MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Lerc | 2025-05-05 22:31:26+00:00
>I still think that, regardless of any copyright violation by the corporation in acquiring the content, that training with the data doesn't (or shouldn't) somehow taint the resulting model.

Yes. Building the data set, acquiring the data set, training the model, using the model, and using the output of a model are all separate actions, it is not necessarily the case that any legal standing in one act transfers down the chain.

It's certainly not going to be resolved by a single case.
by nobody9999 | 2025-05-05 22:31:30+00:00
>I wonder if anyone has made it easy to run the Pi Hole software on regular Unix-like systems without containers and without machine specific binaries. Perhaps I'll have to give that a try some time.

I have done so for four or five years.

Well, with x86_64 binaries -- but I could compile the code myself if I wanted.

No containers, just a Linux (Fedora) VM.
by ValdikSS | 2025-05-05 22:31:58+00:00
In Europe and Asia there was once popular Canon LBP-1120, a 2002-2004 model. You can't use it in modern OS as the driver is for 32-bit Windows only, hence these devices could be bought as low as $7 on flea market.

These printers are still great! They sturdy and unkillable. And they are supported in the print server :P
by jwilber | 2025-05-05 22:32:03+00:00
A stat no doubt brought to us by genai-automated scraping.

FWIW, this post seems longer than most of OPs usual posts.

I’ll also add: as a longtime user of em-dashes, the constant low-effort dismissal of any writing using an em-dash as “must be genai!” is super annoying. So much so that I’ve made an effort to stop using them in my writing.

There’s some poetic irony in using genai to dismiss someone else’s work for perceived use of genai.
by ta8645 | 2025-05-05 22:32:07+00:00
For whatever it's worth, I tried setting up a quick Swiss chess tournament, and got a little confused about the stages. I think I may have set up two by mistake, at least, the "previous" button was visible when I was editing the stage I created.

And it appears that Teams are required, even though for a chess tournament like mine, each player is just an individual, and there are no teams involved. So it didn't really feel like a good fit.

None of this is meant as a criticism, just a data point.
by woodson | 2025-05-05 22:32:33+00:00
Human-to-human conversational patterns are highly specific to cultural and contextual aspects. Sounds like I’m stating the obvious, but developers regularly disregard that and then wonder why things feel unnatural for users. The “median delay” may not be the most useful thing to look at.

To properly learn more appropriate delays, it can be useful to find a proxy measure that can predict when a response can/should be given. For example, look at Kyutai’s use of change in perplexity in predictions from a text translation model for developing simultaneous speech-to-speech translation (https://github.com/kyutai-labs/hibiki).
by Reason077 | 2025-05-05 22:32:35+00:00
The best, most human-like AI voice chat I've seen yet is Sesame (www.sesame.com). It has delays, but fills them very naturally with normal human speech nuances like "hmmm", "uhhh", "hold on while I look that up" etc. If there's a longer delay it'll even try to make a bit of small talk, just like a human conversation partner might.
by minimaxir | 2025-05-05 22:32:42+00:00
Of special note is Ann Telnaes of the Washington Post who won the Pulitzer for Illustrated Reporting and Commentary, who no longer works at the Post as she resigned in protest after one of her cartoons was killed by editors, presumably because it depicted owner Jeff Bezos in a negative light: https://anntelnaes.substack.com/p/why-im-quitting-the-washin...
by moralestapia | 2025-05-05 22:33:18+00:00
Hmm ...

I probably need to clarify what I'm talking about, so that peeps like @JumpCrisscross can get a better grasp of it.

I do not mean the total market share of the category of businesses that could be labeled as "AI companies", like Microsoft or NVIDIA, on your first link.

I will not talk about your second link because it does not seem to make sense within the context of this conversation (zero mentions or references to market share).

What I mean is:

* The main product that OpenAI sells is AI models (GPT-4o, etc...)

* OpenAI does not make hardware. OpenAI is not in the business of cloud infrastructure. OpenAI is not in the business of selling smartphones. A comparison between OpenAI and any of those companies would only make sense for someone with a very casual understanding of this topic. I can think of someone, perhaps, who only used ChatGPT a couple times and inferred it was made by Apple because it was there on its phone. This discussion calls for a deeper understanding of what OpenAI is.

* Other examples of companies that sell their own AI models, and thus compete directly with OpenAI in the same market that OpenAI operates by taking a look at their products and services, are Anthropic (w/ Claude), Google (w/ Gemini) and some others ones like Meta and Mistral with open models.

* All those companies/models, together, make up some market that you can put any name you want to it (The AI Model Market TM)

That is the market I'm talking about, and that is the one that I estimated to be 90%+ which was pretty much on point, as usual :).

1: https://gs.statcounter.com/ai-chatbot-market-share

2: https://www.ctol.digital/news/latest-llm-market-share-mar-20...
by vindarel | 2025-05-05 22:33:24+00:00
oh, hello. Yes, you write "I was surprised by the absence of a quickstart page to help me set up a simple server", that's spreading FUD. Many such tutorials have been written.

> I could not find a quick tutorial for Caveman

But what about Caveman's own README? It's a tutorial.

You would phrase differently I could not discuss it (like your first sentences on CL's documentation state in general). The "absence", I can. Words are important.

> triggered

yeah obviously, and by the fact that I put efforts to improve CL's (web) documentation situation.

> hostile

abrupt and impatient, yet relevant? I make some points.
by IAmGraydon | 2025-05-05 22:33:35+00:00
Yeah good luck with that. The statute that gives presidents emergency tariff powers explicitly exempts movies.

> The authority granted to the President by this section does not include the authority to regulate or prohibit, directly or indirectly [...] the importation from any country, or the exportation to any country, whether commercial or otherwise, regardless of format or medium of transmission, of any information or informational materials, including but not limited to, publications, films, posters, phonograph records, photographs, microfilms, microfiche, tapes, compact disks, CD ROMs, artworks, and news wire feeds.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1702
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-05-05 22:33:56+00:00
> this has some baked assumptions about cycle time and improvement per cycle and whether there's a ceiling

To be precise, it assumes a low variability in cycle time and improvement per cycle. If everyone is subjected to the same limits, the first-mover advantage remains insurmountable. I’d also argue that whether there is a ceiling matters less than how high it is. If the first AGI won’t hit a ceiling for decades, it will have decades of fratricidal supremacy.
by ben_w | 2025-05-05 22:34:02+00:00
> Edit: because if "AGI" doesn't mean that... then what means that and only that!?

"Agentic AI" means that.

Well, to some people, anyway. And even then, people are already arguing about what counts as agency.

That's the trouble with new tech, we have to invent words for new stuff that was previously fiction.

I wonder, did people argue if "horseless carriages" were really carriages? And "aeroplane" how many argued that "plane" didn't suit either the Latin or Greek etymology for various reasons?

We never did rename "atoms" after we split them…

And then there's plain drift: Traditional UK Christmas food is the "mince pie", named for the filling, mincemeat. They're usually vegetarian and sometimes even vegan.
by fc417fc802 | 2025-05-05 22:36:20+00:00
> It’s generally difficult to quantify such risks in any meaningful manner

According to the literature 33 out of 100 patients who underwent this operation in the US within the past 10 years died. 90% of those had complicating factors. You [ do / do not ] have such a factor.

Who knows if any given layman will appreciate the particular quantification you provide but I'm fairly certain that data exists for the vast majority of serious procedures at this point.

I've actually had this exact issue with the veterinarian. I've worked in biomed. I pulled the literature for the condition. I had lots of different numbers but I knew that I didn't have the full picture. I'm trying to quantify the possible outcomes between different options being presented to me. When I asked the specialist, who handles multiple such cases every day, I got back (approximately) "oh I couldn't say" and "it varies". The latter is obviously true but the entire attitude is just uncooperative bullshit.

> puts you in a damned-if-does, damned-if-it-doesn’t-work-out situation

Not really. Don't get me wrong, I understand that a litigious person could use just about anything to go after you and so I appreciate that it might be sensible to simply refuse to answer. But from an academic standpoint the future outcome of a single sample does not change the rigor of your risk assessment.

> Doctors are in no way incentivised to do so

Don't they use quantifications of risk to determine treatment plans to at least some extent? What's the alternative? Blindly following a flowchart? (Honest question.)

> The returned chance of 1/3 probably had an error margin of +/-33% itself

What do you mean by this? Surely there's some error margin on the assessment itself but I don't see how any of us commenting could have any idea what it might have been.
by owebmaster | 2025-05-05 22:36:34+00:00
> the idea that LLMs are therefore in some sense and to some degree human-like.

This is 100% true, isn't it? It is based on the corpus of humankind knowledge and interaction, it is only expected that it would "repeat" human patterns. It also makes sense that the way to evolve the results we get from it is to mimic human organization, politics, sociology in the a new layer on top of LLMs to surpass current bottlenecks, just like they were used to evolve human societies.
by aucisson_masque | 2025-05-05 22:38:36+00:00
Israël have different interest than the usa.

Today they may collide in most instances, who's to say tomorrow it will still be the case. For instance when Iran gets the nuclear bomb and threaten Israel with it ?

An encrypted messaging system, used by the American government, is in my opinion even worst than the supposed Huawei 5g antenna data collection.

Huawei wouldn't have had access to secret talk between top government official, at least not decrypted.
by toast0 | 2025-05-05 22:40:22+00:00
If you're really serious about DNS interception, you'd setup something where

a) you stop accepting A lookups, because it's 2025 and IPv4 only is dead (let's pretend anyway)

b) for each AAAA lookup, return a new IPv6 address that you'll NAT to the real address (you can use this for NAT64 if you want to let clients connect to IPv4 hosts). Then only let clients connect to these IPv6 addresses you setup.

If someone smuggles address resolution through, outside of DNS, their clients can't connect.

(this is going to be a big PITA, but that's how these things go)
by czhu12 | 2025-05-05 22:40:53+00:00
This is exactly why I built https://canine.sh -- basically for indie hackers to have the full experience of Heroku with the power and portability of Kubernetes.

For single server setups, it uses k3s, which takes up ~200MB of memory on your host machine. Its not ideal, but the pain of trying to wrangle docker deployments, and the cheapness of hetzner made it worth it.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-05-05 22:41:24+00:00
> that is the market that I'm talking about, and that is the one that I (correctly, as usual) estimated to be around 90% [1][2]

Your second source doesn’t say what it’s measuring and disclaims itself as from its “‘experimental era’ — a beautiful mess of enthusiasm, caffeine, and user-submitted chaos.” Your first link only measures chatbots.

ChatGPT is a chatbot. OpenAI sells AI models, including via ChatGPT. Among chatbots, sure, 84% per your source. (Not “90%+,” as you stated.) But OpenAI makes more than chatbots, and in the broader AI model market, its lead is far from 80+ percent.

TL; DR It is entirely wrong to say the “market share of OpenAI is like 90%+.”

[1] https://firstpagesage.com/reports/top-generative-ai-chatbots...
by l33tbro | 2025-05-05 22:42:27+00:00
Fine not to like it for those reasons. But maybe try listen to it next time from a more psych, garage, or post-rock perspective. They were influenced very early on by groups like Spacemen 3, and I see HAA as them doing something big and dirgey in this kind of school. I even recall the liner notes saying only "all guitars by Daft Punk".
by isnotaname | 2025-05-05 22:42:46+00:00
Cron jobs don’t scale well when you’re on Kubernetes or in distributed systems — you end up with duplicates, failures, and a mess. We built Schedo to solve this and much more: a cloud scheduler that just works, without extra complexity. It’s designed to handle scale and reliability without you having to juggle locks, queues, or overkill third-party tools.
by com2kid | 2025-05-05 22:42:50+00:00
A lot better techniques exist now days than pure silence detection -

1. A special model that predicts when a conversation turn is coming up (e.g. when someone is going to stop speaking). Speech has a rhythm to it and pauses / ends of speech are actually predictable.

2. Generate a model response for every subsequent word that comes in (and throw away the previously generated response), so basically your time to speak after doing some other detection is basically zero.

3. Ask an LLM what it thinks the odds of the user being done talking is, and if it is a high probability, reduce delay timer down. (The linked repo does this)

I don't know of any up to date models for #1 but I haven't checked in over a year.

Tl;Dr the solution to problems involving AI models is more AI models.
by dragonwriter | 2025-05-05 22:43:06+00:00
> You want whoever is time closest to respond as well.

If you require the police to respond to all medical emergencies, then you have to fund the police at a level which allows them to do that, often at the expense of funding the people who actually should be responding to a medical emergency.

Taking the attitude that the police must respond to all emergency calls even if the only indication of what capacities are needed are fire and/or ambulance services results in a distortion of local funding which makes emergency response worse (it also results in the police presence itself making the response to other things worse in cases where they were not needed, even considering the resources actually available at the time, without considering the effect of response policy on resource allocation -- police are not always neutral-to-beneficial.)

The fact that it is a common rule in the US does not make it right. The US is very bad, compared to other developed countries, at lots of things.
by SOLAR_FIELDS | 2025-05-05 22:43:24+00:00
That limitation (spinning up an instance) only exists if you don't put a payment card in. If you put a payment card in, it goes away immediately. You don't have to actually pay anything, you can provision the always free resources, but obviously in this regard you have to ensure that you don't accidentally provision something with cost. I used terraform to make my little kube cluster on there and have not had a cost event at all in over 1.5 years. I think at one point I accidentally provisioned a volume or something and it cost me like one cent.
by kmacdough | 2025-05-05 22:43:41+00:00
And to those who "say" at least now they're honest, I say "WHY?!" Unconditionally being "good" would be better than disguising selfishness as good. But that's not really a thing. Having to maintain the presence of doing good puts significant boundaries on what you can get away with, and increases the consequence when people uncover some shit.

Condoning "honest liars" enables a whole other level of open and unrestricted criminality.
by jlhawn | 2025-05-05 22:43:43+00:00
How much work do you think it would be to also have a separate xattr which has a human-readable description of the file contents? I wonder if it that might already be an intermediate product of some of the embedding tools, like "arbitrary media" -> "text description of media" -> "embedding vector". You could store both of those as xattrs and you could debug by comparing your text query with the text description of the file contents as they should produce similar embedding vectors. You could even audit any file, assuming you know what its contents are, by checking the text description xattr generated by this program.
by valyala | 2025-05-05 22:43:56+00:00
> For example, every damn log message has hundreds of fields,. Most of which never change. Why not push this information once, on service startup an not with every log message?

If the log field doesn't change with every log entry, then good databases for logs (such as VictoriaLogs) compress such a field by 1000x and more times, so its' storage space usage can be ignored, and it doesn't affect query performance in any way.

Storing many fields per every log entry simplifies further analysis of these logs, since you can get all the needed information from a single log entry instead of jumping over big number of interconnected logs. This also improves analysis of logs at scale by filtering and grouping the logs by any subset of numerous fields. Such logs with big number of fields are named "wide events". See the following excellent article about this type of logs - https://jeremymorrell.dev/blog/a-practitioners-guide-to-wide... .
by eikenberry | 2025-05-05 22:43:59+00:00
Why didn't you list the downsides, what you missed from not having a smart phone? Was it because there weren't any or because you thought they were obvious?

Having a mobile, networked computer with us at all times has been a huge benefit in many ways and I find it hard to believe people would chuck it all due forming habits they don't like. Habits can be molded pretty easily if approached in a conscious way.
by kabirgoel | 2025-05-05 22:44:27+00:00
This is great. Poking into the source, I find it interesting that the author implemented a custom turn detection strategy, instead of using Silero VAD (which is standard in the voice agents space). I’m very curious why they did it this way and what benefits they observed.

For folks that are curious about the state of the voice agents space, Daily (the WebRTC company) has a great guide [1], as well as an open-source framework that allows you to build AI voice chat similar to OP's with lots of utilities [2].

Disclaimer: I work at Cartesia, which services a lot of these voice agents use cases, and Daily is a friend.

[1]: https://voiceaiandvoiceagents.com [2]: https://docs.pipecat.ai/getting-started/overview
by godelski | 2025-05-05 22:44:33+00:00
> I think the correct thing to do is to both move for systemic change and attempt to live the life you advocate for

You'll get no disagreement from me[0,1,2].

> Fundamentally, things tend to change for material, systemic reasons, and so most often the best way to get at issues is not to go after individuals (whose behavior is more a symptom than the disease) but the root cause, the systemic influences that cause them to act that way.

This is the part I disagree with (as seen in my linked comments). This is a defeatist attitude that acts as if people are mindless automata. We forge our own reality. No, we don't have complete control, but we have some control. We cannot directly control the large system, but we can control ourselves and we can strongly influence those around us.

Ultimately this is the root. There's no magic wizard in the sky making people do things, there is only us. Those "systematic reasons" are a bullshit excuse to pass blame[3]. All those things are created by us. The only reason we pretend it isn't is because the results of our actions are only observed after long periods of time. It's those small decisions that add up over time. With each action we choose a better future, a worse, or a neutral. No one can predict the future, but we have a lot of evidence that short term thinking leads to worse results. I'm not asking anyone analyze every move and overload themselves with the infinite chaos. But I am saying we all need to think a few steps ahead and consider unintended consequences. To not be so rash. If things were easy, they would have already been resolved, so we so really take a moment to consider more than our gut reaction.

But ultimately, only you can control you. I hope you advocate for others around you to make good and thoughtful decisions, but there's no dragon in a cave where we can get everyone together and defeat. The dragon only is at thing of our collective consciousness. Each person that decides to defect makes the dragon a little weaker, and each person that decides to believe in the dragons power makes it a little stronger. That's the choice.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43809695

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43852024

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43787383

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43824534
by k310 | 2025-05-05 22:45:07+00:00
A Macbeth kind of marriage in too many ways.

The notion of cultural supremacy resonates with some in Silicon Valley, land of big and targeted data. The social media and crypto bro's have been running essentially unregulated for a long time and sided with Trump on his unconstitutionally extreme libertarianism, as in "I'll do whatever I like and take whatever I want". They definitely agree on that point, and they have not been stopped nor slowed down.

'Reboot' Revealed: Elon Musk's CEO-Dictator Playbook [1]

Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk 'Hijacking' Republicans to Control Entire US Government [2]

PDF of their letter. [3] 630K

[1] https://www.thenerdreich.com/reboot-elon-musk-ceo-dictator-d...

[2] https://bylinetimes.com/2025/02/07/silicon-valley-whistleblo...

[3] https://america2.news/content/files/2025/02/Musk-NRx-Memo-Fe...
by j45 | 2025-05-05 22:45:39+00:00
Everything's old school, everything's new.

It's important to remember that the cloud is also invented by the old school and understanding the oscillation between client/server architectures vs local, and it's implication on topics of data and files is interesting too.

More questions means more learning until I learned there's no one right or wrong, just what works best, where, when, for how long, and what the tradeoffs are.

Quick wins/decisions are often bandaids that pile up in an different way.
by II2II | 2025-05-05 22:45:53+00:00
On the flip side: if I were to attend an event featuring Richard Stallman, I would rather it have a no-photos policy. I am interested in many of his ideas, but I have no desire to be associated with his ideas in their entirety or any public figure. Unfortunately, too many people believe that A implies B.

I also hate drama, and would much rather lead a quiet life as a person no one likes than an interesting life who some people dislike.
by coldtea | 2025-05-05 22:45:56+00:00
>There must be a balance.

Why? I mean, why we cannot just NOT take pictures, or taken them very very very rarely, like on our wedding, kids first steps, or something major like that?

We managed to do without immediate access to photography for some millenia, and with very ocassional and rare use of it for the best part of the 20th century.