MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by pc86 | 2025-05-09 13:20:55+00:00
Hopefully people are keeping lists of the PIs on these redacted papers and keeping that in mind for future grants, hiring, etc. I know almost nobody is, but one can hope.

Academic fraud ranging from plagiarism to outright faking data should, more often than not, make it basically impossible for you to get any academic job whatsoever, in your field or others.

This chip is an extreme example, but potentially millions of dollars of productivity, hundreds or even thousands of people spending months or years on something based in a fabrication.

The person or people directly responsible for this should never work again.
by abricot | 2025-05-09 13:20:56+00:00
It also stowed the other items, and know how much space they take up.

From the article:

> “When you’re a person doing this task, you’ve got a buffer of 20 or 30 items, and you’re looking for an opportunity to fit those items into different bins, and having to remember which item might go into which space. But the robot knows all of the properties of all of our items at once, and we can also look at all of the bins at the same time along with the bins in the next couple of pods that are coming up. So we can do this optimization over the whole set of information in 100 milliseconds.”
by lyu07282 | 2025-05-09 13:20:58+00:00
Looks great! Not meant as a critique but I always thought SVG is the wrong level of abstraction for an editor, I don't really want a SVG editor I want a vector drawing program. Sure it should render to optimized SVG, but a UI/UX built around the SVG concepts like path, clip-path and the like is not very end-user friendly. This always irked me about inkscape anyway.

Also what I always thought would be a real killer feature would be something similar to blender modifiers (array, mirror, etc.) but in a vector editor, allowing for non-destructive editing.
by _heimdall | 2025-05-09 13:21:02+00:00
Unpopular opinion I'm sure, but I very much quantum today as smoke and mirrors. I've tried to dive down that rabbit hole and I keep finding myself in a sea of theoretical mathematics that seems to fall into the "give me one miracle" category.

I expect this won't be the last time we hear about quantum research that has been foundational to a lot of work turns out to have been manipulated, or designed poorly and unverified by other research labs.
by drweevil | 2025-05-09 13:21:21+00:00
>"Such speculation is needed because AI is not currently sustainable. As the UN Environment Program observed last year, "The proliferating datacenters that house AI servers produce electronic waste. They are large consumers of water, which is becoming scarce in many places. [...]"

Until AI can fix its water problem it will remain a destructive technology. You can steal poor communities' resources and wreck the environment only for so long before the consequences become catastrophic. Unfortunately capitalism demands this outcome.
by otherme123 | 2025-05-09 13:21:47+00:00
Phoenicians were a low war civilization. The fact that you had to name a macedonian general to illustrate is telling: the general public barely know phoenician kings or generals despite lasting more than a thousand years through all Mediterraneum, unless we focus on later Carthage which were more belligerant.

As of slaves, of course they had them! It was a normal thing back then.

But the point here is that Phoenicians were traders, not warriors. They built settlements all over the Mediterraneum and then moved goods and culture between them. They were also avid consumers of foreign culture, for example they liked egyptian dead culture so they just copied it.
by taylodl | 2025-05-09 13:22:46+00:00
> Even as organizations push AI implementation, individual employees might resist due to concerns about how they'll be perceived.

I’ve been designing and developing software for 40 years. In my experience, those who resist new technology often find themselves left behind. Those who embrace it, genuinely learning how to apply it rather than just crafting feel-good narratives for leadership, tend to thrive.

My experience so far with AI and code design and generation is it's not a magic bullet. Like every tool that's come before that was supposedly going to replace developers and software engineers or dramatically reduce the need for developers and software engineers, it's not. It's another tool for developers and software engineers to use to get even more work done. Paradoxically, as more work gets done the backlog increases with even more work to do. It's been this way for the 40 years I've been in this industry, and the "old timers" when I started indicated it had been that way throughout their career, too.
by TrapLord_Rhodo | 2025-05-09 13:22:51+00:00
Such Biden logic that ended with us launching missiles into russia. A constant escalation with no real end in sight and always matching "tit-for-tat- instead of trying to solve the root issue.

You don't think trump is actively involved in negotations with russia to stop all this madness?

Don't you think that one of the first signs of good faith in negotations would be to stop attacking eachother?
by pas | 2025-05-09 13:23:39+00:00
I recommend reading the court's decision, it goes through all the relevant facts and statutes, how they apply, and more importantly it says that even if the higher standard of scrutiny would apply it would pass the test.

https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2024/12/24-111...

page 40, "The problem for TikTok is that the Government exercised its considered judgment and concluded that mitigation efforts short of divestiture were insufficient, as a TikTok declarant puts it, to mitigate “risks to acceptable levels.” "
by jjkaczor | 2025-05-09 13:23:42+00:00
Heh - I had something similar when I started at Microsoft - but from my wife (now ex), who was emailing "[myGivenFirstName]@microsoft.com" for some reason, thinking that I was the only person with that name at Microsoft (uh-huh) and furious that I wasn't answering her, when I was away during initial onboarding...
by FirmwareBurner | 2025-05-09 13:24:01+00:00
>and are far more expensive to repair and maintain than a human being

Fillpy the robot will not:

- need vacations - go on maternity leave - call in sick - steal from work - be rude to customers - go to work hungover from drinking - come in high/stoned at work - sue you for X,Y,Z - sexually harass colleagues - go on strike - start a union

All those pale in comparison to repair costs. That's why companies are pushing for automation. Because Flippy does its job quietly and diligently 24/7 without complaining.
by dahart | 2025-05-09 13:24:25+00:00
This March 1 1989 date is when the adoption of the Berne Convention took effect in the US, the Berne Convention being what brings the notion that registration should not be required in order to have legal copyright protections. European artists had that protection for ~100 years at that point. Most countries in the world have adopted the Berne Convention, though I learned fairly recently here on HN that the US is still leaving out a few important bits like the right to sue for statutory damages unless copyrights are registered.
by thaumasiotes | 2025-05-09 13:24:28+00:00
> and plenty of satisfying evidence has been found for biblical narratives -- eg the Pilate stone and the dead sea scrolls

That's not what people wanted. The Pilate stone records the existence of a person named Pilatus. We infer that this was Pontius Pilatus, and there's nothing particularly wrong with that.

But it does nothing to confirm a Biblical narrative. Calling it "satisfying evidence" is similar to picking a fight with someone, losing as badly as you can imagine, and then issuing a press release afterwards to the effect that that outcome was what you wanted all along.

By contrast, a major controversy arising from Mesopotamian archaeology was the discovery of the Mesopotamian flood myth, which severely undermined the Bible by being the obvious source of the myth of Noah while contradicting it in pretty much every particular. That's the kind of thing that destroyed popular interest in Mesopotamian archaeology.
by bluGill | 2025-05-09 13:25:24+00:00
Only sometimes and costs change over time. The first robot is almost always more expensive than a human, but the second robot comes after the design is done and so it generally cheaper than the human (accountants will figure out how to amortize these costs and thus give us a better picture of costs.)

Robots also get cheaper over time because we learn. You can buy many parts in bulk including computer libraries to control them. You can find many people who know best practices who will not make some of the early mistakes that cost money.
Show HN: AgentCanvas: Open-source canvas-style editor for ML developers
by biolin | 2025-05-09 13:25:36+00:00
Hi HN!

We’re a small team of machine learning engineers working on personalized AI agents. As part of our research, we wanted to observe how humans edit documents generated by LLMs — which led us to build AgentCanvas, an open-source, canvas-like editor designed for capturing human editing traces and experimenting with alternative UX patterns beyond chat interfaces.

We explored tools like OpenCanvas, but found them too tightly coupled with LangChain and other heavy frameworks. So we built our own lightweight prototype — mostly hacking through TypeScript as ML folks

Highlights:

1. Built entirely on open-source libraries — e.g., blocknote.js for rich-text editing.

2. Uses simple chat completion APIs, no complex agent frameworks.

3. Designed to be easily modifiable for your own research or product ideas.

We’re looking for contributors! We’d love help from experienced FE/BE developers — especially those interested in the intersection of AI and UX.

Some open areas:

1. FE/BE separation – We're planning a Python backend to test agentic flows.

2. UX experiments – What kinds of UI (beyond chat) help users write/edit better? E.g., would memory blocks help with organizing context?

3. Better prompts, richer interactions, faster loading, you name it!

Repo: https://github.com/Mai0313/AgentCanvas

If this idea resonates with you, feel free to star the repo or share feedback. Contributions of all kinds are welcome
by myrmidon | 2025-05-09 13:25:46+00:00
As an engineer, the difference between "deliberate lies" and "overoptimistic estimates" is often just in the eye of the beholder; Hanlons Razor should be applied IMO.

Was ITER overambitious? Timeline and budget unrealistic from the start? Maybe. But I'm fairly confident that most people involved had perfectly defensible intentions.

I also think that if the goal is commercial fusion, small reactors (100MW and below) are nothing but a stepping stone and inherently commercially useless; I don't see the output (hundreds of termal megawatts) ever justifying the "fixed" overhead costs, and a scale at least close to GW scale seems completely inevitable to me.

If you agree with that premise, then building a reactor that size has a lot of utility already that you'd never achieve from building Wendelstein 7x equivalents or whatever at 50 different university campuses (or however else you'd want to spend the funds instead).

> The true purpose of ITER wasn't to achieve fusion or push forward fusion; it was to preserve funding until those making the decisions had retired. If this required sacrificing long term goals, like actually delivering competitive energy (or, really, delivering anything at all), so be it.

This is what I most disagree with; if commercial fusion is viable (I believe it really isn't) then I think ITER (or an equivalent of its size) is a very necessary, if expensive, step to make, and spending the money on dozens of smaller projects is not an "obviously better long term approach" at all in my view.

I also think that speaking about "true purpose" of the whole project is personifying the output of a complex process way too much, where individual actors in that scheme just want to make ITER happen (for very defensible reasons IMO).
by Calwestjobs | 2025-05-09 13:25:53+00:00
flow batteries are "controlled" by US patents. solar + batteries are not limited in bad way by US companies grip on patents.

china makes all panels, asia is making all batteries. so US utilities / energy providers can not have harmful grip on PV + batteries.

US utilities / energy providers want to have docile customer who only pays every month. they do not want to invest money into grid and have customer not only demand but also supply grid. because they do not understand how to benefit from that. they can, it is just mental limit for them.

utilities / energy providers were too lazy to think about proper decentralized grid so every participant in us grid will suffer more because of that.

this will be flagged as conspiracy, be cause it is conspiracy, conspiracy against US citizen by US companies / US interests"
by KaiserPro | 2025-05-09 13:26:02+00:00
A little background

Getting displays that are bright, colour, reliable, artifact free and low power enough to be in glasses is not a solved problem.

Meta spent billions (literally) to get to the point where they decided to buy in magic leap's capacity for wave guides. Even then they are pretty shit. (its more nuanced than that, but its not in house displays being used in the upcoming AR glasses. The "orion" ones require solid carbide lenses, which are ludicrously expensive and difficult to make)

The state of the art is ok, but not good enough for apple (you'd hope.) still exhibits a whole bunch of rainbow sparkle, and is dim.

Next, what you want to do has a huge impact on how much battery you need.

The meta raybans have something like 1.3 watt-hour of battery. (https://moorinsightsstrategy.com/research-notes/ray-ban-meta... claims its actually ~0.5watt hour) Which means that if you want it do something useful you power budget is three tenths of bugger all.

For AR glasses to be useful, they need to be able to gather context about what you're asking it to do. Apple has the advantage of being able to offload to the iphone. But if you want precise location ie which room am I in, what object do I have in my hand, you need cameras.

But turning on cameras is like ~60mw. Then you need to process those images. Don't think about uploading to your phone by wifi, that'll eat >200mw.

So you're stuck with Bluetooth low energy. Even then, streaming images to your phone is going to eat battery. that means you need to bake your algorithms into silicon.

But.

Imagine you are trying to make immersive AR glasses. for that to work, you need to know what objects you are looking at, what direction your head is looking and draw your overlay to account for that head/object position. at 60hz or more. With a power budget of ~50-80mw.

That shit is hard. really really hard.
by zahlman | 2025-05-09 13:26:42+00:00
> Why would you want to prevent answers to a question, just because another unrelated question exists? Remember that the whole thread is not about actual duplicates, but about unrelated questions falsely marked as duplicates.

Here, for reference, is the entire sentence which kicked off the subthread where you objected to what I was saying:

> It is without merit ~90% of the time. The simple fact is that the "nuance" seen by the person asking the question is just not relevant to us, because the point of the site is not to give you a personalized answer, but to build a reference where the questions are useful to everyone.

In other words: I am defending "preventing answers to the question" for the exact reason that it probably actually really is a duplicate, according to how we view duplicates. As a reminder, this is in terms of what future users of the site will find the most useful. It is not simply in terms of what the question author thinks.

And in my years-long experience seeing appeals, in a large majority of cases it really is a duplicate; it really is clearly a duplicate; and the only apparent reason the OP is objecting is because it takes additional effort to adapt the answers to the exact situation motivating the original question. And I absolutely have seen this sort of "effort" boil down to things like a need to rename the variables instead of just literally copying and pasting the code. Quite often.

> Almost everybody describing their experience with duplicates in this comment section tells the story of questions for which other questions have been found, linked from the supposedly-duplicate question, and described why the answers to that other question do NOT answer their own question.

No, they do not. They describe the experience of believing that the other question is different. They don't even mention the answers on the other question. And there is nowhere near enough detail in the description to evaluate the reasoning out of context.

This is, as I described in other comments, why there is a meta site.

And this is HN. The average result elsewhere on the Internet has been worse.
by toomuchtodo | 2025-05-09 13:26:47+00:00
Robot lasts 6-7 years under typical duty cycles (per FANUC). Think how an EV is cheaper over its lifetime to operate vs a combustion vehicle, capex vs opex. Price of labor will continue to increase in the future due to structural demographics. And lets be real, Amazon warehouse jobs are not good jobs and terribly hard on the human body. No one yearns for the Amazon mines. These are jobs that should absolutely be automated.
by pc86 | 2025-05-09 13:27:36+00:00
I haven't had time to dig into this yet but I played the tic-tac-toe demo at the bottom of the page and it seems pretty interesting. The code is easy to understand.

How do you see this being used in a "real" application? Do you see it providing most/all of the reactivity or integrating with an existing framework or library?
by 542354234235 | 2025-05-09 13:28:24+00:00
Literally an executive order.

“[Christopher] Krebs, through CISA, falsely and baselessly denied that the 2020 election was rigged and stolen, including by inappropriately and categorically dismissing widespread election malfeasance and serious vulnerabilities with voting machines.”

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/addr...
by DennisP | 2025-05-09 13:28:51+00:00
NIF's lasers are 0.5% efficient. Equivalent modern lasers are 20% efficient. Both of these sources have both numbers:

https://physicsworld.com/a/national-ignition-facilitys-ignit...

https://pubs.aip.org/physicstoday/Online/31501/The-commercia...
by lifthrasiir | 2025-05-09 13:29:01+00:00
Personally I prefer fixed-size SIMD mainly because it enables more usages than usual vector instructions while vector instructions can be rather trivially lowered to fixed-size SIMD instructions. I'd call them as "opportunistic" usages, because those are perfectly fine without SIMD or vector but only get vectorized due to the relatively small size of SIMD registers. Those usages are significant enough that I see them as useful even with the presence of vector instructions.
by jmclnx | 2025-05-09 13:29:28+00:00
Seems this is related to SHA1 being used on gnupg. Will be interesting on how this plays out when SHA1 in gpg is obsoleted. I am not looking forward to that.

Then there is the added complexity of git using SHA1, I do not know if that has been changed yet.

Fun times ahead.

FWIW, I changed my git commit signing to ssh-ed25519 from gnupg about a month ago.
by rsynnott | 2025-05-09 13:30:01+00:00
> The problem with buses is that utilization is very low. Most buses, most of the time, run near empty.

Huh. That doesn't resemble my experience, except for rural/small-town services, which are very much provided as a form of subsidy, not a viable business.

> But I doubt, fully electric buses make sense: as long as dispatch-able power (ie your marginal producer) is a thermal plant you get 60ish% thermal efficiency at best minus transformer and transmission losses.

That's still quite a bit better than diesel engines, where for realistic engines you're talking about 40% _in ideal conditions_, but much worse in stop-start conditions (you will do better with hybrids, granted). Gas also have considerably lower CO2 intensity per thermal watt than diesel does (your fossil fuel electricity production is probably mostly gas in most countries).

But, also, in countries with a lot of unreliable renewables, buses charging overnight can be used as a power sink. For instance, in Ireland, our wind generation can be anything from almost nothing to greater than total system demand; reasonably often, wind turbines actually have to be stopped to reduce output, especially at night. At that point, charging the bus is for practical purposes free, or may even have a modest negative cost (the network will sometimes pay for power consumption).
by jansan | 2025-05-09 13:30:18+00:00
Thanks, the curve dragging is surprisingly easy. I think a very old discussion in a Google forum have me the idea how to implement it. It even works with keeping the handle directions (pressing Shift while dragging).

That tree on the left is difficult to get right on all devices. It has to support click, touch to click, drag and drop, swipe scrolling, touch scrolling, etc., and all that while acting as if it holds hundreds of elements. There are still a few issues, for example swipe scrolling and some jankiness on iOS, but I have them on my list.

Keyboard shortcuts are implemented for non-mobile devices. If you open a menu on the menu bar, you can see them at the right in the menu items.
by Kon-Peki | 2025-05-09 13:30:36+00:00
Note that Cermak eventually died from his wounds, resulting in a street getting named after him. On that street was a giant printing building converted into a data center, becoming one of the most important internet connection points for a few decades.

A lot of people here have probably dealt with computers inside of or connected to 350 E Cermak/CHI1. There’s your tech connection to Roosevelt :)
by inoffensivename | 2025-05-09 13:30:54+00:00
I've been working on Webassembly runtimes for the last year or so, specifically on spec compliance and performance. I came to it as a neophyte, but I've become quite fond of the specification. It's a bit hard to get started with the notation, but it's refreshing to have such a thoroughly specified language. There is a reference interpreter generated directly from the spec, which is very useful for resolving questions about what a runtime should do in a given situation.

The provided specification tests allow implementers to be confident that their runtime conforms to the spec.

Overall I think it's an impressive specification and is worth studying .
by ratatoskrt | 2025-05-09 13:30:56+00:00
Yeah, I don't mean to indicate that the model is bad. It's just that statistics are notoriously complicated (both in terms of the mathematics involved but also intuitively understanding the impact of non-perfect data and potential interactions is really hard), and most people really, really suck at it. Once you move from the maths to actually modelling data, you have to rely a lot on (niche) domain knowledge and experience.

I'm a bit biased because I work in a space with actual statisticians, but I'd wager that it's almost impossible for current LLMs to distinguish between good and bad examples in their training data. After all, even very smart humans fail to do that.