MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by firtoz | 2025-05-09 09:04:27+00:00
It's very marmite. I used to hate it when it was vscode's crappy copilot. Now with Cursor and Windsurf, after some onboarding, I find it indispensable. I have used AI for coding for 3 separate roles: - freelancer - CTO - employee

And in all 3 cases, AI has increased my productivity, and I could ship things even when I'm really sleepy or if I have very little time between things, I can send a prompt to an agent and then review things, and then when I have more time, I can clean up some of the mess.

Now my stance is really at "Whoever doesn't take advantage of it is NGMI"

You're specifically very wrong at "LLM's cannot do: following a formal spec in a particular problem domain". It does take skill to ensure that they will, though, for sure.

TLDR: Skill issue
by mrgriffin | 2025-05-09 09:05:17+00:00
> `foo :: Semigroup a, Traversable t => t a -> a` I already know that whatever is passed to this function can be traversed and have it's sum computed. It's impossible to pass something which doesn't satisfy both of those constraints as this is a specification given at the type level which is checked at compile-time.

To add to your point, I don't think foo can even be implemented (more accurately: is not total) because neither `Semigroup a` or `Traversable t` guarantee a way to get an `a`.

I think you'd need either `Monoid a` which has `mempty`, or `(Foldable1 t, Traversable t)` which guarantees that there's at least one `a` available.
by southernplaces7 | 2025-05-09 09:05:55+00:00
I'd suggest you fixate just a bit less on just the media frenzy around the American example of Trump and his grab bag of incompetent nodding clowns in congress and cabinet for examples of authoritarianism in action. My comment was intended more broadly, because the problem is indeed broader.

There's no shortage of authoritarian governments all over the world, many of which use exactly the guise of collective purpose or some other similar nonsense to justify their destructive, repressive activities..
by throwaway_0351 | 2025-05-09 09:06:11+00:00
I see worrying trends in my office.

Developers (often juniors) use LLM code without taking time to verify it. This leads to bugs and they can't fix it because they don't understand the code. Some senior developers also trust the tool to generate a function, and don't take the time to review it and catch the edge cases that the tool missed.

They rely on ChatGPT to answer their questions instead of taking time to read the documentation or a simple web search to see discussions on stack overflow or blogs about the subject. This may give results in the short term, but they don't actually learn to solve problems themselves. I am afraid that this will have huge negative effects on their career if the tools improve significantly.

Learning how to solve problems is an important skill. They also lose access to the deeper knowledge that enable you to see connections, complexities and flows that the current generation of tools are unable to do. By reading the documentation, blogs or discussions you are often exposed to a wider view of the subject than the laser focused answer of ChatGPT

There will be less room for "vibe coders" in the future, as these tools increasingly solve the simple things without requiring as much management. Until we reach AGI (I doubt it will happen within the next 10 years) the tools will require experienced developers to guide them for the more complex issues. Older experienced developers, and younger developers who have learned how to solve problems and have deep knowledge, will be in demand.
by vidarh | 2025-05-09 09:06:29+00:00
My first use of the internet was dial-up e-mail only exchange via UUCP to a local BBS that exchanged mail every 6 hours (might have been 4), and so to be as effective as possible, I'd prepare all my e-mails including mails to the e-mail<->web gateway at CERN so I could exchange a big batch right before the time slot. Often their exchange took long enough that if I sent the messages to the CERN bot first, I'd get the response included when I downloaded the replies after they'd exchanged with their upstream. Then I had a 6 hour window to figure out what to include in the next batch...

100% with you that how you access something can add constraints and stress - in my case there while we paid per minute, the big factor was the time windows. To maximise utility you wanted to include something useful in as many of the exchanges as possible.

With Claude Code as it is now, I often clear context more often than ideal because it will drive up cost. I could probably add a lot more details to CLAUDE.md in my repos, but it'll drive up tokens as well.

Some of it I'll still do because it affects speed as well, but it'll be nice not to have to pay attention to it.
by Agraillo | 2025-05-09 09:07:13+00:00
- OP mentioned this briefly with the plans to expand in 2021 [1] (Good old google still useful : [ "Steve next com" before:2025 ] )

- Also excluding rare words from the search allows finding several AI Summarizers for Hacker News [ "Steve next com" -amazed ]

[1] https://blog.hayman.net/2021/02/07/business-cards-i-have-kno...
by rjsw | 2025-05-09 09:07:35+00:00
And for a description of how to build a computer with loaded microcode you could start with Mick and Brick [1] (PDF). It describes using AMD 2900 series [2] components, the main alternative at the time was to use the TI 74181 ALU [3] and build your own microcode engine.

[1] https://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/www.bitsavers.org/compon... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Am2900 [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/74181
by ratatoskrt | 2025-05-09 09:07:55+00:00
This is not at all how laws actually work. If you sell a product to customers in a specific country, you generally have to comply with local laws. You might be able to avoid this if you're very small and your service is entirely virtual. However, as long as Starlink needs to provide their customers with physical hardware, there are numerous ways to enforce regulations.

And you can always go after people - and I mean both Starlink executives and customers.
by toofy | 2025-05-09 09:08:13+00:00
while it wouldn’t surprise me to learn they might be discussing this, but if they were it would almost certainly be in disgust—opus dei is very very extreme in their dislike of ideas such as those from pope leo.

one of my grandparents dabbled, and every single one of them i’ve met were very… trying to be kind here… veerrry very into the church. not a normal into the church, much more extreme. i’m desperately trying not to use the c word, but it really does fit. if one finds themselves being taken in, truly, please, take just a lil bit and learn how orgs like scientology and heavens gate etc… recruit people. the recruitment similarities are uncanny. the after effects are uncanny.
by jiggawatts | 2025-05-09 09:08:56+00:00
I think you found a bug, but you were doing something that was never going to work, and you reported it in the wrong place.

The right place for this kind of question is the GitHub Issue tracker for CoreWCF, where you'll find several related issues. You're not the first one to hit bugs in streaming mode, which is... fragile. Just turning HTTPS on or off can break it: https://github.com/CoreWCF/CoreWCF/issues/1391

Unbounded streaming is something WCF was not designed to support, and hence CoreWCF doesn't support it either. CancellationTokens, etc... might improve things in case of accidental disconnection of a client session, but in general WCF expects streamed responses to have a finite length and be explicitly terminated with an end-of-stream by the server.

E.g.: read the end of this section: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/wcf/featu...

"Streamed transfers end and the message is closed when the stream reaches the end of file (EOF). When sending a message (returning a value or invoking an operation), you can pass a FileStream and the WCF infrastructure subsequently pulls all the data from that stream until the stream has been completely read and reached EOF."

Fundamentally, WCF is a message-oriented RPC system. It has many issues with streaming: it has to be explicitly enabled, it is incompatible with many features, etc...

Just "read between the lines" in your stack trace! It mentions XML encoding in several places, but XML as used in RPC uses a "tree" structure which must be terminated with closing tags.

You might be able to shoehorn unbounded streams into CoreWCF by implementing custom channels and encodings, but at that point it isn't really WCF any more!

The bug is that CoreWCF really should give up and stop writing if the client is disconnected. Stepping through its code, it does look like it loses track of the CancellationToken at some point, probably riiiight here: https://github.com/CoreWCF/CoreWCF/blob/067f83b490332120f45e...

Note the comments surrounding it talking about things like "TODO: Verify that the cancellation token is honored for timeout" and "Since HTTP streams don't support timeouts, we can't just use TimeoutStream here." That sounds unfinished to me.

I can't be sure, but there seem to be some design flaws that also contribute to this bug. E.g.: CoreWCF uses synchronous writes to ASP.NET Core's pipeline, which is... also a buggy mess because it is so rarely used.

Then, somehow, it is still writing to a socket that is long gone, which is really odd. It really does feel like there's at least a DoS security bug here, either in ASP.NET when operating in sync mode or in CoreWCF. The issue is that malicious clients could easily request many large responses, disconnect, and the server would keep processing the requests for hours and hours.
by anonfordays | 2025-05-09 09:13:35+00:00
>One thing I will say though, is that proof-of-work alone isn't a solution for ddos mitigation and bot protection! I've seen attackers using a mass of proxies and headless browsers to solve the challenge

If you make the challenge sufficiently difficult enough, it should mitigate this no?

>or even writing code to extract and solve the challenge directly (https://github.com/lizthegrey/tor-fetcher).

Similarly if the challenge is difficult, wouldn't matter where it's solved.

I'm not sure why one would use Anubis over haproxy-protection.
by palata | 2025-05-09 09:15:03+00:00
Deal.

Say I ask "How to do X in settings.gradle?" and it is closed as a duplicate to "How to do X in build.gradle?". I know how to do X in build.gradle, I know it is not the same as doing X in settings.gradle (even if it's is twice the same X), and I know how to do X in settings.gradle (because I just had a need and found a solution without the help of StackOverflow). So I post an answer right away.

Can you explain the reasoning, or do you need it more concrete because you're absolutely sure you know better?

Because what's clear to me is that those (because it required multiple votes) who closed it as duplicate have no clue how it works. They obviously stopped at "X == X, it's a duplicate".

At some point I got into the habit of adding notes like "Note: it is not a duplicate of A because [...] and it is not a duplicate of B because [...]", which honestly made the question worse for those who actually understand it (just for the sake of pleasing those who would close it as duplicate). Spoiler: they closed it as a duplicate of A.

But stay happy in your world where you know everything, I'm not coming back anyway.
by rsynnott | 2025-05-09 09:15:19+00:00
> knowing this is the only country where this happens

So, in this case, it is actually _not_; you have a blueprint. Quite a few democratic countries have gone down the personality-cult-authoritarianism rabbit hole in the last few decades; Russia, Turkey, Hungary would be obvious developed-world examples. Some have pulled back from the brink (arguably Poland, for instance).
by jjav | 2025-05-09 09:17:34+00:00
While I sbsolutely agree there needs to be laws preventing account bans for any website larger than some threshold, this is also a reminder why it is so incredibly vital to support open standards that are not owned by anyone. Like email, IRC.

Every walled garden with a single corporate owner will 100% guaranteed abuse that ownership power.

The only way forward is open protocols that interoperate without anyone having a controlling interest.
by dspillett | 2025-05-09 09:17:57+00:00
There already exists an app that will, from photos of your pile, pick out models you can make from a large library of existing models. Though IIRC that has been around long enough that it isn't quite using what people are currently calling AI (instead using older ML techniques for brick identification, and a basic DB search to pick out the valid plans for the resulting list of bricks).
by selfhoster11 | 2025-05-09 09:18:31+00:00
Biblically, sex should only take place within a marriage. If it takes place within a marriage, the sex is sanctified, and non-sinful. Any sex that takes place outside the context of a marriage, is inherently sinful. That means adultery, abuse, and so on. Same-sex individuals simply cannot marry within the Biblical meaning of the term, which means that their sexual activity will not be sanctified, and will therefore be a sinful action by nature of what it is.

Being a homosexual or feeling attraction to your own sex is not sinful - it's a very difficult temptation that, with God's help, you are supposed not to give into. It's acting on this same-sex attraction that is sinful, in much the same way as acting on attraction to your neigbor's wife would be sinful.
by metalman | 2025-05-09 09:18:46+00:00
new phone, browser, computer, device, I turn off all the "help", except of course the search inside the os, which has no settings itself, but in that one case it actualy turns up stuff that does not show anywhere else. So say you avoid an epileptic incident by reducing the flash and jiggle rate in the search bar, then begins wading through the egregious search jacking that is reurned as "results", it's so bad that businesse's have started naming themselves ,location adjective, ie: where and what, so that they at least rank on.the first page below amazon's auto generated result
by jrvarela56 | 2025-05-09 09:18:59+00:00
This applies to coding agents. If the agent can't run the code, it's unlikely that it can produce working code. Add to running: linting, running tests, compiling, code review and any other tool/process humans do to check if software is 'good' or working.

If the agent can apply these processes to the output, then we're on our way to getting good chunk of our work done for us. Even from the product pov, if the agent is allowed to experiment by making deployments and check user-facing metrics, it eventually could build software product - but we should still solve the coding part as it seems easier to objectively verify quickly.
by rsynnott | 2025-05-09 09:20:03+00:00
There are few if any examples of a major absolute monarchy going non-absolute without _some_ sort of revolution (often a kind of limited aristocratic one which may not get _called_ a revolution).

Going from non-absolute to purely ceremonial or non-existent is easier, but generally breaking the power of the monarch in the first place does require some sort of revolution.
by vidarh | 2025-05-09 09:20:22+00:00
A couple of tips if you're just starting with it:

The two worst ways of burning API credits I've found with Claude Code are:

1. Getting argumentative/frustrated with the model if it goes off the rails and continuing to try to make something work when the model isn't getting anywhere.

If it really isn't getting something in the first few prompts, stop and rethink. Can you go back and set a smaller task? Like writing test cases that it's broken approach would fail? If it's not making forward progress after a couple of prompts, it's not likely to unless you split up the task and/or provide more details. This is how you burn $10 instead of $0.60 for a task that "should" be simple. It's bad at telling you something is hard.

2. Think about when you either /compact (trims the context but retains important details) or clear the context entirely. E.g. always clear when moving to another task unless they're closely related. Letting it retain a long context is a surefire way of burn through a lot (and it also slows you down a lot, not least because there's a bug that affects some of us - maybe related to TERM settings? no idea - where in some cases it will re-print the entire history to the terminal, so between tasks it's useful to quit and restart)

Also use /init, but also ask it to update CLAUDE.md with lessons learned regularly. It's pretty good at figuring things out, such as how my custom ORM for a very unusual app server I'm working on works, but it's a massive waste of tokens to have it re-read the ORM layer every time instead of updating CLAUDE.md.
by rsynnott | 2025-05-09 09:21:11+00:00
> The main one that comes to my mind is the British monarchy (to the extent that they don't really have much power)

They don't have much power due to _many, many revolutions_; they may not generally get called that, but the wars leading up to the Magna Carta, and later the English Civil War, were clearly revolutions against the monarchy, and successfully limited its power.
by IcePic | 2025-05-09 09:22:28+00:00
From and older perspective, we used to find things like "having 378238 drivers for matrix and line printers noone uses", so while they may not eat cpu resources and possibly zero ram too, every user had to install them and only 0.01% needed them to be included in the OS installation.

Guess the same would go for a word processor that comes with thousands of super small variations of Times New Roman where basically one would suffice, so just because you want to write a standard text document on your machine you also got to install tons and tons of fonts, icon packs, 'funny' clipart and so forth.

For things like drivers and fonts, depending on your OS, it may actually consume resources if the OS keeps an active list of what you can choose from, and no, it will not make your machine swap in itself, but if you feel it is unnecessary, then "bloat" would be a good word for the extras you never use or need.
by gavinray | 2025-05-09 09:23:35+00:00
Curious anecdote:

I've weight trained most of my life.

For a significant portion of it, I used straps for movements like deadlift and lat pulldowns where the muscles doing the movement were stronger than my ability to hold on to the weight.

This led to me having a relatively weak grip compared to the rest of my strength.

I wonder if this would have been a poor measure for me, due to having outsized non-grip strength.
by easyThrowaway | 2025-05-09 09:24:02+00:00
It depends on what you consider "coding".

For me it's mainly adding quick and dirty hooks to Wordpress websites from berating marketing c-suits for websites that are gonna disappear or never visited anymore in less than a few months.

For that, whatever Claude spits out is more than enough. I'm reasonably confident I'm not going to write much better code in the less-than-30-minutes I'm allowed to spend to fix whatever issue comes up.
by Imanari | 2025-05-09 09:25:05+00:00
Same here, I'd even say you made the learning curve sound worse than it is, no offence :)

This is my workflow for 90% of tasks:

1) /ask: I want to do X. / How would you do X? / What options do I have for X?

2) (optional) /ask>: make these adaptations / consider this / follow up question.

3) "go ahead" (this defaults to /code mode)

For a model I like the style of Sonnet3.7 best.

One caveat: I add my files manually. Knowing what you want and where you want it is 90% of the game and this is where LLMs usually get it wrong.
by suddenlybananas | 2025-05-09 09:25:32+00:00
> I wonder if Carthage had beaten Rome, the Phoenicians would take away the "ancient Mediterranean genius" slot away from the Greeks, since the availability of historical materials would be reversed.

I don't think we owe the survival of Greek sources to the Romans exclusively. Had Rome been destroyed and wiped out, we wouldn't have Latin texts, but the Hellenistic kingdoms could have carried on and Greek would have remained a prestige language in the Eastern Mediterranean.
by turtleyacht | 2025-05-09 09:25:40+00:00
Packages may support compilation flags, but (realistically) consumers don't want to bother, and releasers are not obligated.

Instead, AI creates ed(1) scripts that refactor the code. Not only the rewritten code; the transform must be human readable.

These codemods modify library source at buildtime. If you don't want UI, they get edited out or swapped in as no-ops.

Maybe we could monetize code edits. However, each successive edit has to reward preceding ones. Like a chip wafer, each step makes it more valuable.

How to do that?
by ViewTrick1002 | 2025-05-09 09:25:47+00:00
You still haven’t been able to answer why we should waste money on new built nuclear power.

It costs 5-10x as much, does not integrate well with renewables due to the capital structure and takes 15-20 years to build from political decision to operational plant.

We need to decarbonize now. Not extend the life of fossil assets for decades waiting for nuclear power to come online. With this nuclear power producing a fraction of the TWh compared to if the same money went into renewables and storage.

Wasting money on enormous handouts to the nuclear industry is not ”doing as much as possible to reduce emissions”. It is a dogwhistle from climate change deniers to extend the life of fossil assets to stymie their disruption by renewables.

I don’t think you’ve kept up with the renewable industry. The absolute explosion we are seeing is because renewables and storage today are cheaper than fossil fuels.

It started as feelgood moonshot decades ago. Today companies and countries are at a competitive advantage if they can retool their fossil dependent processes and systems to renewables.
by amelius | 2025-05-09 09:26:04+00:00
> “At this point it's difficult not to suspect their awful 0pSec is a choice, and that there are specific people (ahem cough cough the Russians cough) to whom they're leaking secrets, with incompetence being merely plausible deniability for their true, treasonous agenda,” one critic wrote on Mastodon.

Good point.
by calgoo | 2025-05-09 09:26:19+00:00
There are safe guards for information not to leak. Those safe guards make it very hard to get the info, not impossible, but very hard. Walking into a government office and plugging in your personal Macbook, and running whatever software you want with "god" powers on the network makes it a lot easier to gain access to whatever data is required. Even if its unintentional (big if) from the DOGE's side, at this level you are target by state actors and they will get to your personal devices if they want.
by vidarh | 2025-05-09 09:26:53+00:00
I tested Aider a few times, and gave up because at the time it was so bad - it might be time to try it again, and I'll add that my experience with seeing how Claude Code works for me while lots of other people struggle with it suggests to me that my experience with Aider might well be that my style of working just meshes better with Claude Code than Aider.

Claude Code was the first assistant that gelled for me, and I use it daily. It wrote the first pass of multi-monitor support for my window manager. It's written the last several commits of my Ruby X11 bindings, including a working systray example, where it both suggested the whole approach and implemented it, and tested it with me just acting as a clicking monkey (because I haven't set up any tooling to let it interact with the GUI) when it ran test scripts.

I think you just needs to test the two side by side and see what works for you.

I intend to give Aider a go at some point again, as I would love to use an open source tool for this, but ultimately I'll use the one that produces better results for me.