MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by meander_water | 2025-05-31 07:03:39+00:00
This looks interesting, but anytime security is offloaded to an LLM I am extremely skeptical. IMO the right way to do this is to enforce permissions explicitly through a AuthZ policy. Something like what Toolhive [0] is doing is the right way I think.

All MCP comms from client to server go through an SSE proxy which has AuthN and AuthZ enabled. You can create custom policies for AuthZ using Cedar [1].

[0] https://github.com/stacklok/toolhive, https://github.com/stacklok/toolhive/blob/main/docs/authz.md

[1] https://docs.cedarpolicy.com/
by throwup238 | 2025-05-31 07:03:40+00:00
Meat packaging isn’t something you can “just do.” The hard part is the equipment and manpower to disinfect a meat packing plant, which is done several times a day when in operation.

The reason regulators made it illegal is basic food safety. A meat packing facility - whether that’s an industrial plant or a small group of farmers in a commercial kitchen or whatever - is a hot and humid environment that is an ideal place for bacteria to grow. Now that’s going to happen anyway, but the public safety goal here is to minimize the bacterial load that transfers to the meat so that by the time it reaches the kitchen, the pathogens haven’t reached dangerous levels. That means an entire facility that’s designed to be sprayed down with a foaming disinfectant from wall to wall and crevice to crevice. Small groups of farmers simply can’t afford that and be competitive unless they’re already selling high end organic/free range/etc meat.

Before refrigeration, people ate meat right after slaughter or cured it. They grew the animals at so low an intensity that >80% of the population were sustenance farmers that lived a precarious life prone to starvation at any time. It just makes no sense to compare the infrastructure to feed hundreds of millions in a single country to small scale pre-industrial agriculture.
by pca006132 | 2025-05-31 07:04:12+00:00
While it is decidable, people typically never produce optimal programs even for the hot path. It is just intractable and too slow to do right now.

For register allocation and instruction selection, there is hope because it is FPT and there are algorithms to do it optimally in polynomial time, albeit with a large constant factor (FPT), making it impractical to apply to compilers as of today. For instruction scheduling, it is just too hard. If you read literature on scheduling algorithms, it is NP-hard for apparently simple instances, e.g., 2 parallel identical machines with no preemption and bounding completion time (https://www2.informatik.uni-osnabrueck.de/knust/class/), while actual microarchitecture is much more complicated than this...

Needless to say, these are already the simpler problems. The longer the program or the more profiling data you can optimize for, the more tricks you can throw at it, and most of them are NP-hard to optimize optimally.

Being NP-hard doesn't imply that you can't obtain the optimal result, but compilers that I know of do not implement them, because most users are not willing to wait for days for such a compilation to complete. Ideally, one should make something that can run on clusters of CPUs or GPUs to optimize this, and people having those clusters will typically be willing to do this because they want to optimize the program they later run on the clusters. However, to my knowledge, no one is working on this at the moment.
by godelski | 2025-05-31 07:04:23+00:00
Yet we're what? 5 years into "AI will replace programmers in 6 months"?

10 years into "we'll have self driving cars next year"

We're 10 years into "it's just completely obvious that within 5 years deep learning is going to replace radiologists"

Moravec's paradox strikes again and again. But this time it's different and it's completely obvious now, right?
by shivbhatia | 2025-05-31 07:04:30+00:00
I somehow managed to get through over a decade as a programmer before deciding to actually learn how to touch type. I was stuck at about 60 wpm with the wrong fingering, decided to invest in learning the right approach and dropped down to 30 wpm for a while, but eventually ended up at 120 wpm after a year or so. I can't overstate how much it's changed my ability to write software. Not having to think the literal characters I'm entering and instead just watching words and symbols appear on the screen at the speed of thought makes the whole experience significantly more enjoyable. Combined with getting good at the Vim keybindings which I did around the same time, it makes programming feel like a video game. Can't recommend highly enough. I used monkeytype.com for the most part.
by jacobgorm | 2025-05-31 07:04:39+00:00
I find that most Americans can touch type, but most Danes can’t. I’m Denmark touch typing used to be taught in schools as a voluntary subject, but it mostly appealed to girls who wanted to become secretaries and was eventually abandoned due to lack of interest. Nowadays the only way to learn is through online tools like Typing Club, but last time I checked it didn’t support the Danish keyboard layout. I personally used gtypist on Linux, spent a week on rote learning, best invest of time in many career.
by squigz | 2025-05-31 07:05:21+00:00
> So, I posit: touch typing doesn't need to be taught because the people who use a keyboard enough to benefit from it will learn something better automatically.

This is a pretty poor argument that can be applied to practically any skill. "Why should we teach people in a structured way? They can just learn it by doing it!"

For many people, having a structure to learn from is extremely helpful, even if they do diverge from it to learn in their own way.

Also I don't think we should focus solely on "people who will benefit from it" - presumably you're talking about people whose livelihoods depend directly on typing efficiently. What about those who only use it casually but still want to communicate effectively?
by yusina | 2025-05-31 07:05:28+00:00
> You would need to have something like networked driving, or government supported networks of driving information, to deal with the cultural factor.

Or actual intelligence. That observes its surroundings and learns what's going on. That can solve generic problems. Which is the definition of intelligence. One of the obvious proofs that what everybody is calling "AI" is fundamentally not intelligent, so it's a blatant misnomer.
by camillomiller | 2025-05-31 07:05:37+00:00
>Meanwhile EU is trying to undermine security of all citizens and Meta is promoting it.

The EU is a complex political body. Parts of it are trying that, lobbied by a toxic American big tech corporation. A corporation that carelessly enabled genocide in Myanmar, btw, so it won’t certainly have any qualms about steering a foreign political body towards its own goals.
by toyg | 2025-05-31 07:06:09+00:00
Chatting nowadays happens with thumbs.

Even in previous generations, most self-taught people get fast at hunt&peck rather than learning proper touch-typing. It is not a natural skill in any way, you need a conscious effort to stop looking and to limit your main fingers wandering.

I generally tried to keep my kids away from excessive screen usage, but I motivated them to touch-type anyway, because I always wished I'd learned it earlier than I did (in my early 30s). I see them reaping benefits already in their teenage years, knocking out school assignments very quickly and being able to focus on the content more than the typing.
by unsnap_biceps | 2025-05-31 07:07:02+00:00
While I like the simplicity of the lookup table, I find myself in larger projects to have different backoffs for different upstream services. I'll have shorter ones for services that can degrade without a large impact to service results and longer ones for services that are critical for results. I would prefer to have one algorithmically generated call that is flexible vs multiple individual functions that have different lookup tables, or generating tables and passing them in each time.
by mdp2021 | 2025-05-31 07:08:45+00:00
They may have estimated the volume of replies in those "overview" pages and shrunk the costs routing through a computationally lightweight model.

They may this way also have underestimated the reputational loss - the big umbrella of the "Ford Pinto case".

--

Edit: I was just now looking at the new Visual Capitalist's "Ranked: 2025’s 10 Largest S&P 500 Stocks". Is it possible that Alphabet being at the top with 7.6% of the weight of the 500-items set is paradoxically allowing to afford more damage?
by mbana | 2025-05-31 07:08:46+00:00
Great question!

In the past I contributed to rust-analyzer - not much but something huge but at least something.

Nowadays I only contribute to https://quran.com.

Apologies if this ain't clear but I'll give it a shot.

I will donate to anyone, be it a group or one person if they can get all the different ways of reading رواية The Quran:

1. In static digital version, i.e., as PDFs or what have you in the Saudi script. 2. All the Quran's should be colour coded, i.e., tawjeed style mushaf. 3. It should be available online at first then to Android, etc. 4. Along with the Qur'an there should be readings of that style رواية in application. Shaykh Mishary is doing this but I'm quite why he doesn't just release his entire recording out all at once on YouTube.

I just what to say this isn't an easy tasks hence why I haven't attempted doing it. Or I can simply build a well and retire with life.

If something ain't clear let me know.

Regards, - Bana
by csomar | 2025-05-31 07:09:38+00:00
I had this a few months ago with an old man. He said there are 10 billion people in the world; so I told him you are off by 2 billion. He was adamant and challenged me to a Google search. So I did just that and lo and behold there are 10 billion people according to Google.

I even took a screenshot: https://imgur.com/a/oQYKmKP

I really had nothing to say at that moment.
by ryao | 2025-05-31 07:10:34+00:00
Their CEO is a felon who plead guilty to accounting fraud:

https://milled.com/theinformation/cerebras-ceos-past-felony-...

Experienced investors will not touch them:

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/business/money-report/cer...

I estimated last year that they can only produce about 300 chips per year and that is unlikely to change because there are far bigger customers for TSMC that are ahead of them in priority for capacity. Their technology is interesting, but it is heavily reliant on SRAM and SRAM scaling is dead. Unless they get a foundry to stack layers for their wafer scale chips or design a round chip, they are unlikely to be able to improve their technology very much past the CSE-3. Compute might somewhat increase in the CSE-4 if there is one, but memory will not increase much if at all.

I doubt the investors will see a return on investment.
by ivape | 2025-05-31 07:10:40+00:00
There are innovative ways to accomplish the consistency you seek for the example application you mentioned. They are coming a lot sooner than you think, but hey this thread is a bit of a poker game before the flop, I’m just placing my bet - you can call the bluff.

We just have to wait for the cards to flip, and that’s happening on a quadratic curve (some say exponential).
by robinsonb5 | 2025-05-31 07:11:05+00:00
IceSugarPro (with its breakout board) is quite a nice board if you want something pre-assembled. Same FPGA as this new board (so also supported by the Open Source toolchain), same size SDRAM, HDMI out but PMODs for everything else.

I really like the look of this new board, though - I definitely want to get my hands on one. (I also have a Tang Nano 20K but don't like it all that much.)
by pca006132 | 2025-05-31 07:11:52+00:00
While I think the OP did not mean the compilation process is nondeterministic, I won't be surprised if it is actually non-deterministic. A lot of algorithms and data structures rely on nondeterminism for performance or security (by default). It is too easy to introduce nondeterminism accidentally, and it is tempting to use that to speed up algorithms. Also, if it relies on floating point, results on different machines and environments may be different (depending on libm and hardware implementation), which is, in some sense, nondeterministic.
by crop_rotation | 2025-05-31 07:13:55+00:00
> Basically by your exact same logic you're asking Walmart and Target to outsource their websites, which is completely insane.

No, because Walmart website being down for months is just unthinkable. If a company is so incompetent/resource deficient/use your favorite phrase to describe it/ that their e-commerce is down for a month and outlook is it will be down for more time, then something is seriously wrong with the company. Such companies are 100% going to have a much better experience with Shopify.

> If one of your core businesses is selling clothes online, and you're a large enough entity, you should write your own software to sell clothes online.

If only this was so easy. For various reasons writing non trivial software is hard, and unless these companies can make some structural changes to hire and retain very good engineers (which also is hard for various reasons for these companies), they simply have no chance of doing better than shopify.
by camillomiller | 2025-05-31 07:13:57+00:00
This baffles me like no other tech has done before. Google is betting its own core business on a pivot that relies on a massively faulty piece of technology. And as Ben Evans also says, promising that it will get better only gets you so far, it’s an empty promise. Yesterday AI overview made up an entire album by a dead Italian musician when I searched for a tribute event that was happening at a Berlin venue. It just took the name of the venue and claimed it was the most important work from that artist.

Funnily enough (not for Google), I copypasted that answer on chatGPT and it roasted AI Overview so bad on its mistakes and with such sarcasm that it even made me chuckle.
by stavros | 2025-05-31 07:14:10+00:00
I really don't understand the view that it's a "parlor trick that looks like AI". If it's not "a thing that can write code", but instead just looks like a thing that can write code (but can actually write code), it can write code. All the "no true Scotsman" stuff about what it's doing behind the scenes is irrelevant, because we have no idea what human brains are doing behind the scenes either.
by Ezhik | 2025-05-31 07:14:17+00:00
I've been messing with keybr daily for a while now and have retrained myself to do things more properly but two things about doing everything the "right" way bother me:

1. Too many keys on the right pinky - all punctuation except for `!`, `,`, `.`, plus backspace and return.

2. Opposite modifier keys rule - I just can't retrain myself for this one especially since it's a yet another key for the right pinky. I always end up only using the keys on the left side.

Not sure how to best fix those.
by tialaramex | 2025-05-31 07:15:09+00:00
> Loss of sequential consistency is in no way fatal in C++. There are several access modes that are specifically designed to avoid sequential consistency.

Sure, if you work really hard you can write a C++ program which doesn't meet the 6.9.2.2 intro.races definition of a data race but does nevertheless lose sequential consistency and so it has in some sense well-defined meaning in C++ but humans can't usefully reason about it. You'll almost certainly trip and write UB when attempting this, but assuming you're inhumanly careful or the program is otherwise very simple so that you don't do that it's an exception.

My guess is that your program will be miscompiled by all extant C++ compilers and you'll be unhappy with the results, and further that if you can get committee focus on this at all they will prioritize making your program Undefined in C++ rather than "fixing" compilers.

Just don't do this. The reason for the exclusions in 6.9.2.2 is that what we want people to do is write correct SC code but using primitives which themselves can't guarantee that, so the person writing the code must do so correctly. The reason is not that somehow C++ programmers are magicians and the loss of SC won't negatively impact the correctness of code they attempt to write, quite the contrary.
by alanfranz | 2025-05-31 07:15:56+00:00
> If anyone feels entitled over other people's sexual choices,

I don’t see how this article is suggesting that.

> we really don't care about people who refuse to get help and are holding hostile and harmful

Blackpills aren’t hostile or harmful.

By the way, if a phenomenon is large enough not to be called off as an individual’s quirk, I think society SHOULD care. Something is possibly wrong. And this has large impact on society itself.
by danpalmer | 2025-05-31 07:16:39+00:00
I switched to Dvorak twice. Once in high school because I thought it would be fun, but I bought a labelled keyboard cover and never really learnt it.

The second time, 5 years into my career, I did it for health reasons, and my hands hurt much less as a result. This time though I didn’t get any keyboard covers, didn’t have a relabelled keyboard, and didn’t learn the key mapping. I used an onscreen reference only, and phased it out after a few days. I switched cold-turkey on day one of a Christmas break, made sure to do some practice each day, and 2.5 weeks later when I went back to work I was touch typing Dvorak, albeit slowly.

Nowadays I type fast and get nothing out of looking at the keyboard. I normally use blank or QWERTY labels. And it’s great.

I don’t think I could have taught myself touch typing on QWERTY because I was already too ingrained with bad habits, but switching layout was a great opportunity to start from scratch and get it right.
by robinsonb5 | 2025-05-31 07:17:11+00:00
Selling them nice and cheap is great if you're going to do one batch as a project and then move on to other things.

If you're still going to be selling them next year and the year after that, you don't want it to become a burden or a chore - it has to feel like it's worth your while to be psychologically sustainable.
by vintermann | 2025-05-31 07:18:20+00:00
Yes, 5x5 is small enough that all backtracking can be codified into easily human-accessible rules.

* 5, 0, 1 1 1, 2 2, 3 1 and 3 1 are immediately solved

* 4 lets you set 3 squares immediately

* 3, 2 1 and 1 2 let you set 1 square immediately
by flowerthoughts | 2025-05-31 07:18:24+00:00
> But in the end, society owes individuals nothing when it comes to finding romantic partners. it would benefit society if more people paired up, it's healthier for everyone involved and for society at large. But the strict social law that must be upheld is that individuals either adapt to the preferences of their desired romantic partners or to living a celibate life and all the consequences that come with that. There is no third option that is valid. They're not involuntary celibates, they are voluntarily maladapted.

There's also the practice of having parents/congregation decide on marriage partner. I wonder if some of the would-be incels have traditionally been masked by that. Society (or rather, the economy) has strong reasons to make children happen; stronger than I think you make it out to be. It will find a new way to do match making.
by audunw | 2025-05-31 07:18:31+00:00
There are many parts of Norway where it’s hard or impossible to start diesel cars without block heaters. EVs are indeed much easier to start and more reliable.

The postal service changes all jts vehicles on Svalbard to electric. Svalbard is an island close to the North Pole.

I think many EVs have resistive heating elements as backup to the heat pump? But it’s brutal on range of course.
by hd4 | 2025-05-31 07:19:43+00:00
Given this is a sociological phenomenon, it makes more sense to give them a more scientific designation even though some of their members may have called themselves in an ironic sense.

"Incel" is now widely used as a negative-connotation catch-all term for young loner men almost with the implication that they chose this life for themselves rather than being denied opportunities by society.
by throwaway2037 | 2025-05-31 07:19:52+00:00
Why do people think Goldman pays software developers so well? They do not. They pay whatever is required compared to their competition (mostly other ibanks). There is a tiny sliver (less than 5%) of the dev staff who work in front office and are called "Strats". (Some other banks have "Strats" [Morgan?] or put you into a quant team to pay you more [JPM/UBS/etc].) They make about 25-50% more money compared to vanilla software devs in the IT division.
by michaelsalim | 2025-05-31 07:19:59+00:00
What taught me to touch type was moving to a split keyboard. Using my old method was slow since my hands naturally wanted to press the keys on the other side. So I was basically "forced" to learn it.

Now it's second nature and I can't imagine how I did it before. I'm not too concerned about speed since I was plenty fast previously. I think I'm maybe 10% faster. But the difference in comfort is night and day.
by camillomiller | 2025-05-31 07:20:21+00:00
Remember when Apple was roasted to hell anytime Maps would push you to get a wrong turn? Or when Google Maps would take you to the wrong place at the wrong time (like a sketchy neighborhood)? Those were all news stories they had to do PR crisis management for. Now they slap a disclaimer like that and we’re all good to go. The amount of public opinion forgiveness these technologies are granted is disproportionate and disheartening.
by gsundeep | 2025-05-31 07:21:01+00:00
MCP Defender sits between the MCP client and server. If you use Cursor for example, MCP Defender rewrites your Cursor MCP config file so that all MCP servers point to the MCP Defender proxy. So the tool calls are scanned before they make it to the server. The responses from the servers are also scanned although this is configurable (disabling it speeds up scans).
by eddythompson80 | 2025-05-31 07:21:03+00:00
What about what is hard to understand?

Google did it because it's better for Google, yes. They no longer have to deal with people trying to hack SEO. Now you would have to figure out how to influence the training process of google to hijack that box. So it's better for Google to move to AI Overview. What's your point here?

I say Google is in a bad position morally or in terms of "doing the right thing" not that one would really expect it from a corporation per se. There is a distinction you know.

Google introduced the box as "Excerpt from a search result" box. They traditionally put a lot of care into their search quality and it showed and built trust with their users. Over the years, the search quality dropped. Whether it was less attention from Google, fundamentally harder problem to solve with far more motivated attackers. Yet, the intrusion of bullshit website in the "Excerpt from a search result" box still let you decide that you are not gonna trust medical advice from "mikeInTheDeep.biz" it wasn't ideal that they build trust then let it slip, but being able to see a source with a quote makes it useful when you trust the source.

With AI Overview, you either trust it all, don't trust any of it, use it as confirmation bias, don't
by kn81198 | 2025-05-31 07:22:18+00:00
I was hoping it would speak to the second part more - why is it worth it?

I get the arguments in the abstract sense, you want the tool to be background, maximum focus spent in flow. But in my experience I’m rarely chugging out multiple WPM constant typing. This is as a software engineer coding on Python predominantly. Plus the advent of CoPilots along with autocomplete IDEs I am not even typing as much as before. Granted, I am spending less time looking at the keyboard because I have the key sequences imprinted in my head now, and that feels nice.

The blocker in flow is rarely the time I spend pecking out keys. So what am I missing, how much is it truly worth it?