MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by culebron21 | 2025-05-24 21:04:59+00:00
Maybe I'm too late to the party, but here are my 2 cents.

AI/LLMs for web dev is like StackOverflow on steroids. Was it worth learning the model of SO site, or Google, in order to become a good dev? I guess, no.

LLMs jobs in this analogy are like becoming search engine developer. Completely different area, and different career, I guess.

To upgrade a CV and just skills, I would suggest learning another backend language, like Go or Rust, if they're not on your CV already. I chose Rust, and it boosted my understanding of what's happening in code. You may also choose Go, and offer speed boosts for Python/JS backend code, as many employers are more willing to use it than Rust. I hesitated to do that, and turned out, I was wrong, and I could have offered impressive speed boosts at one of my jobs, where background jobs would work for hours.

This can be any tech that is near, but feels like beyond a barrier, and people hesitate trying it.

As for other jobs - take a look at college/uni teaching: it brings status (if you do it more, even tangible titles), and boosts social network, which will yield crops in 5-15 years.

Another thing is something that requires certification. This is what people hesitate to try or fail at tests. Jobs protected by certificates are supposedly more secure. And learning as an adult is much cooler, because now you've seen yourself learn stuff on your own and can apply methods to the process.
by sadeshmukh | 2025-05-24 21:05:26+00:00
You control the prompt and the system prompt. No, it's not hyper specialized yet on the training side, but that doesn't matter. You can explicitly control the files it reads in Cursor, and I'm sure Roo and Aider can as well. If you self host, you can control exactly where your data is stored.

I've never seen so many false assumptions in one place.
by SoftTalker | 2025-05-24 21:07:56+00:00
I think longevity is a bad goal. No matter what you achieve, it won't be enough, and in the grand scheme if things it doesn't matter (and is probably a net negative, socially). Hundreds of thousands of people are born every day, and hundreds of thousands die. It is the natural way of things for older generations to die so that younger can prosper.
by leereeves | 2025-05-24 21:09:21+00:00
That's a great anecdote. I wonder if the publicity helped Crocs catch on.

If so, I'd like to thank her, because Crocs are the most comfortable shoes I've ever worn. Also, they are only "pretty ridiculously looking" because they're shaped properly, not like the majority of misshapen shoes that crush your toes.

(Unfortunately, Crocs now makes a normal looking sneaker that crushes my toes. Such a waste.)
by cortesoft | 2025-05-24 21:09:48+00:00
If the system sees someone exit a building and that person does not match someone the system saw enter the building, the person could be flagged and tracked as possibly being someone else who entered the building. Once the system accounts for everyone else who entered the building (by seeing when they exit), the system would be able to correlate that the unknown person who exited is the same as the only unaccounted for person who exited
by 0xDEAFBEAD | 2025-05-24 21:10:08+00:00
That's an argument against gaming laptops more generally. But I understand that gaming laptops are fairly popular:

>I've been hearing gaming laptop manufacturers tell me for years that gaming laptops are the future or whatever, but now that a laptop GPU is sitting securely at the top of the Steam Hardware Survey, I'm actually starting to believe it.

https://www.ign.com/articles/gaming-laptops-are-apparently-m...
Show HN: Predator vs. Boids
by dejavucoder | 2025-05-24 21:10:23+00:00
Live Demo: https://sankalp1999.github.io/swarm-sim/swarm-simulation.htm...

Swarm Intelligence Simulation

Boids vs Predator with Evolution

Boids are artificial life forms following three simple rules:

- Alignment - Match direction with neighbors - Cohesion - Stay close to the group - Separation - Avoid collisions

The term "Boid" is short for "bird-oid object." The simulation and its underlying principles were developed by Craig W. Reynolds in 1986.

A predator hunts the swarm, forcing evolution. Boids that survive reproduce, passing on genetic traits like speed and evasion abilities. Successful boids automatically reproduce every ~15 seconds.

Key Features:

- Real-time evolution across generations - Self-attention mechanism for global awareness - Interactive predator control (arrow keys) - Emergent survival strategies

Watch as simple rules create complex, lifelike behaviors!
by jxjnskkzxxhx | 2025-05-24 21:11:06+00:00
Oh shit.... I never realized until now that's exactly what the point of Alexa is. I thought the point was like a different UI to Amazon. As in "being able to buy by clicking OR sounding must lead to a strictly larger number of sales than being able to buy by clicking only". So you can imagine my confusion on people telling me that Alexa isn't a good UI.

Of course. The point is to snoop on people to make better "recommendations". Dystopian.
by tombert | 2025-05-24 21:11:56+00:00
I think when you get to a high-enough level of running a company, you figure out ways to turn off your empathy, and ignore your principles.

Most of us develop a bit of the latter. I have worked for a bunch of questionable companies that kind of go against my values, but deep down I'm a bit of a whore and whether or not I keep to these principles isn't likely to make a huge difference, so I just shut up and cash my paychecks [1].

I would like to think if I became a billionaire, I'd maintain my empathy and would keep my principles because at that point I actually could do something, but I probably wouldn't be able to become a billionaire if I maintained my principles and empathy. Sort of a catch 22, which is why I probably won't be worth any significant amount of money unless there's some kind of Mr Deeds situation and I have a long lost billionaire uncle that I don't know about who dies.

I don't think Tim Cook or Sam Altman are pure sociopaths in any kind of clinical sense. The vast majority of people aren't. I think that they actively taught themselves to value their respective companies instead of fellow humans.

That, and the last two years of layoffs in these tech corporations has shown me that these people are extremely short-sighted.

[1] Well, if I weren't unemployed :)
by imiric | 2025-05-24 21:12:12+00:00
Precisely.

While sometimes reinventing the wheel is a useful exercise, as TFA lays out, this is often a symptom of a larger Not Invented Here mentality. This is generally a harmful tendency in some organizations that leads to derailing project deadlines, and misdirecting resources towards building and maintaining software that is not core to the company's mission.

So in most cases the advice to not reinvent the wheel is more helpful. Deciding to ignore it, especially within a corporate environment, should be backed by very good reasons.
by tomnipotent | 2025-05-24 21:12:36+00:00
You forgot to quote this important part:

> The new, free language server

Pylance isn't the same extension as what was originally shipped, it's an entirely different product. Your link backs up my argument, not yours. Releasing an open source project doesn't not obligate them to continue supporting that project indefinitely, and the decision to migrate to a closed-source plugin is a perfectly valid and reasonable decision. Disagreeing with it doesn't mean they've somehow magically violated some implicit obligation you think they owe "the community".

> MS started closing vscode and the extensions years

They never "started". The plugin marketplace and vscode - the proprietary version of "Code - OSS" - has always been proprietary and closed. At no point did they give you something and take it away. Deciding to release a closed-source replacement for an open-source tool is not the same thing, and it's bad faith to argue otherwise to fit your fundamentally flawed argument.

> This was their business model all along get adoption in partly by leveraging the open source community

>Consider MS launch announcement that focuses on open source, extensibility, open community

You're relying on hand-wavy assertions without any evidence to back it up.

> Except they weren't open and did a u-turn on the community a few years later.

Where's the u-turn? I don't see anything in this post that's not true in 2025. Microsoft offers a curated plugin marketplace that's proprietary to vscode, and they provide distribution and hosting for free without requiring anything from creators and users. Pylance continues to be free but closed, Code - OSS continues to be FOSS, vscode continues to be a proprietary version of Code - OSS, plugin authors continue to upload products free-of-charge, and users continue to benefit from that community that Microsoft has fostered.

They've firmly established what their role is in this relationship. There's never been ambiguity between what's vscode closed-source and what's code - oss, unless you've not put in the effort to find out.

Point to an actual, concrete example of where they've acted in bad faith, did a "u-turn", or reneged on a public statement rather than hand-wavy generalizations. It's on you if you've relied on second-hand HN comments and news headlines to build your opinion, and relying on misunderstanding of context isn't a convincing argument.
by johnea | 2025-05-24 21:13:08+00:00
As the article's first comment states, and what was my first criticism after seeing Madd Max years ago: Who's refining the gas?

Let's just call it what it is: The whole premise is stupid, and was the biggest detractor from "suspension of disbelief" while watching the movie.

This is the same stupidity that's causing rural residents to shoot themselves in the foot by refusing to adopt electrification.

There is NO other technology that allows the level of technical autonomy, post-apocalyptic or otherwise, that is afforded by electricity.

People with rural acres could be supporting ALL of their own residential and agricultural energy consumption with onsite electrical generation. Instead, due to culture war side taking, they hobble themselves to be ever dependent on the petro-extraction and refinement industries.
by thomascountz | 2025-05-24 21:13:52+00:00
Thanks! I'm reading Starting Forth[^1] and Forth: The programming language that writes itself[^2] and they're great so far, particularly the latter!

I'm a bit self-conscious, now that you've asked, but I suppose I was looking to find resources walking through a Forth program end-to-end; perhaps a tutorial building something Forth is particularly well-suited for.

[^1]: https://www.forth.com/starting-forth/

[^2]: https://ratfactor.com/forth/the_programming_language_that_wr...
by LegionMammal978 | 2025-05-24 21:15:10+00:00
Other people in this thread have claimed that AE handlers can resume the code multiple times, as in call/cc, as opposed to resuming a coroutine, which can only be done once for each time it yields.

Personally, I don't see a whole lot of value in that, with how unpredictable execution could get. I'd rather write a function that explicitly returns another function to be called multiple times. (Or some equivalent, e.g., a function that returns an iterator.)
by bombdailer | 2025-05-24 21:15:33+00:00
Meanwhile this article is quite clearly written (or cleaned up) by AI. Or perhaps too much dialectic with AI causes one to internalize its tendency to polish turds smooth. It just has the unmistakable look of something where the original writing was "fixed up" and what remains is exactly the thing is warns against. I understand the pull to get an idea across as efficiently as possible, but sucking the life out of it ain't the way.
by hnuser123456 | 2025-05-24 21:17:17+00:00
Okay, apparently this is the core of the debate?:

Frequentists view probability as a long-run frequency, while Bayesians view it as a degree of belief.

Frequentists treat parameters as fixed, while Bayesians treat them as random variables.

Frequentists don't use prior information, while Bayesians do.

Frequentists make inferences about parameters, while Bayesians make inferences about hypotheses.

---

If we state the full nature of our experiment, what we controlled and what we didn't... how can it be a "degree of belief"? Sure, it's impossible to be 100% objective, but it is easy to add enough background info to your paper so people can understand the context of your experiment and why you got your results. "we found that at our college in this year, when you ask random students on the street this question, 40% say this, 30% say this..." and then considering how the college campus sample might not fully represent a desired larger sample population... what is different? you can confidently say something about the students you sampled, less so about the town as a whole, less so about the state as a whole...

I don't know, I finished my science degree after 10 years and apparently have an even mix of these philosophies.

Would love to learn more if someone's inclined.
by pppone | 2025-05-24 21:17:42+00:00
Yes, and it is already happening in professional astronomy. For example, the "Antarctic Tianmu Plan" [0] have shown that you can successfully capture non-trailed images without using tracking mounts by using drift-scanning CCDs—basically letting the sky move across your sensor while the detector is read out at the same rate.

[0] - https://doi.org/10.1117/12.3019468
by nout | 2025-05-24 21:17:47+00:00
Because by spending bitcoin you are actually fueling the bitcoin economy, you are showing interest to the sellers and so the price of bitcoin will go even higher (companies see the interest -> start supporting it -> start buying it -> start marketing it -> more people using it -> price goes up).

Further, if you believe that bitcoin is going to be used as a currency at some point, you may as well start using it already.

And finally, since bitcoin is so liquid (you can literally buy or sell in seconds with custodial wallets/accounts like Strike, or in minutes with self-custodial/private solutions), it doesn't really make sense to "sell the worse currencty (fiat) first" you can just buy whatever is your target amount of bitcoin today. You don't need to wait. This is not physical gold that takes hours up to days to buy or sell (you have to go to a special place, etc...).

Some people do "spend-and-replace", where they spend bitcoin for products/services and immediately buy the same amount of bitcoin for fiat. That's a nice way to start, but it's sort of unnecessary.
by techjamie | 2025-05-24 21:18:16+00:00
It can be both. Saying "Alexa, buy eggs" is a lot quicker and easier than loading up Amazon, finding the eggs you like which will probably be the top result for you, and clicking buy (or even Buy Now). Instead, it already knows your preferences in eggs anyway, so just by telling it, you can impulsively buy the eggs without even stopping what you're doing.

Then they get all that juicy "accidental activation" data on top of that.
by cryptonector | 2025-05-24 21:18:40+00:00
The whole not validating the signatures thing is a problem, yes. That can happen with PKI certificates too, but those have been around longer and -perhaps because one needed an ASN.1 stack- only people with more experience wrote PKI stacks than we see in the case of JWS?

I think Protocol Buffers is a disaster. Its syntax is worse than ASN.1 because you're required to write in tags, and it is a TLV encoding very similar to DER so... why _why_ does PB exist? Don't tell me it's because there were no ASN.1 tools around -- there were no PB tools around either!
by boricj | 2025-05-24 21:18:49+00:00
I've reinvented my own wheel in a particular niche. I didn't set out to do that, but I rejected the existing state of the art as fundamentally misguided. Then, I attempted to divide-and-conquer my particular problem, something that is conventionally considered impossible.

Against all odds, I not only succeeded (mostly thanks to ignorance and stubbornness), but my wheel turns out to be unbelievably good at what it does. Possibly even world-class. After further experimentation, it also enables feats that can only be described as pure heresy with troubling ease. Time passes and some people from that niche start picking up my wheel. They all hold it wrong at the beginning because it's so alien, but once they get the hang of it they never go back.

I get bug reports and feature requests from all over the world for the oddest of use-cases and workflows. I have deep, in-depth technical discussions with brilliant people I would've never met otherwise. I've witnessed achievements done by others with my wheel beyond my wildest dreams. I discover things that keep me awake at night. I get kicks out of melting down the brains of my uninitiated coworkers and colleagues explaining what my wheel does and what I can do with it.

Don't be afraid to reinvent the wheel. You never know what crazy, wild path it might roll you down to.
by ddeck | 2025-05-24 21:19:44+00:00
I find the single apartment scaffolding to be the most amazing. These guys turn up at the door of your 30th floor apartment with a bunch of bamboo poles and nylon strips and a couple of hours lated the entire side of the apartment is scafolded, like a spider's nest hanging off the side of the building.

To begin, one guy hangs out the window, drills a few holes in the outer concrete wall, and bolts a piece of L shaped steel to support the initial bamboo "floor". After that he's outside balancing on the first piece while he drills more and extends along the wall. Someone on the feeds the poles through the window.

He usually has a rope attached to a waist harness, which is initially held by someone inside, and then clipped to the braces outside... most of the time.

The whole thing is amazing to watch.

It's necessary every time you need to service something outside, like replacing or repairing aircon.
by tel | 2025-05-24 21:19:45+00:00
Sorry, Haskell’s “monad transformer library”. One of the earliest approaches to composability of multiple monadic effects. It’s pretty similar to an algebraic effect system allowing you to write effectual computations with types like `(Error m, Nondet m, WithState App m) => m ()` to indicate a computation that returns nothing but must be executed with access to error handling, nondeterminism, and access to the App type as state.

There are a few drawbacks to it, but it is a pretty simple way to get 80% of the ergonomics of algebraic effects (in Haskell).
by linguae | 2025-05-24 21:19:49+00:00
I feel the exact same way about tech today as a 90s kid who embraced personal computing and who was inspired by the histories of Apple, Microsoft, Bell Labs, Xerox PARC, and other pioneering places. As late as 2014 I thought highly of FAANG and I was proud of the two summer internships I had at Google, which were enjoyable.

Having been disillusioned by the state of the industry, I now teach computer science at a community college, and I get saddened when thinking about the world my students are to enter once they transfer and finish their bachelor’s degrees.

There are still many good companies and good people in our field, but I’m saddened by the rise of tech oligarchs who use tech for dominating people instead of making life better for everyone.
by Flemlo | 2025-05-24 21:20:14+00:00
That's not necessarily true.

Amazon is also a ecosystem. Alexa shows you notifications from Amazon like the status of a delivery. It's able to call others (great for family).

Amazon has also the fire kid tablet, fire TV etc.

And if I already use Amazon anyway I'm quite happy if Amazon would recommend me good products I like.

For plenty of things, Alexa is a very good UI.
by daveguy | 2025-05-24 21:20:19+00:00
Two questions,

1) What sensitive information was published in this article besides some superficial listening preferences and some Alexa interactions we have all had? I'm not sure identifying the extent of the use of the prefix "omni" is particularly sensitive information. It's not like anyone was divulging personal preference by asking for definitions.

2) What makes you think the author didn't run it by their family before submitting the story?
by rlpb | 2025-05-24 21:21:25+00:00
Ironically, it was Anker chargers with Anker cables that worked the worst (all were new), and a new Ugreen charger with the cable it came with that worked the best.

I got the impression that the Ugreen charger was more tolerant somehow - perhaps delaying longer before considering a previous PD negotiation terminated. I don't have the ability to tell for sure though.
by tossandthrow | 2025-05-24 21:21:36+00:00
This seems like a bad idea.

1. Relying on philanpropy is generally not democratic and should be frowned upon. 2. This entire structure is legacy.

Research needs to be an integrated part of society. Something people go and out from.

Not something a few elite people get to dedicate their lifes to.

This is important to ensure diffusion, especially in highly volatile times like we are in now.

The big question should be: how can we get a 40 something year old industry professional to do research in a couple of. Years between jobs.
by pilingual | 2025-05-24 21:21:51+00:00
First, in the US this type of thing violates the fourth amendment as the Institute for Justice will prove in court with ALPRs. It could be set up such that it does not, but for whatever reason these companies are greedy and make it broad rather than narrow in scope.

Second, I just won't patronize your establishment, shopping center, or municipality if you do. I'd like to go to the UK, but because of this policy I will not. Menlo Park pushed back against ALPRs: I'll go there. I went to a different ski shop because the one closest to me has an ALPR. And so on.
by siliconc0w | 2025-05-24 21:22:04+00:00
You can make millions and keep your empathy but I don't think you can be a billionaire unless you're just a voracious unsatiable machine without much empathy to begin with. You can get good at projecting a facade and saying the right things and maybe even actually doing some good in some cases but it's usually just in service of expanding your wealth or power.

This isn't really a bad thing, we just need to make sure that society sets the right incentives to align these individuals properly to maximize prosperity. (e.g, preventing monopolies so value is generated via innovation vs rent seeking)
by brudgers | 2025-05-24 21:22:30+00:00
A strong trained human can do all the things you mention with less supervision and in less time.

In other words if there is a lot of work for untrained workers, it is a poorly run construction site. In a well run construction project, trained workers clean up after themselves and installers don’t need additional people holding up heavy objects during placement because they bring proper tools, staff, and falsework with them.
by madaxe_again | 2025-05-24 21:22:59+00:00
You can, but dark noise is a problem with this technique as your SNR per bucket ends up being low. The purpose of long exposures with tracking is to maximise your SNR.

Also, it helps significantly to be in Antarctica, where the relative movement is much slower than it is at lower latitudes — and to have multiple telescopes - and low noise CCDs, in a cold, dry environment.

Sadly, most of us don’t have those luxuries.
by timthorn | 2025-05-24 21:23:08+00:00
I attend the Christmas Lectures too - I'm literally on my way home from the RI as I type :) They used to go a lot deeper and narrower, exploring a topic (eg the Standard Model or chirality) over a set of 5 hour long lectures. The target audience was scientifically aware teenage children, but they're now about engaging children for whom science might not have otherwise been an interesting topic.

My point about Simon was that he is engaging - I tried to allude to the fact that an expert wouldn't learn anything. I don't know how it comes across as a video but as a live performer he draws you in.