MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by PaulHoule | 2025-06-27 22:51:32+00:00
(1) An LLM is trained on text up to a certain date in time. So out of its own memory it can only accurately answer questions about events that happened before then. When it comes to sports, for instance, I'd expect to get good answers about Superbowl XX but not about a game that happened last weekend. An LLM could go and do a search about the game last weekend, read about it, and tell me about what it read, but its basic knowledge is always going to be a little out of date.

(2) Reasoning about events across time is difficult. It's a problem for the old symbolic AI systems in the sense that plain ordinary first order logic doesn't respect time. "A" might be true today but it was false three weeks ago but maybe two years from now "A" might be false again. You can certainly design a logic for temporal inference, but it's not something standardized with a standard way to do inference. [1] Common sense reasoning not only requires this, but also "Mary believes A is true but John believes A is false" and "It is possible that A is true" or "It is necessary that A is true" or "If B were true, then A would have to be true" and even combinations such as "Three weeks ago John believed A was true" or "John believes A was true three weeks ago".

LLMs don't work on logic but rather by matching up bits of text in the context which other bits of text, so if it is "thinking it through step by step" you are going to see text that is relevant to different steps of the thinking which could involve various times, contingencies, people's belief systems and such and it would have to always know which bits are relevant to what it is thinking about right now and which bits aren't which is... hard.

[1] Note that inference over totally ordinary logic with arithmetic is undecidable https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_...
by _fzslm | 2025-06-27 22:52:00+00:00
Everybody is talking about how dystopian this is, which... well, yeah. That's kind of the point, no?

But at first seeing this, I unironically felt joy at the idea of being able to directly communicate with somebody real on the internet about anything I like. Like... yeah, back in the day.

Then, the reality sinks in and I realise my social skills are so atrophied post-Covid that I don't even know what I'd say. (half-joking.)

And yet I can rattle off to ChatGPT freely about any old thing...

It's a clever art project and makes you think. Hopefully the creator wakes up to a surprise little nest egg of cash out of $5 bills.
by majormajor | 2025-06-27 22:52:11+00:00
Even beyond the lives lost on the side of the anti-US fighters in those places, who wants to bet on if the US would give up and walk away and just let any random local armed community in its own territory ignore it?

Will you see eventual retreat, or will you see eventual overwhelming force? The US didn't want to bulldoze these other countries and jail or kill everyone and set up a new state; very different than how the US would handle more Wacos.
by riedel | 2025-06-27 22:53:07+00:00
Funnily back in the 90s working as a webdesigner in my high school years (whatever you would call web design these days), I remember building a DSSSL- dialect based pipeline to generate websites from a newsfeed published. I still like XSLT transformations. I even used the bananas XI reader [0] to transform actual text using XSLT for transforming and templating . I have, however, met few people that also appreciated this. Often such tooling was replaced once someone else took over the job...

[0] http://www.ananas.org/xi/
by mjburgess | 2025-06-27 22:53:11+00:00
This judgement has nothing to do with citizenship, and there's yet no reason to suppose citizenship is under threat from the EO as a result of this judgment.

Many states will have state-wide injunctions, and there will be a nation-wide class action suit to go thru the courts, and if there's any executive policy on this, it will receive judicial review.

The SC will also, whilst this is going on, intervene an basically issue a universal injunction as soon as the executive takes any issue whatsoever with this process.
by mbananasynergy | 2025-06-27 22:53:51+00:00
It has always been the goal of the project to provide security and privacy features while maintaining usability. People are expected to acquire a device to use GrapheneOS rather than us supporting as many devices as possible where we cannot offer the same protections.

We're hoping to have a non-Pixel device that actually meets the projects requirements in the near future, potentially. Our requirements aren't exotic and OEMs are confirming that they're well within their capabilities. We'll focus on working with OEMs interested in shipping secure devices in order to expand our offerings, which should offer more choices for potential users as well.
by majormajor | 2025-06-27 22:54:22+00:00
And what happened next in those cases?

Was the inconsistency resolved?

How is there less room for inconsistency now? If a judge has said five plaintiffs can play on a certain sports team in one jurisdiction, now the sports administrators need to know every ruling in every jurisdiction that their league functions in?

What makes you think "reform" is going to happen here? Have you read much of the material pushing for increased executive power on the right? It's very clear that the goal is solely to remove impediments to stretch executive power to the point that executive power decides what the law allows.
by benreesman | 2025-06-27 22:54:24+00:00
No one is trying to take anyone's multi-gigabyte pile of dynamic library closure to deploy what should be a few hundred kilobytes of arbitrarily portable, secure by construction, built to last executable.

But people should make an informed choice, and there isn't any noble or high minded or well-meaning reason to try to shout that information down.

Don't confidently assert falsehoods unless you're prepared to have them refuted. You're entitled to peddle memes and I'm entitled to reply with corrections.
Ask HN: Documenting the behavior of Microsoft of destroying true sleep
by tryauuum | 2025-06-27 22:55:14+00:00
Apparently Microsoft is the reason modern laptop can't sleep well and drain battery. According to the internet:

I reached to Dell support and they told me that they don’t support S3 simply because Windows 10 may have BSOD after wake. They don’t care about other OS and they don’t give customers a choice.

Is there more documentation of microsoft forcing vendors to remove S3? I want to be more sure about microsoft's behavior before going into the full hater mode
by sshine | 2025-06-27 22:55:28+00:00
$5/30 secs is $10/minute, or $600/hour, but that's not his hourly price.

I'm sure if you hire him as a consultant at bulk, you'll get a discount.

You have to remember that taking 30 seconds out of your day is unproportionally expensive cognitively in terms of context switch. So get a bulk deal or enjoy the fun experiment, either by trying it or from the sideline like most of us. ;-)
by joshuamorton | 2025-06-27 22:57:40+00:00
> Imagine you're a SC judge in this case, and you have to craft a judgement which allows universal injunctions in incredibly narrow and highly specific cases, whilst ruling out almost all of them. And that the area of law you're dealing with is a puddle of mud (equity).

You can of course, also not take up the issue on this case. I can't find the article offhand, but I believe Steve Vladeck made this point that the SC has passed over a number of egregiously bad universal injunctions, handling them entirely on the shadow docket, and decided to grant full cert and a hearing on this case.

You can maybe argue that that's good in the sense that they're making a strong stand that even in the best example this is disallowed, which is clearer precedent. But also they could have picked a "better" case in the sense of it being a clearer misuse, and used that as the vehicle for the same ruling. Using a Kacsmaryk injunction for the same ruling sends a very different message than this case.
by threemux | 2025-06-27 22:57:46+00:00
Yeah you can certainly criticize Thomas's legal theories, but his interpretation is logically consistent and he sticks to it even to the point of frequently solo dissenting.

It's important to read his stuff too because it seems to gain more acceptance as time goes on.

Your points on Sotomayor are well taken, her dissents are often way over the top. However I'm starting to think Justice Jackson is potentially worse when it comes to histrionics
by lelandbatey | 2025-06-27 22:58:30+00:00
It does not mean that in broad strokes. It very specifically was meant to exclude folks such as children of diplomats, as decided in United States vs Wong Kim Ark 169 U.S. 649 (1898): https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/169/649

A great summary: https://law.stackexchange.com/a/33057

In short the phrase “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” excludes three and only three groups of people:

1.Children born to foreign diplomats here on diplomatic business, who have diplomatic immunity to US Law

2.Children of members of an invading army that has occupied and controlled some part of US territory, born on that occupied area, who are obviously not subject to US Law (which has rarely happened in the US, although Guam was occupied during WWII, and parts of Alaska, and small parts of Maine during the War of 1812); and

3. Members of Native American tribes, subject to the jurisdiction of their tribal governments, who do not pay US taxes. (This was true when the 14th amendment was passed, but it no longer is. See section below on the act that changed it in 1924.)
by mort96 | 2025-06-27 22:58:32+00:00
Let's not pretend that retained mode is somehow easy. Procedurally changing the system's state in response to events gets pretty complex. A philosophy which approximates the II as a function of state is tempting, in a lot of ways. As someone with a fair amount of experience of both retained mode and immediate mode UIs, I can't confidently say that retained mode requires less "mental gymnastics" than immediate mode.
by kergonath | 2025-06-27 22:58:44+00:00
> What an appropriate name for an astrophysicist. I wonder if she's distantly related to the namesake of the Lagrange point.

Scopus has 390 profiles of people named Lagrange. It is not a very popular family name but it is not uncommon either and some of them are bound to end up in academia, whether they are descendants of Joseph-Louis or not.
by danans | 2025-06-27 22:58:52+00:00
https://www.wesa.fm/environment-energy/2024-02-19/weirton-fo...

> Optimistically assuming 12 hours of sunlight per day, a 40MW datacenter would need 480MWh of batteries to cover the dark period, costing $50 million.

A 40MW data center doesn't run constantly at 40MW. That's its load rating. Like any industrial facility, actual peak loads are probably around 80% and average loads are lower.

Also, why do you assume that the data center has to be off-grid? That's a constraint of a space-based datacenter, not a ground based datacenter.

Datacenters with storage can complement grid power.

> The cheapest batteries today are around $100/kWh.

If we are comparing ground based data centers to hypothetical space based ones, then consider that grid scale iron air batteries are coming soon at $20/kWh.

https://www.wesa.fm/environment-energy/2024-02-19/weirton-fo...
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 | 2025-06-27 22:59:26+00:00
HN changed their HTML

1. Double quotes used for item id instead of single quotes

2. No more spaces after closing tag "</a>" in "past" hyperlink

Changes to yy095.l

<MODE1>[ ]id=['"][0-9]+["'] { <MODE1>class=\"hnpast\">past<\/a>< fwrite("0);\n",1,4,yyout);
by GMoromisato | 2025-06-27 23:00:05+00:00
In case anyone is wondering, we are (sadly) very far from getting an image of this planet (or any extra-solar planet) that is more than 1 pixel across.

At 110 light-years distance you would need a telescope ~450 kilometers across to image this planet at 100x100 pixel resolution--about the size of a small icon. That is a physical limit based on the wavelength of light.

The best we could do is build a space-based optical interferometer with two nodes 450 kilometers apart, but synchronized to 1 wavelength. That's a really tough engineering challenge.
by magicalist | 2025-06-27 23:00:20+00:00
> The ruling today very explicitly and clearly does not touch the birthright citizenship issue.

In practice it absolutely does, because now everyone is scrambling to try and protect their clients that were previously covered by the larger injunction. The supreme court could have just not taken the case in the first place, or let the injunctions stand as an appropriate use of injunctions (for grossly unconstitutional executive orders)
by squeek502 | 2025-06-27 23:00:26+00:00
Good catch, that does indeed look like a mistake in the spec. Everything past the first sentence of that error description is suspect, honestly (seems like it was naively adapted from the example in [1] but that example isn't relevant to the missing-semicolon-after-character-reference error).

Will submit an issue/PR to correct it when I get a chance.

[1] https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/parsing.html#named-ch...
by umeshunni | 2025-06-27 23:00:30+00:00
From the article:

It had the following tools and abilities: * Tools for keeping notes and preserving important information to be checked later—for example, the current balances and projected cash flow of the shop (this was necessary because the full history of the running of the shop would overwhelm the “context window” that determines what information an LLM can process at any given time);
by PaulHoule | 2025-06-27 23:00:31+00:00
There is more than one way to come to the same moral conclusion

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Kohlberg's_stages_of_...

Recently somebody asked "What do you think about the ethics of lying on your resume?" and my answer was "You'll get fired if you get caught" which I think is a good answer which should be convincing to most people even if it doesn't represent the highest level of ethics.
by krapp | 2025-06-27 23:00:53+00:00
Hacker News is designed to prefer fewer, higher quality comments over more lower quality comments - signal over noise. To that end it has numerous features intended to discourage engagement over the long term, as the quality of conversation tends to diminish and the chance of flamewars tends to rise over time.

Get it, say your piece, and get out. That's how one uses HN.
by benatkin | 2025-06-27 23:01:07+00:00
To me it's weird that Anthropic is doing this reputation boosting game with Andon Labs which I'd never heard of. It's like when PyPI published a blog post about their security audit with a company which I'd never heard of before and haven't heard of since, that was connected to someone at PyPI. https://blog.pypi.org/posts/2023-11-14-1-pypi-completes-firs... I wonder if it's a similar cozy relationship here.
by toomuchtodo | 2025-06-27 23:01:59+00:00
You don’t have to defend yourself from the entire US government, just the government representation who shows up and decides to violate laws or your rights (and your life is in imminent danger). “Better to be judged by twelve vs. carried by six.” Otherwise, you’re default dead. Odds are better in jail on US soil than an El Salvadorian prison. I agree full out civil war against the US military on US soil is a different threat and engagement model. 5 million people participated in the No Kings protest, more than double total active military members on US soil, for example.

https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-people-are-in-the-us-...

https://www.militaryonesource.mil/data-research-and-statisti...

(position derived from first principles and threat modeling, with input from several US military service members and a physical defense subject matter expert)
by bryanrasmussen | 2025-06-27 23:02:33+00:00
given that it was in Ohio, the grandmother lived in Batavia a few miles away, and this was in 1913 I feel pretty confident in saying they probably knew the person they were entrusting their infant to.

the quoted article does not say they knew the carrier, but it does not explicitly say they did not. Reporting being what it generally is I think they imply that he was not known because they cannot explicitly say it without being called out for lying.

on edit: changed undoubtedly to probably, more description.
by marze | 2025-06-27 23:02:50+00:00
Against the cost of a lower payload fraction. Say you get 4% with TSTO, 2% with SSTO. And if you run into trouble with the design, the SSTO payload moves towards 0%. Your operational savings need to compensate for a doubling of cost per unit mass payload, possibly much more.

And even though full reusability is much easier with two stages, and has not been achieved yet.
by brudgers | 2025-06-27 23:03:15+00:00
An open source code base built for long term collaboration is likely to be organized differently than a code base written under desperate business conditions (which a dying company is).

Or to put it another way, if it’s not a hell-yes, it’s a No in practice. Even if you don’t want it to be one. Open source projects need enthusiasm. Only Google can get away with throwing code over the wall.
by hackyhacky | 2025-06-27 23:04:12+00:00
> In all of these 6-3 cases where Sotomayor writes the dissent, she writes entirely for the press and reserves only the last few pages to engage in anything like the legal arguments. Her effect in these cases is profoundly pathological on the public discourse.

That's one interpretation. On the other hand, I can understand her reaction at the conservative majority's repeated disrespect for stare decisis and existing case law, their tendency to craft non-textual and ahistorical reading of the Constitution to suit their short-term political goals, and their seeming bottomless capacity for subservience and deference to an obviously unlawful executive branch that has repeatedly evinced contempt for the judicial.

So, given the extraordinary depths that the majority is sinking to, her dramatic dissents are more justified than you think.
by mschuster91 | 2025-06-27 23:04:29+00:00
> Today if a child would see a friend blow up in front of him people would be talking about PTSD, (life-long) trauma, etc. During the war my grandfather had a friend blow up in front of him. "Well, you didn't get any help in those days, you just had to deal with it, haha!"

... and carry that shit for the rest of their lives. A lot of Boomer kids are absolute dogshit parents because they never worked through the trauma they experienced back during their childhood (or during the rest of their lives), and they never learned how to properly manage their emotions (and yes I am talking both about men and women here), plainly because they didn't know better, there was no research, no nothing available. There's a reason why "break the cycle" has become a thing.
by underlipton | 2025-06-27 23:04:36+00:00
No. If a ruling has determined that a government action has the potential to be illegal and must be halted for the suing party, it should absolutely be halted for everyone, because you're dealing with an action that's ambiguously illegal for everyone. It's not just the wronged party at the center of this issue, it's the capacity for the government to engage in illegal activity. Once you've identified behavior as questionable, you stop the behavior.
by majormajor | 2025-06-27 23:04:55+00:00
As a former-red-state-citizen for decades, "basic stuff like consumer protection" is not something that I think has clear broad bipartisan support. Caveat emptor! Regulation [of scammers] bad! Free speech [for scammers] good! "I'm from the government and..."

A certain amount of less-partisan stuff does get passed all the time. But, to get more subtle about it, I think the danger if you help pass something like consumer protection - even if MOST people on both sides would support it - isn't that you risk getting branded with it if it backfires. It's that you get labeled soft in a way that the die-hards who dominate primaries can be rallied against. The right wing has been VERY aggressive in pushing purity tests for decades, and eventually you have convinced everyone of the final-battle-of-good-and-evil stakes. The left has been doing it more and more too, sadly - but it's not like what they were doing before was working too great.

That situation also gives increasing sway to the rich lobbyists who also want to make sure those basic things don't happen. Your base won't get mad at you for failing to ban abortions nationally because obviously you can't. So they don't put much blame on you for not getting the smaller stuff done either, or scrutinize your donors too much.
by mjburgess | 2025-06-27 23:05:31+00:00
I think there's a clear 7-2 against this EO when its content will be considered. I do not think a lot of them enjoyed making this their stand against UIs; and you can hear in orals robert's frustration with the situation and various desires across the panel to find some way to thread the needle. I dont think any of the 7 trusted the goverment as far as they could throw them. This isn't a pro-trump court, nor one that believes any of this executive behaviour is credible. I think they were not at all pleased with how the case had been brought to them.

It's clear K's concurrence was written as a playbook for how to get to "the right outcome" in this case, and it will be followed. I suspect if that playbook wasnt available, they would have had a much harder time with getting to a judgement.
by aabiji | 2025-06-27 23:06:24+00:00
Over the past couple of weeks I've built Chickoban, a puzzle game inspired by Sokoban.

You can play it on the web [here](https://aabiji.github.io/chickoban/).

It's in 3d and uses raylib. I know the game itself not very good, but I was hoping that maybe some of you would be kind enough to offer feedback on the code. What parts of the design or good, what parts are problematic, etc.

In any case, maybe the game will be interesting. It's all open source. Have a nice day.
by VinLucero | 2025-06-27 23:09:10+00:00
Nice! But have you considered a Neurosymbolic AI that can Evolve?

https://deepwiki.com/dubprime/mythral/3.2-genome-system

Or feel Emotion? https://deepwiki.com/search/how-do-emotives-work_193cb616-54...

Have you read Marvin Minsky’s Society of Mind?
by hayst4ck | 2025-06-27 23:09:41+00:00
> If you have any interest in taking a non-hysterical reaction to the ruling

"The court’s decision to permit the executive to violate the constitution with respect to anyone who has not yet sued is an existential threat to the rule of law,” Jackson wrote. “Given the critical role of the judiciary in maintaining the rule of law … it is odd, to say the least, that the court would grant the executive’s wish to be freed from the constraints of law by prohibiting district courts from ordering complete compliance with the constitution.”

Reacting to a (female) judge assessing that there is an existential threat to the rule of law, in an administration that has done everything to break through the boundaries of law and openly violates it is hardly "hysteria", especially when there is a track record of robbing people of due process, which is literally and precisely the executive asserting its supremacy over the judiciary by robbing it of the opportunity to make a ruling.