You can put everyone's names in the credits, but that doesn't mean they'll be remembered and shared.
by aatd86 | 2025-05-21 23:01:42+00:00
To provide a quick feedback, I believe the 'without jsx' version could have been improved. One advantage it already has is that it doesn't need the repetition of /closing> elements.

But it doesn't go far enough in terms of function composition to pass arguments. The signature (that resembles react.createElement I guess) is too cumbersome.

That creates a succession of braces and comma which is unfortunate. Just to specify some object attributes. That could be easily a function Attr().

We have higher order functions easily in javascript. We should make use of it.

That eliminates html looking jsx since we just use functions. That's less confusing than pseudo html syntax.
by gerdesj | 2025-05-21 23:01:42+00:00
"Issued in 1972 in a set of seven, the stamps are miniature, one-sided, 33 1⁄3 rpm vinyl records playable on a standard turntable. You peeled off the backing paper and stuck them on an envelope or postcard. Content includes Bhutanese folk songs and histories of the country in English and Dzongkha, the local language. "

I work in IT. I used to be a philatelist (can you stop?). How on earth did I never think of this.

It makes those bloody awful business card CDs (off of the 90s n noughties) look pretty naff.

Barking mad and quite beautiful. Love it!
by tocs3 | 2025-05-21 23:01:58+00:00
I asked somewhere here about the algorithm for the position of the dots and got an answer (can I link directly to a post?) below. Putting things on a circle sounds like a good way to do it but it sort of precludes special arrangement for specific numbers. Not that it could not be done but what would the algorithm look like?

Edit: I looked more at the animation some more and maybe I am wrong. Anyway I may try to make one.
by bongodongobob | 2025-05-21 23:02:10+00:00
It will never be the year of Linux. That statement doesn't even mean anything. Businesses desktops run on Windows. Linux wont replace the ease in which MS allows you to manage thousands of people in the near future. There will be billions of Windows computers for the forseeable future because they can be managed easily by sysadmins with AD/M365.

Out of curiosity, have you had any experience managing 100s or 1000s of users/workstations?
by MalbertKerman | 2025-05-21 23:02:39+00:00
The rocket folks call them "turbopumps" rather than "turbochargers," and most of them are powered by a separate combustion apparatus (with non-obvious terminology: if, after going through the turbine, the gas will then end up in the main combustion chamber then it's called a preburner, but if the gas will be discharged outside the main combustion chamber then it's called a gas generator).

There is one type that comes closer to a turbocharger's operation: the "tap-off cycle" runs the turbine on gas drawn from the main combustion chamber rather than using a separate combustor. Tap-off cycle engines aren't common but Blue Origin and Firefly are using them.
by can3p | 2025-05-21 23:03:15+00:00
I’ve made my own attempt in building a social network [0] and it’s evening running for me and my friends.

Here are few things I’ve encountered during the development:

- Based on my experience private only approach does not work. It’s all about network effects and if users can’t send their post to all friends, they’ll just move on to a different platform

- chronological friends only feed is really boring. Not that it’s bad per de, but it’s hard to convince people to stay if the service is not entertaining

It can also be me not being able to market the project right. Good luck with your attempt!

[0] https://github.com/can3p/pcom
by cosmic_cheese | 2025-05-21 23:03:27+00:00
Very cool. I think this is probably the way forward for various types of retrocomputing now that original chassises are disintegrating due to aging plastics and parts are becoming more scarce.

It’s a much higher bar to clear, but I’d love to see this treatment for some PPC 603/604, G3, and eventually G4 era Macs… I love the idea of building an ITX G4 cube.
by Jackson__ | 2025-05-21 23:03:43+00:00
They've already claimed that there will be no "GPT-5" LLM, and that instead what they want to call "GPT-5" is a fusion of their various models like 4o, dalle, their video model, etc. That in and of itself is a move that makes it quite clear to me they've hit a wall on the intelligence side.

Add these purchases, and it seems like they are extremely desperate.
by ninkendo | 2025-05-21 23:04:47+00:00
Yeah, you’d need to do something like accept an enum that is either &mut [u8] or &mut [MaybeUninit<u8>], and make a couple of impl From<>’s so callers can .into() whatever they want to pass…

But I don’t think this is really a shortcoming, so much as a simple consequence of strong typing. If you want take “whatever” as a parameter, you have to spell out the types that satisfy it, whether it’s via a trait, or an enum with specific variants, etc. You don’t get to just cast things to void and hope for the best, and still call the result safe.
by IvanK_net | 2025-05-21 23:05:09+00:00
I am confused. If a single-tape turing machine receives a digit N in binary, and is supposed to write N ones on the tape, on the right side of the digit N, it performs N steps.

If you expect N ones at the output, how can this machine be simulated in the space smaller than N?

This machine must decrement the digit N at the beginning of the tape, and move to the end of the tape to write "1", so it runs in time O(N^2), not O(N)? (as it takes N "trips" to the end of the tape, and each "trip" takes 1, 2, 3 .. N steps)

Since turing machines can not jump to any place on a tape in constant time (like computers can), does it have any impact on real computers?
by ajsnigrutin | 2025-05-21 23:05:33+00:00
Chrome on linux does the same sadly... prompts to be the default browser, never remembers the "no" option, and if you misclick the small 'x', it sets itself as the default again.

People have actually written apparmour configs to prevent that: https://sergei.nz/stop-google-chrome-from-hijacking-mimes/
by Macha | 2025-05-21 23:05:52+00:00
> Could they not get more juice out of a single, modern server

They could probably get more performance out of one core on a modern phone, never mind a single modern server. But you see some really old systems in a lot of equipment, not because the porting costs are expensive, but the certification of proving the new system works the same is more than the operational cost of the legacy equipment.