MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by cromwellian | 2025-05-11 10:18:20+00:00
Nothing to do with energy star. Modern Bosch Dishwashers use less water, wash better, and dry better, than your old 1990s washers.

In the same way that people think low-flow toilets are why their sh1t doesn't flush, instead of the proliferation of multi-ply super-thick toilet paper that are almost as bad as paper towels. It doesn't matter how much flow you have, if you flush a wad of cellulose that won't instantly dissolve like single-ply or thin-two-ply, you'll need to break out the augur.

And really, if you don't have a Toto Washlet or Japanese toilet, you're missing out. You barely need any toilet paper at all, and don't walk around with fecal particles wiped against your skin all day.
Show HN: I built a system to make ChatGPT brutally honest with you
by moobuilds | 2025-05-11 10:18:48+00:00
Most people use ChatGPT wrong.

Without the right guidance or prompting .

ChatGPT will validate anything you say.

It's designed to be agreeable, not truthful.

It will praise your bad ideas.

It will overlook critical flaws.

It will miss market opportunities.

And you'll never know until it's too late.

You need brutal honesty, not false validation.

It won't challenge your beliefs, question your

decisions, or call out your blind spots.

Unless you force it to.

So, That's why I built a system to fix that.

It's a set of prompts designed to override the

default behavior and turn ChatGPT into what you

actually need:

a brutally honest, advisor for Self-Growth .

Try this prompt (copy-paste it inside ChatGPT ):

---

I want you to act as my brutally honest, high-level advisor.

Speak to me like I’m a founder or leader with

massive potential but dangerous blind spots.

Don’t comfort me.

Don’t flatter me.

Give me the unfiltered truth—even if it stings.

Tell me what I’m doing wrong, what I’m avoiding,

and what I need to do to get to the next level.

No fluff.

No lies.

Just clarity.

-----

This is one of many.

If you’re serious about using ChatGPT to grow and

build, think, or grow—stop letting it lie to you.

Start getting real answers.

https://honestprompts.com
by muzani | 2025-05-11 10:21:44+00:00
Pretty much whatever you're using 3.7 for. You don't need as tight a scope. It does easy things well.

An situation I had yesterday: we had two dropdowns. For simplicity, let's say it's country. When you pick a different country, it shows states. When you select state, then change country, it crashes because the state doesn't exist in the new country.

The standard solution is simple – just make it reset to null when switching countries, or better yet, check whether the selected state exists in the new country. But the thinking models will overengineer the hell out of this. They'll check from the deep service level when these checks can be made just below the view layer.
by graemep | 2025-05-11 10:22:28+00:00
> "All plants grow faster with more CO₂, but lianas benefit even more."

I have read other articles (by climate scientists) that say that the increase on CO₂ is not sufficient for this to be significant.

> "We shouldn't intervene until we fully understand their ecological role"

Given the dramatic damage he says it is doing in some areas, surely cutting them in at least those areas would make sense?
by norrius | 2025-05-11 10:23:03+00:00
> But if I asked you, "Why is this stove burner on?" it would be entirely normal for you to answer, "I'm making tea."

This is a confusion specific to the English language, not consciousness in general. Some languages distinguish between the past-oriented cause-why and the future-oriented goal-why explicitly (e.g. Russian: почему vs зачем).
by vicentesteve | 2025-05-11 10:23:37+00:00
Hi everyone,

I’m an independent researcher and recently completed a formal, self-contained proof that P ≠ NP. The result is based on an explicit language L* ∈ NP \ P that resists all polynomial-time machines via a certified local test. The core techniques combine locally testable codes, circuit resistance, and diagonalisation.

Unlike many previous attempts, the proof avoids relativization, natural proofs, and algebrization, and relies entirely on constructive combinatorics and meta-complexity arguments. It has been submitted to the Journal of the ACM and also made publicly available here:

ResearchGate (PDF, with DOI): https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.14071.74408

I’m sharing this for discussion and feedback from the theoretical CS and cryptography communities. Constructive criticism is welcome — I’d genuinely like to know if any gaps remain. The paper is intended to be rigorous and elementary in its construction.

Thanks in advance, Vicent Esteve Voltes https://orcid.org/0009-0003-1371-7561
by cromwellian | 2025-05-11 10:24:03+00:00
Because it is an externality. Capitalism works when there are property rights. Even educated libertarians admit that that which is not able to be given property rights must be subject to government oversight.

Public safety is an externality. The air and water are externalities.

Private industry can't effectively compete to optimize a cost which is not "priced in". That's the whole point. If you can pollute, damage public safety, et al, it amounts to a free subsidy, you are externalizing costs which should show up in your balance sheet.

It's like people read Ayn Rand, or some cliff notes version of free market capitalism, but don't read any of the deep philosophical economic arguments in the literature, and then parrot slogans around.
by delusional | 2025-05-11 10:24:15+00:00
That is an impossible point to argue. What we can say is that historically they have been linked. The Danish slave trade was, as an example, fueled by weapon technology exports to African warlords in exchange for enslaving the population they defeated.

As the story goes, no Dane set foot in the african interior. We instead assisted the already warring factions with technology allowing them to subject more people to their war.

I think it's hard to envision how any of this could have happened without those wars.
by CaptainOfCoit | 2025-05-11 10:27:22+00:00
> It’s such a turn off.

Is this the wiki you somehow want to have removed? https://wiki.freepascal.org/

It seems perfectly fine, information-dense even which is even better. Seems a lot better than the typical one-long-landing-page-docs many languages have today. What exactly is the problem with the wiki that cannot be fixed and must be re-made from scratch?
by graemep | 2025-05-11 10:29:41+00:00
> According to Wikipedia:

>> Galileo was given permission to write about the Copernican theory, as long as he treated it as a hypothesis

I cannot find that in Wikipedia's article about Galileo.

So why was neither Copernicus (who initial proposed the theory) or anyone else subjected to restrictions like that?

Also, it was a hypothesis that was proved to the wrong. The sun is not the centre of the universe. He was wrong to claim it had been proved it was. It was not even the best supported theory on the available evidence (there were several theories competing to replace the Ptolemaic model).

> Basically, the Church has no problem with evolution as long as everyone agrees that evolution happens after God created everything on the planet/in the universe.

How does that constrain evolution? The Universe was created a few billion years before evolution even started!
by encom | 2025-05-11 10:30:36+00:00
All the consumer brands are pozzed. My last build (i7-14700K) used an MSI board. Their secureboot is still broken. The BIOS setup is complete mess, and all the settings are reset after a BIOS update. I have to unplug and replug my USB keyboard after a poweroff, or it doesn't work. But I insisted on a board without RGB lights, and that limited the selection. Computers are over.
by fnord123 | 2025-05-11 10:32:11+00:00
When you remark on improvements, up is generally better and down is generally worse. So saying "response times will be higher" gives an immediate sentiment of improvement. But, obviously, a moments thinking helps you re-orient and realize it's better. This is why plots often have "lower is better" in the legend, to help readers understand.

I often use 'slower' and 'faster' as a native speaker to help reinforce the meaning of the direction.
by rdm_blackhole | 2025-05-11 10:35:09+00:00
> No, it just claims that human souls are created differently than animal souls, and therefore have different properties.

These properties were never proven but simply asserted. Anything asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Also why draw the line between human and animal souls, what about bacteria and viruses?

> It defends this with the same kind of zeal that you defend a round earth with, and for the same reasons.

That is disingenuous, we have an overwhelming amount of evidence that the Earth is round whereas the concept of souls and their supposed differences have been asserted for centuries but never proven.

That's my problem with the concept of religion. When the tough questions are asked, the only answers given are of the special pleading kind and/or simply asserting that something is correct in a tautological way.

No proof necessary, how convenient!
by sargstuff | 2025-05-11 10:35:43+00:00
?? 3d snap shot of Meh (multi 2.71828 huygens[-2][-1]).

Unless gravity of situation is to much, then (S)urreal[0].(a)nimated.(T)uring[1] (t)ests / (a)nimated (C)omplex-number (T)uring (t)ests might be the way to go. aka Don't have to worry about bricking things[2] because of limited data and need to apply a t-test[3]. May need metaheuristics to analyze.

To much 9.81 might result in visual wrinkles[4] and IRL mov obscuator[5]

---------

[-2]: Huygen's theory of light & wavefronts : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpTFU4Yh7gQ

[-1]: What is sound? : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhzZAoSYDLE

[0] : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surreal_number#

[1] : physical turing test... : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43938386

[2] : Brickognize .... : https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/23/4/1898

[3] : https://www.jmp.com/en/statistics-knowledge-portal/t-test

[4] : Nanoscale wrinkles ... vibrant color patterns : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43953099

[5] : https://github.com/xoreaxeaxeax/movfuscator
by xrhobo | 2025-05-11 10:36:01+00:00
The good news is that we have evolved an amazing ability to believe ridiculous narratives as coping strategies so that we aren't frozen by this reality and can still get on with and enjoy life.

When ridiculous narratives like Christianity feel worn and outdated, we make up new ridiculous narratives like panpsychism.

I would say "organic machine p-zombies with no real truly conscious experience with an operative system built on random, ridiculous, changing narratives. A machine that randomly stops working then other organic machines burn or bury it."

The fact I can believe this and still enjoy life so much really is a miracle in the Christian sense.
by ndsipa_pomu | 2025-05-11 10:36:02+00:00
> Why is housing exempt from normal supply and demand?

Most people feel the need to live in a house, so the demand is not going to diminish when the supply is low. Also, the land that housing requires is a fixed size resource, so is often seen as a good investment which means that over-supply of housing usually results in it being purchased by the wealthy and then used to generate rent income from the less wealthy.
by Grimblewald | 2025-05-11 10:37:00+00:00
Nah, I don't buy it. Theyre good enough at higher level skills / comprehension that such enormous failures in more foundational skills makes no sense.

the website advertises a product that makes use of web infrastructure signficantly more complex/sophisticated than webmail tied to your domain. It's a zero effort zero cost addon for most hosting services these days.

so either this whole thing is a LLM project, and the 16 year old just has their name and reputation as a biological human of young age propping up / hyping the llm based product, or its a scam.

bottom line. It's either unremarkable or untrustworthy, likely both.
by dijit | 2025-05-11 10:37:20+00:00
I hear what you're saying and I agree, but it's perhaps too black and white.

Let's take one of the most disastrous bugs in recent history: meltdown.

Speculative execution attacks inside the CPU. This required (in Paul Turners words): putting a warehouse of trampolines around an overly energetic 7-year old.

This, understandably took a lot of time, both for microcode and OS vendors.. it took even longer to fix it in silicone.

Not everyone is running SaaS that can deploy silently, or runs a patch cadence that can be triggered in minutes.

I work in AAA games and I'm biased, we have to pass special certifications to release patches, if your publisher has good relations, waiting for CERT by itself (after you have a validated fix) is 2 weeks.
by vasco | 2025-05-11 10:38:05+00:00
> Given the dramatic damage he says it is doing in some areas, surely cutting them in at least those areas would make sense?

You being personally convinced about something doesn't mean you can't be aware of your own limitations and want to be careful about implementing solutions too early to limit their impact of you're wrong.

The difference is clear when you give an opinion about someone else's problems and how they should proceed vs when you have to decide about your own life. It's harder to implement change when you have to live with the consequences.
by fullstackchris | 2025-05-11 10:38:43+00:00
Well... if the author wants websockets, why doesn't the author just do it? They state clearly in pull request the community is totally free to make their own.

My guess is one will crop up within the next few months...

Speaking from the TypeScript side of things...

I will say the documentation is indeed garbage - it still includes code snippets of APIs / source code examples that don't exist anymore. Also, the choice to use zod types is also in my opinion, way over the top... the fact that I need to import a third party library to write a MCP server is wild - when you're already writing in a typed language (TypeScript)... (and yes I know the other advantages zod provides)

Otherwise it's simple enough to get started, if just tinkering around.
by mvanbaak | 2025-05-11 10:39:04+00:00
From what I read your problems are all traced back to CEC. I'm not using CEC, and I dont have any of the problems you describe here. but that's because I dont let my devices tell each other what to do. I use a harmony remote for that.

Logitech stopped selling new harmony remotes, but all the infra to configure them is still online and managed by them, and as soon as you have configured the hub, it does work totally standalone. I'll worry about another brand when I buy new hardware and the harmony configuration infra is no longer online (I'm pretty sure there will come an opensource alternative)

About the update: the secret here is 'dont connect your tv to the internet, there is 0 use for that'
by giantg2 | 2025-05-11 10:39:06+00:00
That's because nobody actually cares about security nor do they want to pay for it. I'm a security champion at my company and security related work gets pushed off as much as possible to focus on feature work. If we actually wanted security to be a priority, they would employ security champions who's only job was to work on security aspects of the system instead of trying to balance security and feature work, because feature work will always prevail.
by immibis | 2025-05-11 10:40:22+00:00
You still have the right to say you think this law is bad. You can even say you think this law is bad because you think it should be legal to stand in the public square and yell that Hitler did nothing wrong. But you can't stand in the public square and yell that Hitler did nothing wrong.

I think you should own your full opinion. What is the thing you want to say that is currently illegal to say because of hate speech law?
by GreenWatermelon | 2025-05-11 10:40:28+00:00
> AI can be just as good as talking to a friend when you don’t have one

This sentence effectively reads "AI cam be just as good as (nothing)" since you can't talk to a friend when you don't have one.

Of course, I understand the point you were trying to make, which is that AI is better than absolutely nothing; but I disagree in the vain that AI will give you a false since of companionship that might lead you further towards bad outcomes.
by II2II | 2025-05-11 10:40:40+00:00
I am not dismissing Wozniak's designs here, but it is important to not a couple of major differences between the Disk II and it's competitors:

- Many of the design constraints that other companies faced were removed. Apple designed their own drive electronics and drive interface card. Yes, it takes a talented engineer to handle both the analog and digital side of things. On the other hand, there were compromises. The Apple II was stuck doing a lot of the heavy work. Apple also ended up designing a more complex drive controller to go beyond single sided, double density drives.

- On the flip side, Commodore had more design constraints than most. The 1541 was based upon drives from the PET era. The drives also interfaced to the computer in a fundamentally different way. On the surface level, Commodore drives interfaced to the computer over a generic bus (a bit like USB is a generic bus). The drives also handled high level commands over that bus, to the point where they could operate autonomously. I recall a colleague demoing a drive-to-drive copy between two 1541 drives that occurred without the drives being connected to a computer (after the initial setup was done). The commands were also very high level, dealing with file system access rather than block level access.

While it would be easy to claim that Commodore drives were over-engineered, one must also consider that the original designs came from a time when personal computers had 4 kB of RAM, with nearly 1 kB of that being used by a 40x25 text display (many early computers shared memory between the CPU and video). Software like a disk operating system also required at least some RAM and, in the case of the Apple II, was entirely loaded into RAM. In other words, Commodore was offloading some of the work and memory requirements from the computer.

Wozniak was a genius at designing simple hardware, but those designs usually pushed things into hardware. The Disk II is one example. The other classic example is the non-linear addressing of video on the Apple II. It simplified hardware, but more work had to be done in software.

As for Commodore, well, they were geniuses at botching sophisticated hardware designs. But that's another story.
by pirgidb | 2025-05-11 10:40:44+00:00
> Did I say that?

Yes, you kinda did say that. You said people should leave their jobs if they weren't stimulating, and when someone pointed out this was lacking in nuance, you waved it off completely. Now you're dismissing anyone who is in that situation, oh they're just a slave, of course my remarks don't apply to slaves.

So yeah, you are refusing to acknowledge the flaws in your argument or the reality of people who don't have the privilege to prioritize their own enrichment over other responsibilities. And I'm not very impressed with that.

> Does that mean that the ideas cannot be discussed at all?

Just because someone challenges your ideas doesn't mean they're trying to shut you out of the conversation. I'm engaging in conversation with you. I wouldn't respond, and certainly wouldn't respond with questions, if I just wanted you to stop talking. Again, this is not a good faith interpretation of my criticism.
by sobiolite | 2025-05-11 10:40:49+00:00
I don't understand why consciousness is considered mysterious anymore. We know intelligent systems broadly work by learning, updating and querying a predictive world model. For accuracy, a sufficiently powerful system must necessarily start to include its own state and potential actions in this world model. This creates a recursive self-knowledge that produces self-awareness. The ongoing process of analyzing and acting upon this self-model is consciousness.
by hnlmorg | 2025-05-11 10:40:53+00:00
It might be more productive to explain how this scam works instead of dismissing my counter argument with an incorrectly used meme.

I really don’t see how a learning app for students who also frequent HN is a valuable enough demographic to target. And ironically, the red flags identified would be mistakes a scammer would know not to make.

Everything about this submission can be easily explained by inexperience but it’s a lot harder to explain why it’s scam.

You could apply Occam’s Razor here and reasonably say that this being an inexperienced 16 year old is the hypothesis with the fewer assumptions.
by dissent | 2025-05-11 10:41:39+00:00
Even that's a slippery slope. If I was to say publicly "death to all agile practitioners", it's up to interpretation whether I'm serious or not. I deserve the benefit of the doubt, which is traditionally how it's been handled. Perhaps if I was successful in inciting violence, I could be held accountable for my success. That would make a lot more sense.
by timknauf | 2025-05-11 10:42:59+00:00
I’ve seen this sentiment a lot, and I do understand it but… I just feel so completely differently. The 2000s web, early web apps and Flash, the iPhone and smartphone revolution, the incredible buffet that is modern video games, virtual and mixed reality, and yes, even (imperfect, fraught) AI have all seemed as magical to me as those wonderful things from the 80s and 90s. Probably not coincidentally, many of those things have featured in my working life pretty heavily!
by tialaramex | 2025-05-11 10:43:04+00:00
Huh? What's the other "quicksort" ? Tony's famous Quicksort I'm aware of, and while you should not use this algorithm this century† in its pure form it's still in the core of good sorts, you just need other ingredients too.

So what's the diametrically opposed algorithms with the same name ?

† Don't tell C++ programmers, some of their standard libraries only stopped shipping quicksort as the default algorithm during the Biden administration.
by ang_cire | 2025-05-11 10:43:19+00:00
> why would you put my tens of thousands of users at risk, instead of emailing me and have the vulnerability fixed in an hour before disclosing

You've got it backwards.

The vuln exists, so the users are already at risk; you don't know who else knows about the vuln, besides the people who reported it.

Disclosing as soon as known means your customers can decide for themselves what action they want to take. Maybe they wait for you, maybe they kill the service temporarily, maybe they kill it permanently. That's their choice to make.

Denying your customers information until you've had time to fix the vuln, is really just about taking away their agency in order to protect your company's bottom line, by not letting them know they're at risk until you can say, "but we fixed it already, so you don't need to stop using us to secure yourself, just update!"