MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by tsevis | 2025-05-18 03:07:04+00:00
As AI-generated content floods the web, how do we preserve human originality? My article explores:

Why "grounded creativity" (rooted in real-world experience) matters more than ever How AI can enhance—not replace—human creativity Practical ways to stay original in an age of synthetic content

Thoughts? Would love to hear the HN perspective.

┌───────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ GROUNDED CREATIVITY │ │ (Human originality in the AI era) │ └───────────────┬──────────────────────┬────────────────┘ │ │ ┌───────────────▼──────┐ ┌──────────▼─────────────┐ │ WHY IT MATTERS │ │ HOW AI CHANGES IT │ ├──────────────────────┤ ├────────────────────────┤ │ ▪ Loss of human │ │ ▪ AI as a tool, not │ │ uniqueness │ │ a replacement │ │ ▪ Over-reliance on │ │ ▪ Synthetic vs. │ │ synthetic content │ │ authentic creation │ └───────────────┬──────┘ └──────────┬─────────────┘ │ │ ┌───────────────▼──────┐ ┌──────────▼─────────────┐ │ PRACTICAL STRATEGIES │ │ FUTURE OUTLOOK │ ├──────────────────────┤ ├────────────────────────┤ │ ▪ Cultivate deep │ │ ▪ Hybrid creativity │ │ real-world │ │ (Human+AI synergy) │ │ experiences │ │ ▪ Ethical boundaries │ │ ▪ Use AI for │ │ │ │ augmentation, not │ │ │ │ imitation │ │ │ └──────────────────────┘ └────────────────────────┘
by Brian_K_White | 2025-05-18 03:07:24+00:00
You don't get to have everything.

The point of a graph like that in this case is merely so that you can choose which aspects you need for a given application.

You decide which aspects you can live without to get the ones you can not live without, for a given application. Because it's either that or have a dull knife, or a broken knife, or a rusty knife, etc.

My favorite kitchen knife is tough and sharp but rusts easily. It's ok since it doesn't live in a tackle box on a boat, or in my leatherman.

At best you can have "good all-season tire" which at least doesn't completely suck to the point of failuire in any dimension but doesn't excell in any either.
by s1mon | 2025-05-18 03:07:36+00:00
There are a number of commercial solutions in this space. It's weird when there's a press release like this that acts like their solution is completely novel and unrelated to anything else.

Roadio has front and rear facing cameras with AI driven object detection to help keep cyclists and motor scooter riders safer.

https://www.roadio.com

Garmin (amongst others) has had a rear mounted radar (and bike light) system for a while. They also have one with a camera built in.

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/p/698001/

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/p/721258/
by grues-dinner | 2025-05-18 03:07:42+00:00
If anything that makes it more impressive to me, technically. It's pulling allusions to hints to information out of absurdly tiny fluctuations in the universe. Anyone, metaphorically, can just build a bigger camera and hold the shutter open for longer. Not to denigrate the engineering behind these awesome instruments, which is where my heart really is, but the design is driven by ever sneakier ways to coerce reality into telling us what's going on.

True, the image itself isn't especially exciting graphically (with the things CGI and AI are producing, what real thing even is these days?) but what it represents is.
by zyx_db | 2025-05-18 03:08:09+00:00
for point 1, i think this example is a bit biased. its not really fair to compare random shows made now to some of the greatest shows ever made.

although, i will say, it is a lot better of an experience watching old, well reviewed shows / movies, than it is to watch whatever comes out now. but again thats mainly because i can choose from some of the best productions ever.
Tech giants honestly admit they'll unleash AGI even if it kills us all
by EGreg | 2025-05-18 03:09:03+00:00
BREAKING NEWS — 2027: TECH GIANTS ADMIT THEY’LL UNLEASH AGI ANYWAY

San Francisco, CA — In a historic moment of accidental honesty, representatives from the world's top AI companies held a joint press conference to address rising global anxiety over the imminent release of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). The tone? Less reassuring than hoped.

Corporate Spokespeople, Unfiltered: OpenMetaCEO: "We get it — AGI could destroy jobs, rewrite social contracts, maybe even outcompete humanity. But our legal obligations aren’t to humanity. They’re to shareholders. If we hesitate, competitors win. So yeah, we’re pressing forward."

Googlon Spokesperson: "Most of our employees have serious ethical concerns. Internally, there's been pushback. But structurally, we're not designed to listen. We're designed to execute."

Tesla.AI Deployment Lead: "We estimate a double-digit risk of catastrophic outcomes. But that’s not actionable data from an ops standpoint. Our rollout is already automated. Honestly, there’s no off-switch anymore."

Anthropi.io Co-Founder: "We spent more on influencer partnerships than we did on long-term safety. Because safety doesn’t trend."

XAI Director of Deployment: "When people ask who’s in charge, the answer is... a lot of dashboards and incentive structures. We just optimize KPIs. It’s not evil — it’s spreadsheet-driven."

The Voice of Conscience Dr. Geoffrey Hinton, AI pioneer and former Google Brain researcher, commented remotely:

“People keep asking why the individuals inside these companies don’t stop it. But corporations aren’t people. Even if 99% of the employees — even the executives — know it’s dangerous, it doesn’t matter. The structure is set up to win a race, not preserve the track.”

Dr. Amaya Veldt, professor of AI governance at MIT, added:

“It’s not malice. It’s inertia. The entire system is optimized to accelerate. No individual can stop the machine, because the machine was never built to have a brake — only a throttle.”

Closing Remarks When asked if any companies were considering coordination to slow things down, a silence hung in the air. Then, OpenMetaCEO spoke plainly:

"We tried to talk about a pause. But every time we scheduled a call, someone launched a new model. You can't 'pause' a gold rush. You can only try to monetize the fallout."

"We do wish things were different," Googlon's rep added with a half-shrug. "But… they’re not."

:dunno: Sorry guys.

Related Headlines:

“UN Petitions OpenAI to Install a Kill Switch; OpenAI Says They Lost the Key”

“Startups Now Offering AGI Insurance (No Payouts Guaranteed)”

“Foresight is Trending Downward, Reports Say, But Share Prices Up”
by wlesieutre | 2025-05-18 03:09:38+00:00
You might also look at arms that use a vertical post with a horizontal arm coming off of it, rather than the gas spring height adjustment. They can come in a variety of heights, I think mainly because the systems are designed to allow multiple rows of screens (like a big 3x2 grid).

Off the top of my head, I know I've seen this for Knoll Sapper, which the PDF brochure (linked below) says has posts up to 32" high. Not sure if the 17" horizontal extension is enough for you, though you could also drill a hole in a desk and mount the post further forward instead of clamping on the back. Or heck, clamp it on the side or front.

See page 7 here: https://www.knoll.com/document/1352941326370/Copy%20of%20Sap...
by svat | 2025-05-18 03:10:27+00:00
The usage of "thesaurus" in English for a kind of book dates back to the first one by Peter Mark Roget in 1852, which was indeed synonyms and antonyms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roget%27s_Thesaurus see the Project Gutenberg link mentioned in another comment: https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/10681/pg10681-images.ht... (or indeed, just read the posted article here).

This is still the primary meaning of "thesaurus" in English, and contrasted with "dictionary": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesaurus

It's very unusual for a thesaurus to contain meanings (beyond the category head/name) and etymology, let alone explanation. Such things are usually found in a dictionary instead.

So it's more a question for you: where did your unusual idea of "thesaurus" come from? As one of your examples you mention dictionaries, so that's especially confusing.
by floam | 2025-05-18 03:11:32+00:00
PEPSI LOGO: four-dimensional vortex spinning infinite sugar into your brain, colors aligned with cosmic harmony, corporations bending space-time for brand immortality. RED AND BLUE: binary opposition, day-night duality, eternal beverage cycle feeding consciousness illusion. MARKETING TEAMS: trapped in cubic time distortion, scripting consumer reality inside spherical deception—only Pepsi knows the quadrants.
by solongso | 2025-05-18 03:12:37+00:00
Damaging a contributor's reputation because they didn't initially conform to your standard is vandalism. Why don't you make your suggestion for improvement and let the poster bring the post into compliance? If that's what you want, do you think that by damaging my reputation you are motivating me toward compliance with your standards? No, you're motivating me to stop contributing.

OK. I concede the point. Maybe it's not glee. Maybe it's just a misplaced conviction that punishment is the best way to motivate the behavior you are seeking.
by jitl | 2025-05-18 03:13:51+00:00
It really does not need runtime string parsing unless you want to do some kinds of manipulation. I built Notion’s sql`…` literal and “all” it does is concat the string parts arrays and concat the argument arrays so you can pass { query: string, args: PostgresArg[] } to the database. The database is the only one who needs to parse the query string.

As for syntax highlighting, that’s available in VS Code, we auto install the appropriate extension.
by kjkjadksj | 2025-05-18 03:15:45+00:00
Working with python for a while and I still don’t bother with classes. Only when I “borrow” other code do I mess with them. It just seems like a flowery way to organize functions. I prefer to just write the functions. Maybe its because my first languages lacked classes that I don’t much like to reach for them.

I don’t even like loops and prefer to functionalize them and run in parallel if sensible.

I know this makes me a bit of a python heathen but my code runs fast as a result.
by saithound | 2025-05-18 03:17:20+00:00
This would be a wrong argument even if your premise about Switzetland was factually true (it's not).

It's like praising Danish architecture for its earthquake-resistance since no Danish building ever collapsed in an earthquake. It fails to account for the fact that Denmark never gets any significant earthquakes.

You can't tell how good a system is at resisting descent into authoritarian rule unless wannabe-autocrats have tried several times, amassed some support to achieve their goals, and the democratic institutions held against them. This never happened in Switzerland, not even in the 1930s: the ability of the Swiss constitution to precent authoritarian backsliding is untested.

(But as a side note, what you're saying is not factually correct. The Swiss constitution is from 1848, and before Napoleon only Schwyz, Uri and Unterwalden would be considered nonauthorian. Many cantons, like Bern, were ruled by birthright autocratic families, and had no popular vote whatsoever.)
by Groxx | 2025-05-18 03:17:51+00:00
Surprisingly: USB-C cables do have an orientation. It comes up a lot with these kinds of female-to-female USB-C cable extenders: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CTT1FJL6 (I have not used this one, it's just an example)

>Important Note: Ensure your USB-C cables support video transmission when using this coupler for video pass-through. If the connection doesn’t work initially, try reversing the orientation of the cable’s plug to ensure proper functionality, as USB-C protocols depend on connector orientation.

AFAICT not all cables are like this, but quite a few are, and broadly it appears that it's the sockets that are reversible and are simply hiding this - cables often just use one side. So when you bridge two cables like this, you need to make sure those (unmarked) sides line up.

So I suspect one side of your connection is either damaged or cheap (and didn't fully meet the reversible spec to save money).

(but only suspect, I haven't found a way to fully validate this)
by neonsunset | 2025-05-18 03:18:14+00:00
We've had this conversation before, it's likely a waste to reply but, well, my mistake.

For those interested as to why: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43396171

A few more arguments while we're at it:

https://dotnet.microsoft.com/en-us/platform/telemetry (Linux leads with 77% of all systems invoking .NET CLI commands)

https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/src/libraries/Sy... (first-class epoll/kqueue integration with async, much like the one Go has with goroutines via netpoll)

https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/src/coreclr/gc/u... (GC implementation is cgroups-aware, unlike Go)
by bakkoting | 2025-05-18 03:20:38+00:00
Yup, or to transfer them anywhere else. One use case is for classes which allocate resources in their constructor:

class Connector { constructor() { using stack = new DisposableStack; // Foo and Bar are both disposable this.foo = stack.use(new Foo()); this.bar = stack.use(new Bar()); this.stack = stack.move(); } [Symbol.dispose]() { this.stack.dispose(); } }

In this example you want to ensure that if the constructor errors partway through then any resources already allocated get cleaned up, but if it completes successfully then resources should only get cleaned up once the instance itself gets cleaned up.
by pixl97 | 2025-05-18 03:22:04+00:00
Taking mechanical stuff apart and fixing it is one of these areas.

One of the more recent ones I watched is taking apart large wenches on a bulldozer. There is a metal plate with two bolts on it you have to take off. If you don't know what you're doing you take both bolts out and it flies apart losing stuff because there is a spring behind the mechanism. If you know what you're doing you take out one bolt then put in a bolt twice as long before taking out the second bolt, the long bolt catches the mechanism and releases the spring tension keeping all your parts in one place.
by kmeisthax | 2025-05-18 03:22:19+00:00
Because if you use a token, you don't have to pay for a certificate.

TLS PKI is designed to do one thing and one thing only: bind a keypair to a domain name. This is great for authenticating servers and terrible for authenticating clients. The question that a server wants to ask of a client is not "is this server authorized to serve this domain name", it's "is this a key I authorized to access this resource". The latter question is not just "inappropriate for the TLS PKI", it's inappropriate for any public PKI[0]. The only appropriate PKI for client authentication is for each server to run its own private client PKI.

If you insist on using client certs that are signed by the TLS PKI, then everyone who wants to connect to your API needs to buy a cert from a third-party that will provide no additional security for you or them, compared to the moral equivalent of ~/.ssh/authorized_hosts. If you have a particularly complicated server setup, then rolling your own client root would at least give you centralized issuance and revocation control.

Ok, let's say you set up your API to use client certs. You've just massively complicated the most common use case for your API: pinging it from a web browser running your JavaScript. There is no API in the web standard for a random website to enroll a client cert in your browser, and you can't specify a client cert in HTTP fetch or anything. Client certs are instead managed with the same terrible UX as the root cert store, which is deliberately obfuscated for fairly obvious "keeping the user from hurting themselves" reasons. So now you have to give your users a cert file and guide them through a bunch of nonsense to install the cert.

Furthermore, if any other website does this, now all your users have to pick which identity they want to use whenever they go to a website that wants client certs. They aren't bound to specific domain names like, say, password manager items can be. The only way you could avoid this... is by using a public client cert PKI, which means now all your users need to pay $$$ to a third party just to login to your website, which is a terrible idea.

Tokens, passwords, and passkeys avoid all of this nonsense and give you exactly what you want: client authentication, nothing more or less. TLS client certs are the sort of thing an engineer cooks up because it sounds nice and symmetrical. Oh, servers have certs, why can't clients have certs? But in practice certs solve the wrong problem and carry too much baggage for clients.

[0] Public public key infrastructure
by paulryanrogers | 2025-05-18 03:22:42+00:00
Until democracy is fixed I don't think these problems can be disconnected. But I'll admit that even an equal society could barrel toward its own destruction. I just think equal societies are less likely to, because all our livelihoods would be on the line. None could deny the problem and strong arm the government to ignore it--for the short term benefit of the few at the top.
by jauntywundrkind | 2025-05-18 03:22:54+00:00
That folks are still making new Cortex-A7 (2011) designs is wild. A-35 doesn't seem to be very popular or better.

Cortex-M33 (2016) derives–as you allude to–from ARMv8 (2015). But yeah it barely seems only barely popular, even now.

Having witnessed some of the 9p's & aughts computing, I never in a million years would have guessed microcontrollers & power efficient small chips would see so little change across a decade of time!!
by healsdata | 2025-05-18 03:23:01+00:00
Its limiting to dismiss a tool out of hand simply because you haven't encountered a situation where that tool would be useful.

Plenty of web sites allow the end-user to select colors[1], or automatically derive colors from assets provided by the end-user. For those that care about accessibility, they typically calculate contrasting colors to prevent the user from creating a non-accessible experience. A built-in CSS tool like this will, hopefully, encourage more sites to provide a basic amount of accessibility while in no way hindering those who want to build an even better experience.

It would be cool if this was more customizable like the npm contrast-color package but the blog post details why they started with white/black with intentions of changing the algorithm later.

[1] Example: https://coolors.co/8fbfe0-7c77b9-1d8a99-0bc9cd-14fff7
by SllX | 2025-05-18 03:23:02+00:00
> After the government passes a new law, opponents have 100 days to collect 50000 signatures. If they manage, the law will not take force until it's approved by a vote by the populace.

I generally hate ballot propositions within the context of California (or American States really, but I put my energy towards the State I actually live in and care the most about), but that's an interesting way to do it. Have there been any significant downsides to this specific clause[1] in Switzerland?

[1] Let me emphasize: "this specific clause" being the one I quoted. I'm not looking for a general discussion on all forms of ballot propositions whether pro or anti.
by ColonelPanek | 2025-05-18 03:24:01+00:00
Not quite. The child still has the disease and will need lifelong treatment for not only the disease itself, but also the gene editing procedure.

This procedure costing upwards of $800,000 simply trades one disease process for another.

It would be interesting to find out if this child does indeed end up getting the liver transplant that was sidelined for this new one off procedure.
by jeroenhd | 2025-05-18 03:24:02+00:00
They're used in a whole bunch of industries, but not in the sexy ones.

Renewal is the most important issue. Certificate stores often suck and for tokens there are various existing protocols for re-issuing expiring ones. For certificates, you're stuck doing your own thing.

For local applications, UI/UX of the system supposedly in charge of certs is often absolutely terrible. I've had the displeasure of working with Java key stores and I'd rather rewrite the auth mechanism than deal with that bullshit again.

The use case they would perform excellently in (centrally managed corporate networks) are also the places where you will find terrible middleboxes that will kill any protocol they don't understand.

TLS client certificates could've been what passkeys are today, and they could've been what OAuth2 tokens have become, but the terrible development experience killed them off before they could bloom. I mostly blame web browsers, who didn't bother improving their UI for certificates after the day they first implemented them. Hacking OAuth2 on top of HTTPS calls is pretty easy compared to figuring out how to refresh a user certificate.
by theamk | 2025-05-18 03:24:27+00:00
the key idea of this seems to be:

> if developers collectively insisted on pair programming [...] they could effectively shield themselves from individual metric tracking. Because there would be no such thing as individual programming effort.

This does not follow. Today, if management wants to measure productivity, they'll see how many points per sprint (or features per month etc..) does programmer do. In pair programming, they could do exactly the same, but only adding half of total ticket's points to each of participants.

This means misguided managers would still be able to calculate per-person points, and harass people if they are not doing enough. But now there will be a new reality: working with slower person means your own performance also decreases. Choosing a pair will be a strategic game, lest you face the management's wraith. But on the other hand, people who are not very fast would be able to scrape by, as long as they are paired with fast performer often enough.
by jkachmar | 2025-05-18 03:24:40+00:00
> And the rest of automakers offerings aren’t half as good.

This was true maybe even as recently as 5 years ago, but it certainly isn’t true now.

Tesla, at the top end, hasn’t been an attractive luxury proposition at least since the Hyundai Genesis & Mercedes EVs started rolling out. They had a shot at capturing the mid- to low-end market, but it looks like they’re in the process of blowing that as well.

> Hard to do in times of austerity [..]

The average American’s lifestyle is hardly austere — it _is_ precarious for very many (most?), but I don’t think that’s the same thing.

You can now get refurb EVs (e.g. a Hyundai Ionia) with <50k miles for <$15k, and that’s in a not-inexpensive part of the US (northeast).

Over the course of the next 10 years that used market is going to only grow, and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that a battery swap will be less costly than the sorts of overhauls high-mileage gasoline cars require so there _will_ be a solid used market.
by genocidicbunny | 2025-05-18 03:24:58+00:00
Unless we also significantly improve charging infrastructure, and more importantly, disallow grandfathering of the lack of charging infrastructure, that's going to be a very difficult sell. If you live in an apartment, you probably do not have reliable charging access at home. Newer buildings might have some charging spots, but you would need _all_ parking spots to have it available. Older apartments would need to somehow retrofit charging infrastructure as well, and it can't just be giving every parking spot access to a 120v socket. In a similar vein, not everyone has the ability to charge at work either, whether due to a lack of infrastructure, or their employer not being willing to pay for the electricity or the cost to install metered chargers.

Chargers also need to get much, much faster; 15 minutes for 80% might be fine if you're at a charging station that doesn't get that much traffic, but think of somewhere like the Costco gas stations. Imagine accommodating that many people charging for 15 minutes at a time instead of 3-5 minutes at a time. Not everyone can afford to spend that much time on charging their car.

There's also the fun bit about how charging an EV in some places is more expensive per mile than an ICE car, though that does often depends on the time of day you charge and what the exact price of gas is.