MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by potato3732842 | 2025-05-06 13:32:43+00:00
>I think it's that people are tired. Tired of paying large amounts of money to taxes that don't seem to fix anything in their day-to-day lives. Tired of companies screwing them over at every possible turn.

Tired of hearing these endless debates. Tired of seeing people peddle policy based o11n one set of principals out of one side of their mouth and a different policy based on different principals out of the other.

>doing the 'little' things and pushing ever so slowly for the change we need.

Sometimes improving things, sometimes creating yet more layers of spaghetti that prevent future change....
by dpq | 2025-05-06 13:32:57+00:00
> If we were referring to writing a recipe book or creating a novel it doesn’t have its own “hip” phrase to go with it. Many people would simply call it “stealing”.

> LLMs don’t miraculously know how to create code – it’s learning from what’s available to it online already. Do you think it’s learnt from closed code such as Microsoft software, or anything from Apple? No. It’s taking advantage of the generosity and sharing spirit of the open-source community.

So if I learn from open source community, pick up good coding habits, patterns etc., and then apply what I've learned to write new code - does this also constitute stealing? While IP laws are without doubt not without fault, I'm rather more used to people claiming that they are too strict, if anything. Now, the author essentially claims that we need to introduce on top of copyright also "trainingright" (or "learningright"?), essentially extending the definition of "derivative works" to plus infinity. This doesn't sit right with me.
by matheusmoreira | 2025-05-06 13:33:51+00:00
This resonates so much. It's always nice to see I'm not alone.

I believe computer programming is the closest humanity has ever come to godhood. We're creating entire universes out of unstructured bits. It's addicting. I feel this deep need to remake everything in my own image, to have the entire system reflect my own understanding.

I often feel like I'm insane for thinking there's a better way. Surely someone much smarter than me would have thought of it, right? I must be stupid and missing some crucial fact that proves me wrong. Then I do it and it actually fucking works. What a rush.

I only regret the fact I'm a mere mortal with just one lifetime and whose days have just 24 hours which must be carefully allocated. Real gods have infinite time and are capable of infinite effort. Just look at the universe. It's a deep religious realization.

> Your once-perfect tool breaks silently because libfoo.so is now libfoo.so.2.

... Solution: get rid of libfoo and do it yourself. Now when it breaks you only have yourself to blame.

Yeah, I know... At some point it becomes pathological. It can still be an immensely fun activity if you're curious and have way too much free time on your hands.

> Sometimes, it’s OK to just use the thing.

Also okay to just complain. No, you don't actually need to send in the damn pull request. It's alright.
by senordevnyc | 2025-05-06 13:34:22+00:00
I’ve read all your comments here, and as someone who has at different times been both the entrepreneur making big money and the employee working a chill job, I think you’re missing the point here.

You started by making the point that he might have more money, but you have more time, which you conclude is ultimately more valuable.

As many have pointed out, he can sell his business and retire, which you don’t have the option to do. Your rejoinder that he can’t do that because then he’d have too much time makes little sense, both because you’ve already setup the axiom that “more time = more freedom”, but also because he could at that point decide to do all kinds of things: start another business, buy one, get a job, work for charity, whatever. He’s quite obviously more free than you, although perhaps not psychologically, who can say.

You don’t need to defend your life choices to anyone, but from the outside it looks like you’re making an illogical case because you can’t accept that he actually does have more freedom than you. Which is OK! There’s always someone out there doing better than us.
by panny | 2025-05-06 13:35:32+00:00
So this is a plug for repomix?

Some questions,

Does repomix do anything Github copilot should be doing? It seems like this should be something copilot does automagically.

Does it work on any language? I notice the repomix github suggests a different tool if you're using python.

It seems straightforward to create an output.xml on the repomix site, but is there an opinionated try-it-free AI to use that output with?

I'm tired of trying things only to get ai slop. If this cures the slop, I would be interested.

edit: it seems the HN discussion is dominated by the definition of "vibe coding" and not at all interested in what the article presented as a solution... nice.
by froindt | 2025-05-06 13:35:58+00:00
That experience is ridiculous, I'm sorry you had to go through that. My cousin is a teacher and is trying to support one of her students who is very food insecure. She's currently putting a box of food into the kids backpack every day, so the kid doesn't feel different/shame bringing a bag of food home. The one consistent meal the kid gets per day is the school lunch.

It wasn't that child's choice to be born. Some of the biggest lifetime ROI's out there are ensuring a childhood isn't filled with trauma, involves enough nutrition to help their bodies and brains develop, etc.

I have no time for people who make an argument about "the government shouldn't be providing food because it creates a dependency or expectation they'll want for life". Their lifetime earnings and contributions to society will be vastly larger if they aren't hungry during the school day.

It's tough to focus and learn when you're only eating a few hundred calories per day.
by SpaceNugget | 2025-05-06 13:36:03+00:00
The code says to call into_iter and consume the iteratee, so rust does that. If you want a reference, use the &, just like in zig/c/c++/etc. You are saying an even more extreme version of "If there's a way what I wrote could possibly be interpreted that could compile, it should do that" ignoring the fact that there's almost assuredly _many_ ways that your code can be interpreted that could compile.

Slowing down type resolution/compilation (by making every unannotated loop a generic T|&T) and adding more syntax (since rust would need new annotations to explicitly specify borrow/take in for loops), in order to save a single character that matches the behavior of most other related languages and is perfectly clearly explained by the compiler, is maybe a bad move. Considering compile time and complicated syntax are two of the biggest things people who actually write rust complain about.
by malfist | 2025-05-06 13:36:04+00:00
My previous PM was ultra valuable. Put devs in contact with the customers, got out of the way of deciding what to build, and then sheltered the devs from the chaos of customers. He was also smart about what could be done and in what timeline, always working from the estimates engineers gave, working backwards and deciding what scope could be cut and where, who if another team could loan us people. He was the right balance of umbrella, partner and pass through. It was magnificent.

My company, being more than a little bit toxic, he got transferred to a new manager who took an instant dislike to him and he was pulled off all his projects and then fired for not delivering anything. (bit of an exaggeration, he got put onto one of those "all responsibility, no authority" type projects where he was responsible for making sure everyone at the company stopped using the VPN, but he had no authority to force teams to build or migrate services to be available outside the VPN, and there were 2+ decades of services to migrate, and he couldn't direct people to stop connecting to VPN if they needed something that was inside the VPN)

The PM that came along to replace him described himself to all the engineers as "the next Elon", wouldn't let engineers talk to customers, personally decided what features to build with no input from the dev team, even when making technically difficult decisions. He asked for estimates from devs but never used them. Often giving us both half the time asked for, and half the engineers asked for to deliver a project. He never deflected chaos from customers, just added a translation layer that made it impossible to make the customers happy. Everything was an emergency, every feature necessary for an MVP. He'd constantly harass people for status updates, forget what they were working on and harass them again. He constantly asked for documents to be written for himself that he never bothered to open the links too.

He was actively toxic, wrong and an impediment.

He'd send out launch announcements to the org celebrating the projects that were completed and it was customary to list key people who delivered the project. He'd forget whole teams of people that worked on the project. One time he left me off of a project that I lead, got everyone in our sibling team that was helping out though. One person he never forgot to list as being a key person involved in the project was himself. Even in projects he had never heard of before having to write the launch announcement.

That behavior was rewarded, for whatever reason. Although he finally left the company when one of the many rounds of "you must work from the same office as your manager" bullshit caught him up and he wouldn't relocate from canada to the US.
by ziddoap | 2025-05-06 13:36:40+00:00
>I'm still searching for successful vibe coding examples.

I'm wondering what this means.

Kind of by definition, you wouldn't be able to tell "successful vibe coding" from "successful coding", right? Unless someone announces it. And a quick look at the comments here, or any other thread with about AI & coding, would immediately tell you is a bad idea to announce.

There's a few things you just don't say on HN, because you'll be piled-on immediately: don't criticize Kagi, don't hint at being pro-cryptocurrency, don't announce you "vibe coded" something even if it's extremely successful, etc.

(The immediate downvotes on this is actually hilarious, and proves the point)
by BuyMyBitcoins | 2025-05-06 13:36:53+00:00
I suspect the Greek alphabet was given special treatment because of just how prominent Greek symbols are in math and science.

I posit that engineers and computer scientists gave extra time and attention towards accommodating Greek because they were so familiar with seeing and using those glyphs during their education. They knew that those symbols would be encountered in English, even before full internationalization efforts would take place. Whereas Turkish was merely an afterthought.

Edit: This post of mine is unfounded/inaccurate, thank you to dhosek for providing a proper explanation, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43905574
by Theodores | 2025-05-06 13:37:25+00:00
This comes in handy with the bloated codebase I am running from, bravo.

My problem is the codebase I am running towards. I am making headway with scoped CSS, however, Firefox does not have it yet. I keep checking in on Firefox to see when that is going to support scoped CSS but I have not been able to determine what the hold up is.

Does anyone have scoped CSS working with a workaround or compromise for Firefox?
by osigurdson | 2025-05-06 13:37:32+00:00
This is a good point. It is already the case that unless you deeply review every Windsurf change you will have zero understanding of your codebase. If it gets 1000X better in the next 3 years why would anyone look at code at all?

Of course, back to reality. Today, at least in my workflow, I use / like Windsurf but it is a small part of what I am doing. For any code I want to keep I mostly write it by hand (using vim for a very bare-bones / cognitive mode experience). For me, the real flow state occurs in vim while ChatGPT and Windsurf are great for exploration.
by skoskie | 2025-05-06 13:38:09+00:00
Is this not the logical result of fighting spammers? It’s easier to trust messages coming from mega corp when you know mega corp has invested in mechanisms that ensure their systems aren’t being used to send spam. I certainly don’t like the negative impact on people who choose to self host, but I also don’t see it as an intentional effort to shut out legitimate emails.

Case in point a bit further down in the comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43902653
by rchaud | 2025-05-06 13:38:57+00:00
"Vibe Coding" sounds like a phrase that was coined in a Barstool podcast, or any of the lowbrow, hustle-culture heavy Gen Z-targeting "new media" outlets.

Very sad to see the same people who railed against bootcamp grads and Fiverr devs for lowering the bar, legitimizing this. As the article states, "vibe code" is essentially scraped OSS code that reduces the human programmer to become a janitor for sloppy code -- exactly the criticism they had for bootcamp grads.
by ThinkBeat | 2025-05-06 13:39:26+00:00
I presume that there is an official application that has been created by the US military / NSA / some other entity to facilitate secure encrypted messaging for a presidential administration?

If such a beast exists what is it called? How does it work?

I would more expect it to be a specific combination of hardware physically approved phones and software.

Did the prior administration use it exclusively?

I remember Obama allegedly refusing to part with his Blackberry.
by 0xDEAFBEAD | 2025-05-06 13:39:31+00:00
I noticed you weren't able to provide any compelling concrete examples, as expected.

At best, the US does a bad job of providing global public goods which benefit all nations. At the peak of the British Empire, the Brits controlled 25% of the globe. By contrast, US territory barely expanded in the wake of WW2, during the period that we've supposedly been running the world for our own benefit.

During this period, relative US economic strength also declined considerably: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/u-s-share-of-global-economy...

>Presumably you would still like to spend some dollars defending the US? How many dollars do you think is the difference? (keep in mind there are many nonlinearities in defense spending: you can very easily cut spending by 20% and wind up with 20% of the capability instead of 80%) The US's presense in Europe is very much strategically part of the US defending itself.

I think we should have a nuclear deterrent. I don't think we should have bases in Europe or commitments to defend foreign countries. We should evaluate all of our spending on the basis of how much it helps with homeland defense.

>If Europe ceased to be an ally to the US and instead became hostile (due to being occipied by e.g. Russia), then it very much would be the US's problem.

I don't seek a hostile relationship with Russia. It's critical for global peace and stability that the major powers have good relationships.

Part of the strategy is to stop inserting ourselves in foreign conflicts so we have less need for military spending. We get nothing but complaints for inserting ourselves in foreign conflicts anyways. If things go right, our involvement is forgotten or taken for granted; if things go wrong, somehow it is always our fault.
by eigenspace | 2025-05-06 13:39:39+00:00
It's honestly nuts that so many developers continue to try to make software on MacOS. I understand the appeal of their current hardware, and I used to even be a big fan of the user experience, but it really seems like attempting to build software in MacOS is like trying to build a house on a sandbar.

Apple has done nothing and continues to do nothing to engender any confidence in their platform as a development target.
by Nevermark | 2025-05-06 13:40:03+00:00
Ugh, I do love clear terminology. But “vibe coding” is so bad it sounds like something a “vibe coder” would come up with!

(Joking really. It’s was a funny inventive and evocative term. The sadness is that it is getting traction as a serious phrase.)

Still get fingernails on a chalkboard cringe every time I come across a language model’s “confabulation” (conscious or subconscious filling in of unknown details or facts) being called “hallucinations” (false experiences in sensory systems as they iterate partially or completely unmoored from their normally grounding flow of external information).

There are real questions about when anthropomorphizing is appropriate directly or by analogy. But inconsistently applied anthropomorphization is grotesquely unnecessary confusion. As someone who has spent a career being careful with terms, it hurts. Bad terminology and notation create subtle but often permanent drags on clarity.

Even poor emphasis does real damage. Tell a three year old a standard circle’s radius is 1 and circumference is called tau. Cool! Tell another 3 year old a standard circumference is 2*pi, perhaps also noting that a half standard sized circle has a radius of 1/2, a diameter of 1, and a circumference of pi to “simplify” things, and see which child more readily takes a conceptual step forward. Because even an extra 2 creates real (transcendental!) conceptual drag.
by IAmBroom | 2025-05-06 13:40:43+00:00
> how do we recognise a "real" independent journalist doing real investigative journalism from an activist blogger with an axe to grind?

100% the wrong take.

Why shouldn't reporting be traceable as far as is both practical, and safe for the people involved? "The 'I HATE BIBI' blog reported that the Israeli Prime Minister admitted he like dressing up like a kangaroo and hopping around his office" allows people more (potentially) useful information than merely reporting the PM is a furry.

There doesn't need to be a distinct line between "reporter" and "person reporting news". At least, not in general; some measure of impact (followers, audience size, etc) is practical and necessary for allowing people to attend White House press briefings, but that's another subject altogether.
by kibwen | 2025-05-06 13:41:44+00:00
> Somehow shame doesn't work anymore.

We don't need to wonder. Shame as a mechanism only works in social contexts that feature a high degree of social dependency. In olden days, if all your neighbors hated you to the point of dissociating with you, that could be tantamount to a death sentence (who's going to share food with you when your harvest fails or take care of you when your household falls ill?); that's a society with high social dependency. For better or worse, modern society is built on abstracting away this dependency. (It's the same thing that explains declining church attendance: a church is a social organization, but nowadays if you need to find a spouse you ask a dating app instead of your congregation, and then when you need marriage counseling you ask a professional marriage counselor instead of your priest, etc. Economic transactions have replaced social dependency.)
by lukev | 2025-05-06 13:42:11+00:00
So, I know the battle has been lost for the definition of vibe coding (https://simonwillison.net/2025/Mar/19/vibe-coding/).

But we definitely need a word that makes a distinction between a LLM autonomously generating software, and having a human ultimately curating all the code (even if they're using a LLM to generate it.)

If not vibe coding, what should we call that?
by genrilz | 2025-05-06 13:42:26+00:00
I think it is important to note that in 59nadir's example, the reason Rust gives an error and Odin doesn't is not memory safety. Rust uses move semantics by default in a loop while Odin appears to use copy semantics by default. I don't really know Odin, but it seems like it is a language that doesn't have RAII. In which case, copy semantics are fine for Odin, but in Rust they could result in a lot of extra allocations if your vector was holding RAII heap allocating objects. Obviously that means you would need to be careful about how to use pointers in Odin, but the choice of moving or copying by default for a loop has nothing to do with this. For reference:

Odin (from documentation):

for x in some_array { // copy semantics for &x in some_array { // reference semantics // no move semantics? (could be wrong on this)

Rust:

for x in vec.iter_ref().copied() { // bytewise copy semantics (only for POD types) for x in vec.iter_ref().cloned() { // RAII copy semantics for x in &vec { // reference semantics for x in vec { // move semantics

C++:

for (auto x : vec) { // copy semantics for (auto &x : vec) { // reference semantics for (auto &&x : vec) { // move semantics
by prawn | 2025-05-06 13:42:41+00:00
I've tried both Cursor and VS Code with AI in the agent/edit mode. They both seem similar enough. Is there another mode I haven't found where Cursor has a distinct advantage? If so, I'd like to try it.

I gave up on Cursor because my trial ran out, while VS Code with Copilot doesn't seem to charge me anything.
by bayindirh | 2025-05-06 13:43:04+00:00
> The entertainment industry has a lot of people who just want to get their job done and go home, just like any other industry.

I think another reason, in addition to yours, is that the entertainment industry sees their products are disposable, or want them to be disposable. This way they can pull the drain plug from the pool, so they can pump in new content into it. Otherwise, listening same good old songs will inevitably eat into profitability of the new releases, because you can watch/listen for so long in a given time.

BTW, I don't share the same views with "the entertainment industry". You can't get the good old albums from my cold, dead hands.
by compsciphd | 2025-05-06 13:43:47+00:00
I'll repeat myself, but this is because Docker (and all its descendents) didn't understand my work (or at least took the easy way out).

https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenix-atc-10/apiary-easy-...

I argued (and built years prior to docker), a container oriented file system infrastructure that combined the best of linux style package management and union file systems. Where instead of "packages", you had "layers" (analogous to packages) and an "image" that was just a set of layers. I imagined, instead of a linux distribution having an archive of installable packages, it would provide a mirror of usable layers (and PoCd this by converting a large enough set of Debian packages into layers to cover the applications needed for my PoC).

In such a world, you don't waste (directly at least) any additional space, as you are sharing the packages directly (and therefore the underlying files, which can also have memory benefits in terms of easier sharing of ro code pages, due to being the same page on disk).

You do still have a concept of version sprawl, as different images can be using different versions of the same package, but its not very visible. Each image enumerates directly what "shared" components its using. One could argue that just like upgrading a regular deb/rpm environment is relatively straight forward, "upgrading" (or in reality, creating a new image version from an existing version) in such a world is also easy. Just upgrade the shared layer versions in the image manifest/definition.

I was trying to create a world where you could upgrade the container easily (ex: move the running container's private RW layer to a new container on upgrade, or in a sense resolve the container's layers from version A to version B by swapping around the layers that have changed), but one might argue that today that isn't viewed as valuable, and I might agree. I was trying to demonstrate a system that supported what I called persistent and ephemeral containers, with persistent containers being what became called pets and ephemeral containers being what became called cattle and the world today wants everything to be cattle.
by resters | 2025-05-06 13:44:03+00:00
- A $3B signal that OpenAI is unable to do product

- AI assisted coding is mostly about managing the context and knowing what to put in the context to avoid confusion and dumb mistakes, it's not about the UI.

- This signals that OpenAI believes that highly effective coding assistant LLMs will become a commodity / open source and so UI / tooling lock-in is a good investment.