MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ted537 | 2025-06-05 16:51:46+00:00
Yeah its an awkward position, as self-hosting is going to be insanely expensive unless you have a substantial userbase to amortize the costs over. At least for a model comparable to GPT-4o or deepseek.

But at least if you use an API in the same region as your customers, court order shenanigans won't get you caught between different jurisdictions.
by martinpw | 2025-06-05 16:51:55+00:00
It seems to be a common misconception that lowering an object's orbit is much easier than raising it. I guess because it feels like it is just floating up there and gravity can do most of the work to pull it down if you give it a little nudge. In reality the energy required to lower the orbit is about the same as the energy required to raise it. In both cases you need to change the orbital velocity.
by starkparker | 2025-06-05 16:52:13+00:00
> The process of coding with an “agentic” LLM appears to be the process of carefully distilling all the worst parts of code review, and removing and discarding all of its benefits.

This has been my experience as well, especially since the only space I have to work with agents are on C++ projects where they flat-out spiral into an increasingly dire loop of creating memory leaks, identifying the memory leaks they created, and then creating more memory leaks to fix them.

There are probably some fields or languages where these agents are more effective-I've had more luck with small tasks in JS and Python for sure. But I've burned a full work week trying and falling to get Claude to add some missing destructors to a working but leaky C++ project.

At one point I let it run fully unattended on the repo in a VM for four hours with the goal of adding a destructor to a class. It added nearly 2k broken LOC that couldn't compile because its first fix added an undeclared destructor, and its response to that failure was to do the same thing to _every class in the project_. Every time saying "I now know what the problem is" as it then created a new problem.

If LLMs could just lack confidence in themselves for even a moment and state that they don't know what the problem is but it's willing to throw spaghetti at the wall to find out, I could respect that more than it marching through with absolute confidence that its garbage code did anything but break the project.
by dhruvrajvanshi | 2025-06-05 16:52:57+00:00
> I also make unit test runner play sound for success and failures.

This is brilliant! Such simple change but a massive qol improvement.

> Test runner

Node has one built-in these days. Haven't tried it yet but would be nice to get rid of the vitest dependency. Mostly because it makes my dependabot noisy for no apparent benefit.
by Trenthug | 2025-06-05 16:53:47+00:00
Thanks for the thoughtful and imaginative perspective. However, I’d like to point out a couple of concerns that might help clarify your argument.

First, there's a strong reliance on metaphor—particularly with the holographic analogy and the idea of "entangled clusters" of attention. These images are evocative, but without clear definitions or mechanisms, it's hard to evaluate what they actually mean or how they differ from existing models. Are you proposing a literal physical substrate? Or is this purely a metaphor for distributed processing?

Second, the distinction you make between “Truth” as existential and “truth” as symbolic feels like it’s drawing a sharp binary that may not hold up. Symbolic systems (like mathematics or language) aren’t just “graffiti pens” on reality—they often reflect deep structural truths about the world and have predictive power. Dismissing symbolic or information-theoretic models entirely overlooks how symbolic representations can be causally embedded in and shaped by existential reality.

It’s useful to critique reductionism, but a full rejection of symbolic cognition as “not consciousness” needs more than metaphor to be convincing. Otherwise, the argument risks sounding profound without being precise.
by Kirby64 | 2025-06-05 16:54:05+00:00
> Also there are angle grinder resistant locks.

Angle grinder wins against any lock. Maybe you're not the easiest bike to steal by having your very expensive lock, but in certain areas (NYC being a big one) that basically doesn't matter. And insurance claims from the bike locks still suck, since you have to deal a lost bike and an insurance claim every time that happens...
by colechristensen | 2025-06-05 16:54:11+00:00
I'm thinking it will be a vaguely more Hyperion vision with different groups and different strategies. After a few centuries some humans which are barely recognizable and some humans who are highly conservative and probably a lot in between.

Basically I think humans taking our genetic code into our own hands intentionally is inevitable and the question shouldn't be whether it should be allowed or not but instead how do we do this wisely and when are we ready for which steps.
by dzalona | 2025-06-05 16:54:36+00:00
Location: Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegvina

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Only for exceptional opportunity

Technologies: C++, PostreSQL, Postgis, Python, Django, Node.js, React

Résumé/CV: https://dzakat.tiiny.site/, https://www.linkedin.com/in/tarik-d%C5%BEaka-836390224/

Email: dzakatarik@gmail.com

Software engineer with a strong foundation in maths and algorithms. Over the past few years, I've worked primarily in C++, Python, and PostgreSQL/PostGIS, building impactful backend systems. At Orca, I was a key contributor to our Sail Routing feature — a complex, real-world navigation engine now used by sailors worldwide to plan over a million routes annually.

I'm passionate about solving hard problems, especially in domains where technical depth matters. I lean toward backend-focused roles but enjoy working fullstack when there's meaningful product impact. Always looking for interesting challenges and teams where I can grow and contribute meaningfully.
by rixed | 2025-06-05 16:54:55+00:00
You could also avoid divisions entirely, while still keeping 100% correct perspective, by "rasterizing" the polygon following the line of constant Z. You would save the divs, but then you would draw mostly outside the cache, so not a panacea, but for large surfaces it was noticeably nicer than divide-every-N-pixcels approximation.
by Havoc | 2025-06-05 16:55:05+00:00
Have a similar setup. Unfortunately the open a window thing isn't all that reliable as test. Even sensors cheaper than the SDC40/41 will happily do that.

The issue is more drift and that its a very localised measurement. The sharp spikes in the graphs are often more about the air is moving than the room's total CO2 changing. Like on mine (also sdc41) I can see when I wake up on the bedroom one. Being awake produces more CO2 sure but it's marginal. 80% sure the spike is simply more turbulence in room. Lying still for hours vs getting up and making bed etc
by jplusequalt | 2025-06-05 16:55:19+00:00
There's a whole host of researchers who helped paved the way for modern graphics that no-one outside the graphics community knows about. Ever heard of Eric Veach? His work on path tracing is extremely important, and I've never heard a single person who wasn't already in the weeds of writing their own path tracer mention him or his ground-breaking thesis.

https://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/veach_thesis/thesis.pdf
by smeej | 2025-06-05 16:55:25+00:00
Am I the only one who faces a weird sort of existential lump in the pit of my stomach when I think about how, in the world "we're" creating, I never would have made the cut?

I mean, if you'd killed me as an embryo, I'd be every bit as dead today as if you'd killed me yesterday. I can't dissociate my adult self from my embryo self enough to ignore that.

And who knows? Maybe I would have made the cut. Maybe I'm as good as my parents could do. But I can't shake my unease about treating rejected embryos like there aren't adults implicit in them that we're never letting see the light of day.
by pityJuke | 2025-06-05 16:55:45+00:00
I do find it funny that the library Twitter is using (according to TFA anyway) self-describes itself as:

> Caution

> Experimental library!

and

> While this library is just a wrapper around the well known Libsodium library it still comes with high potential of introducing new attack surfaces, bugs and other issues and you shouldn't use it in production until it has been reviewed by community.

[0]: https://github.com/ionspin/kotlin-multiplatform-libsodium
by op00to | 2025-06-05 16:55:49+00:00
I found Gemini 2.5 Pro highly useful for text summaries, and even reasoning in long conversations... UP TO the last 2 weeks or month. Recently, it seems to totally forget what I'm talking about after 4-5 messages of a paragraph of text each. We're not talking huge amounts of context, but conversational braindeadness. Between ChatGPT's sycophancy, Gemini's forgetfulness and poor attention, I'm just sticking with whatever local model du jour fits my needs and whatever crap my company is paying for today. It's super annoying, hopefully Gemini gets its memory back!
by diggan | 2025-06-05 16:56:10+00:00
Maybe AngelScript (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AngelScript) could be a good fit, used in a bunch of released games, so seems to be good enough for real work.

Wren (https://wren.io/) is another interesting language, but I haven't even tried it myself, but on the surface it seems to match. Edit: Scratch that, Wren isn't actually statically typed, but somehow I have it saved in my bookmarks as one.
by sorcerer-mar | 2025-06-05 16:56:39+00:00
Yet despite variation in what people eat and what drugs they take, high-IQ people tend to be born to high-IQ people and same for low-IQ.

Even twins raised in totally separate households will have very similar IQs later in life.

This epigenetic stuff is invariably copium from people who don’t want to admit their intellectual gifts are in fact gifts and as a corollary, all the downstream economic rewards of intelligence are also mere gifts from the lottery of being born to high-IQ parents.
by BugsJustFindMe | 2025-06-05 16:57:01+00:00
> if you'd killed me as an embryo, I'd be every bit as dead today as if you'd killed me yesterday

You wouldn't have existed in any meaningful definition of "you" if your embryo had been destroyed, so you wouldn't be dead. Being dead and being not here are not the same thing. I've never had children. That doesn't mean my children are dead.
by CooCooCaCha | 2025-06-05 16:57:17+00:00
In that case, you defeated your own argument because if you dismiss historical democracies (which I agree with) then you’re left with modern democracies which haven’t existed long enough to compare with monarachy in terms of resilience.

But I also fully acknowledge that invalidates my argument as well. However, I still think the stability of monarchies is overstated. Just because a dynasty lasts for 700 years doesn’t mean it was stable.
by arcfour | 2025-06-05 16:57:17+00:00
But they didn't break the law. The NYT articles were not algorithms/AI.

It's bad faith because they are saying "well, they should have done [unreasonable thing]". I explored their version of things from my perspective (it's not possible) and from a conciliatory perspective (okay, let's say they somehow try to navigate that hurdle anyways, is society better off? Why do I think it's infeasible?)
by disambiguation | 2025-06-05 16:57:30+00:00
Yeah rhetorical flexibility is probably an important ingredient for an effective social order (not necessarily a moral one) but you have to consider what it takes to embrace an idea. My sense is that ideologies usually emerge bottom up from individual values - anything top down runs the risk of being misaligned, and therefore incompatible and won't be accepted. Further, if its too inconsistent or incorrect then its vulnerable to opposition and is no longer "the least bad choice in the room."
by maqp | 2025-06-05 16:57:48+00:00
If your HW/OS doesn't allow verification of binaries, but your threat model requires doing that, then you need to use proper HW/OS that allows the verification. Also, iOS is proprietary so who knows what the OS is doing anyway. Also, this https://thehackernews.com/2014/01/DROPOUTJEEP-NSA-Apple-iPho...
by sergiotapia | 2025-06-05 16:58:10+00:00
Elixir and Phoenix is my tech stack of choice for many years, nearly a decade now.

The two thorns that remain:

1. The Phoenix Form <> changeset story is still quite tricky, even to me. It's very 'yappy'.

2. Elixir not having types hurts when a project grows. Even typespecs help very little. I wish we had proper types and let the computer flag stuff.
by superkuh | 2025-06-05 16:59:03+00:00
Let's not adopt the newspeak of the megacorps here. The actual headline is,

"Google Restricts Android Application Installation–What It Means for User Autonomy and Freedom"

The idea that you're not allowed to install any application without it coming directly from $megacorp is the new wierd thing. The idea of installing applications yourself on your computer is well established and normal.

"Sideloading" is a dangerous word that implicitly gives up freedoms. It should not be used.
by anbende | 2025-06-05 17:00:05+00:00
My (not a lawyer) understanding is "no", because Microsoft is not administering the model (making available the chatbot and history logging), not retaining chats (typically, unless you configure it specifically to do this), and any logs or history are only retained on the customer's servers or tenant.

Accessing information on a customer's server or tenant (I have been assured) would require a court order for the customer directly.

But... as an 365 E5 user with an Azure account using the 4o through Foundry... I am much more nervous than I ever have been.
by Aurornis | 2025-06-05 17:00:12+00:00
> In a pilot program launched in Singapore, the tech giant now blocks the installation of certain sideloaded apps—particularly those requesting sensitive permissions such as SMS access or accessibility services—if they are downloaded via web browsers, messaging apps, or file managers.

There are a lot of qualifiers on this: Only in Singapore, only on apps requesting certain permissions frequently used by scams, and only when downloaded via certain paths.

I don’t see the full details but this implies that it’s still possible for advanced users to side load whatever they want. They don’t want to make it easy for the average user to start sideloading apps that access SMS permissions or accessibility controls.

If it takes a few extra steps for the advanced user to sideload these apps that’s not really a big infringement on freedom like this purism PR piece is trying to imply. Unfortunately sideloaded apps are a problematic scam avenue for low-tech users.

> The move, developed in partnership with Singapore’s Cyber Security Agency, is designed to prevent fraud and malware-enabled scams.

This explains why it’s only in Singapore for now.
by jamesgill | 2025-06-05 17:00:52+00:00
My original description of what it is still stands: “Markdown is a text-to-HTML conversion tool for web writers.

Yes, that's how John Gruber defines it. But like every creation you share with others, it can evolve. If popular, it will evolve. People create their own versions and uses and intentions with it.

I've used markdown for 12 years or so, for two reasons:

1. As a way to write plain text but still get visual layout cues without using a proprietary format/tool (e.g., Word).

2. Have options for later conversion to other formats/outputs (for Gruber, HTML.)

So for me, writing markdown on my Apple device means that instead of using Apple's proprietary format, I have another place to write plain text markdown and use/share it elsewhere (which I often do).
by bcrosby95 | 2025-06-05 17:01:10+00:00
I tried using them for a game server, written in C, as a test case and I came to the same conclusions. It did pretty well at making something that was buggy but worked, but increasingly continually fell apart around the 3k lines mark, which really isn't much code.

It's not like these are esoteric languages, so I'm not sure why they (in my experience) have such a big problem with them.

My current guess is that C and C++ aren't so mono domain. The languages its good at seems to be languages used predominantly in the web world, and most of the open code out there is for web.

I'm curious if anyone has tried to use it for C# in Unity or a bespoke game in Rust and how well it does there.
by allturtles | 2025-06-05 17:01:27+00:00
If they didn't break the law, your pragmatic point about outcomes is irrelevant. Open AI is in the clear regardless of whether they are doing something great or something useless. So I don't honestly know what you're trying to say. I'm not sure why getting licenses to IP you want to use is unreasonable, it happens all the time.

Edit: Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc. is a great example of a case where a tech giant tried to legally get the rights to use a whole bunch of copyrighted content (~all books ever published), but failed. The net result was they had to completely shut off access to most of the Google Books corpus, even though it would have been (IMO) a net benefit to society if they had been able to do what they wanted.
by mmmBacon | 2025-06-05 17:01:35+00:00
For any fire, once the fire gets hot enough, it can be difficult or impossible to extinguish.

The fundamental problem is that battery fires get to be very high temperatures 1200C and cannot be extinguished at that point. I think the distinction you’re making about presence of thermal runaway or not is really rather irrelevant because yes you can put that fire out. That’s not the problem. The problem is that the devices do runaway and when they do it’s very difficult to put them out.

The ship in the original article was abandoned because it the fire could not be extinguished. The battery fire at Moss Landing could not be extinguished for 2 weeks.

Here’s a great video of the MountainView Fire Department talking about the difficulties of putting out EV fires. They explain that they’ve had cars catch on fire again 6 days later. They purchased new specialized equipment but at the time their department was one of the only fire companies that had this in California.

https://youtu.be/lnLqJqAT48E?si=UmEmSu841WyGU8PP
by bluefirebrand | 2025-06-05 17:02:14+00:00
> I can do things while the machine works

I find this workflow makes my life extremely tedious, because reviewing and fixing whatever the machine produces is a slog for me

I suppose it would be exhilarating if I just trusted the output but somehow I just can't bring myself to do that

How do you reconcile this with your own work? Maybe you just skim the output? Or do you run it and test that way?

Please don't tell me you just trust the AI to write automated tests or something...
by johnfn | 2025-06-05 17:02:18+00:00
Impressive seeing Google notch up another ~25 ELO on lmarena, on top of the previous #1, which was also Gemini!

That being said, I'm starting to doubt the leaderboards as an accurate representation of model ability. While I do think Gemini is a good model, having used both Gemini and Claude Opus 4 extensively in the last couple of weeks I think Opus is in another league entirely. I've been dealing with a number of gnarly TypeScript issues, and after a bit Gemini would spin in circles or actually (I've never seen this before!) give up and say it can't do it. Opus solved the same problems with no sweat. I know that that's a fairly isolated anecdote and not necessarily fully indicative of overall performance, but my experience with Gemini is that it would really want to kludge on code in order to make things work, where I found Opus would tend to find cleaner approaches to the problem. Additionally, Opus just seemed to have a greater imagination? Or perhaps it has been tailored to work better in agentic scenarios? I saw it do things like dump the DOM and inspect it for issues after a particular interaction by writing a one-off playwright script, which I found particularly remarkable. My experience with Gemini is that it tries to solve bugs by reading the code really really hard, which is naturally more limited.

Again, I think Gemini is a great model, I'm very impressed with what Google has put out, and until 4.0 came out I would have said it was the best.
by deburo | 2025-06-05 17:02:47+00:00
It seems quite obvious as surely the amount of C++, C, etc. is less, in the public domain, than the millions of lines of JS, C#, Java, Python & others that are available on github, gitlab & others.

So for those users, you might still be finding LLMs lacking. It's also understandable that you might get more errors when generating C++ than say C#, since it's harder to use.

It reminds me that I recently changed companies in part because at my previous job, I didn't have as many opportunities to work with LLMs (doing the things they are good at) as my current one.
by grimre4p | 2025-06-05 17:02:52+00:00
ApplianSys | Senior Software Developer | Coventry, UK | Onsite | 40,000 - 70,000 GBP / year | Full-Time

Tech used: GitHub, Linux, Network, Nginx, Python, Embedded, Hardware, HTTP

We seek individuals eager to elevate their careers. Our standards are high, and the work is intellectually challenging. These positions offer the opportunity to make a personal impact, develop your skills, and achieve substantial professional and financial rewards.

More details and option to apply: https://devitjobs.uk/jobs/ApplianSys-Senior-Software-Develop...
by Nevermark | 2025-06-05 17:03:00+00:00
> LLMs are statistical tools and not cognitive systems

I have never understood broad statements that models are just (or mostly) statistical tools.

Certainly statistics apply, minimizing mismatches results in mean (or similar measure) target predictions.

But the architecture of a model is the difference between compressed statistics vs. forcing a model to translate information in a highly organized way reflecting the actual shape of the problem to get any accuracy at all.

In both cases, statistics are relevant, but in the latter it's not a particularly insightful way to talk about what a model has learned.

Statistical accuracy, prediction, etc. are basic problems to solve. The training criteria being optimized. But they don't limit the nature of solutions. They both leave problem difficulty, and solution sophistication unbounded.
by vouaobrasil | 2025-06-05 17:03:16+00:00
> Deep research and similar tools alone have helped me navigate complex legal matters recently for my incorporation,

On the flipside, it will make it even easier for corporations to use the legal system in their favour and corporations will more easily and effectively use GenAI against individuals even if both have it due to the nature of corporations and their ability to invest in better tools than the individual.

So it's just an arms race/prisoner's dilemma and while it provides incremental advantages, it makes everything worse because the system becomes more complex and more oppressive.