MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by AdieuToLogic | 2025-06-17 02:54:13+00:00
I've been in this situation as well and there are no realistic options to improve it without leadership recognizing the manager's affect and redressing same.

> Micromanagement, lack of vision, poor communication, poor planning, zero support, full package.

This isn't going to get any better. More likely it will get worse over time as your new manager is under more stress to deliver on promises made, without the requisite planning and/or consultation with their team needed.

> About half the team share similar view. The other half seems like just playing along.

Experience suggests the latter group shares the same view as the former, but have other priorities (family, stock options, retirement, etc.) outweighing sharing them. This is not a judgement nor a bad thing. It just is.

> I still care about the mission and about what I do. Though not as much as before this all happened.

This is an inevitable transition resulting from this scenario. A cheeky phrase for this is "beating the care out of you."

> What would you do in my shoes to make the best of the situation?

Make as few waves as possible; do what you are assigned to do ethically.

Take your time to identify an ideal opportunity in another company.

Say nothing of the job search.

Only move on to another gig if you have an employment agreement in place.
by hatefulmoron | 2025-06-17 02:54:23+00:00
It depends on what you're doing. If it's a simple task, or you're making something that won't grow into something larger, eyeballing the code and testing it is usually perfect. These types of tasks feel great with Claude Code.

If you're trying to build something larger, it's not good enough. Even with careful planning and spec building, Claude Code will still paint you into a corner when it comes to architecture. In my experience, it requires a lot of guidance to write code that can be built upon later.

The difference between the AI code and the open source libraries in this case is that you don't expect to be responsible for the third-party code later. Whether you or Claude ends up working on your code later, you'll need it to be in good shape. So, it's important to give Claude good guidance to build something that can be worked on later.
by hug | 2025-06-17 02:54:54+00:00
I don't know why this perspective bothers me so much, but it does. This idea that people are alternatively dull or interesting feels wrong to me, on a kind of visceral level. So far so that I'm having trouble marshaling my thoughts enough that I can tell you why. It's like there's an intuition gap so large I'm getting vertigo. Nothing here is intended to say that the way you feel about it is invalid, but I need to write out my own feelings in order to put my brain's feet back on solid ground.

It feels entirely backwards to me that there is some kind of dull/exciting switch that flips and a person becomes dull or exciting, depending on whether the observer finds the topic the person is speaking about interesting. The one at fault (such that there is any) for the lack of interest isn't usually the speaker, surely?

I have a friend who works in a field that most people absolutely find completely uninteresting (and, to be frank, I am also uninterested in the field in general), but when we sit and have a pint after work and have a chat, I can't help but be engaged because there is more to learn about everything, and while the technical minutiae of his trade is unexciting, the conversation is not. I know more about turbidity now than I ever expected or needed to, but I don't feel like it was time wasted.

Swap me out for an analog of your wife, and the guy flips from interesting to dull? That seems unfair, for some reason, not that fairness should really ever into it. Just because an interest isn't shared doesn't mean it should be derided as dull, right?

And, y'know, conversely, I know a dull guy. Like, I like to think I'm a good conversationalist. I can hold my own in a chat with basically anyone. But this guy. He sink-holes literally anything you try to say. One word answers. You can drag out the most maniacal story of the past few years of your life, a story that every single person you've ever talked to about it has been engaged and you get a good back and forth and a bit of patter, but this guy: "Oh, cool". And he's like that with everyone. Play word association, you say salt, I say pepper, you say this guy's name, I say dull. All of this seems really mean, but I'm pretty sure he's happy being that guy. I mean who knows what his actual inner thoughts about the matter might be, because you'll never get him to say anything worth listening to about it.

And this, I think, is probably the crux of why I'm so not on board with the way you see it. My friend and my boring friend are not the same, vis-a-vis in a dullness competition. They're not even in the same weight class.

Anyway. Perspectives. Weird, huh?
by rustcleaner | 2025-06-17 02:55:25+00:00
15-30 years is a bit heavy for 30 million doses even. 1.5-3 years is way more fair.

15-30 years of adulthood is like putting your child in timeout for 6 to 12 years (childhood being 0-19)! Is there anything your child could do to spend half his childhood living in a concrete room, maximum grounding? This is what we are doing to a man.

No. 12 years is public school length so that should be the life sentence, in the interest of keeping government in check. Think it's unfair in your case? Murder him when he gets out and serve your 12. Or... get over it, life goes on, etc. :^)
by jaybrendansmith | 2025-06-17 02:57:59+00:00
Everyone must have a MAGA uncle. I myself have two, my kids have one, perhaps two. They are the ones we always had questions about, and would often introduce strange ideas at the table, like a return to the gold standard, or joining Amway, or something. It's scary how easily they bought into it, and how easily manipulated they are. I would imagine they would be easily hypnotized or something. They seem to be the ones that want someone else to tell them what to think, or what to do. My sons call them 'NPCs', and I think perhaps they are somewhat correct. What do we do about the NPCs?
by almostgotcaught | 2025-06-17 02:58:16+00:00
> If your static analysis is over SSA, then generally the static analysis is easier and (potentially) storing facts is easier. This is due to this property called sparseness. Where a static analysis over non-SSA programs has to store facts about all variables at all program points, an analysis over SSA need only store facts about all variables, independent of context.

Not sure what this has to do with SSA or not? Maybe you're saying if you don't have SSA then value numbering requires extra book-keeping to keep track of the names? that's true but the book-keeping only kicks when a name is updated, not at every program point.

> If we want to keep our information sparse, though, we have to add a new definition to the IR.

I mean this isn't like a law of nature, it's just a design point - a question of whether the facts have to be serializable for some reason. If they don't (and in general, I can't think of a reason they would have to be), you can just keep things in-memory in general and do either sparse or dense analysis on an as-needed basis. To wit MLIR, an SSA IR, handily supports both sparse and dense dataflow analysis:

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/mlir/include/...

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/mlir/include/...

Note, both analyses propagate lattices which support meet and join.

> Anyway, SSA only stores type information about instructions and does not encode information that we might later learn in the IR. With basic SSA, there’s not a good way to encode refinements…

This is true of course but I struggle to think of a reasonable semantic that would enable you to refine/change/alter the type of a value that wasn't an operation. The conditional example is specious but could be rectified if it were modeled correctly: the conditional is an operation which has operands and two regions, each with a basic block with basic block args and it's the types of the bb args that can show as "refined". MLIR's scf.if isn't "isolated from above" and its bbs don't have args but it could have both such things and such an operation would model what you want precisely and in the IR/types themselves.
by PaulHoule | 2025-06-17 02:58:21+00:00
Maybe 10 years ago I was a student of file formats and I actually liked PDF as it had a clear theory of how you serialize a graph of objects. It's more like the old Microsoft Word format or the current DOCX and much better than the atrocious PSD format. PDF is a good format for one developed in the 1990s for what it was intended to do.
by mircerlancerous | 2025-06-17 02:58:50+00:00
I'd like to disagree with this but it's the only thing that's worked for me.

If you do stay, there's a good chance the manager will eventually be found out. You can play a subtle sabotage game in the background to expedite it. Don't save them from their mistakes, and undermine them by talking about the mistakes. Don't blame them but rather let conversation about mistakes lead them to the same conclusion.

Personally I'm not patient enough to stick around anywhere, so I definitely wouldn't in your case unless I really cared.
by LukeShu | 2025-06-17 02:58:51+00:00
I would agree with you that DTLS is a misnomer; that it does not provide the layer-4/transport-layer -like interface that regular TLS provides.

(It isn't quite a layer-3/internetwork-layer -like interface; from the UDP that it sits on, it has a multiplexing component that is "half" of a layer 4 interface.)
by bigstrat2003 | 2025-06-17 03:00:24+00:00
The problem with YT premium is that they simply do not have content worth paying for. Even the very best content (say, videos where people give music lessons) is not actually something I would pay for. I don't mind paying for a streaming service - I pay for Netflix and will for the foreseeable future. But that's because Netflix has stuff where I actively want to watch it and would miss it if it was gone; YT does not.
by fuzzfactor | 2025-06-17 03:00:29+00:00
>Why are PDFs so hard to edit?

This is by design.

IIRC the original objective was to require a costly proprietary program from Adobe called "Acrobat" to create the file to begin with, and it was intended not to be edited. Rather it was supposed to be readable and printable with good consistency between PCs and Macs.

"Acrobat Reader" has always been free, to help popularize the format and make sure that anybody could open and read the file. But no editing for you the user. And the "publishers" who routinely generated the early PDFs using the full Acrobat suite wanted to distribute documents for people to trust that they had not been edited from the source. At least not as easily as a Word DOC file could be edited.
by zmgsabst | 2025-06-17 03:00:59+00:00
NSA is a DOD organization.

> The National Security Agency (NSA) is an intelligence agency of the United States Department of Defense, under the authority of the director of national intelligence (DNI).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency

> William J. Hartman is a United States Army lieutenant general who has served as the acting commander of United States Cyber Command, director of the National Security Agency,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_J._Hartman

They’re staffed by military people (alongside civilians) and their commander is always military — because much of what they do (abroad) could be construed as acts of war.
by SamPatt | 2025-06-17 03:02:19+00:00
Formatting changes across lots of notes, creating custom plugins, diagnosing problems with community plugins, creating a syncing program that compares my vault (with publish:true frontmatter) to my blog repo and if see changes then automatically updates the repo (which is used to build my site), creating a tool that converts inline urls to markdown footnotes, etc.

Obsidian is my source of truth and Claude is really good at managing text, formatting, markdown, JS, etc. I never let it make changes automatically, I don't trust it that much yet, but it has undoubtedly saved me hours of manual fiddling with plugins and formatting alone.
Show HN: Kabit – A habit tracker
by iamrahulrao | 2025-06-17 03:03:33+00:00
Hi HN, I'm Rahul, and I come from a design background. I've always wanted to create my own app, but my lack of coding skills held me back. Fortunately, with AI advancement, I was finally able to get started.

I wanted to track my habits, but most trackers on the App Store offered features I didn't need. I simply wanted to track whether I completed or missed my habits, see basic stats about missed days, and have a streak indicator for motivation. This is what sparked my journey.

Initially, even setting up the project in Xcode was confusing. It took countless back-and-forth sessions to establish proper file architecture. Since tools like Cursor and Windsurf weren't mainstream yet, I constantly relied on ChatGPT (and later Claude) to generate and fix code.

A couple of months after launch, a popular Middle Eastern influencer randomly promoted my app on Instagram to her followers. My app suddenly had over 500 reviews in just one week. Unfortunately, I knew nothing about paywall testing or pricing strategy, so I couldn't fully capitalize on this momentum.

This experience launched me into learning about marketing, testing different approaches, and adding features customers requested. I'm incredibly proud of what I built and have since created five more apps.

What Makes Kabit Different

Kabit is beautifully simple—a no-fluff habit tracker that embodies you. You use it to mark your successes and failures. I use Kabit every day, not just because it's my creation, but because it genuinely helps me see my progress. It doesn't suggest or recommend anything. It simply shows what you did and didn't do. That's it.

If you appreciate this straightforward approach to habit tracking, I'd recommend giving Kabit a try.

I never expected Kabit to receive this kind of response, and I'm incredibly thankful for the feedback and progress so far. Cheers!
by bsenftner | 2025-06-17 03:04:09+00:00
> It might cite non existing diverging opinions, misuse sources or introduce subtle changes in a citation.

Just like a person could, which is why one validates. AI is not one's sole information. That's dangerous, to say the least. It also helps to stay within one's formal education, and/or experience, and stay within logical boundaries one can track themselves. It is really all about understanding what you are doing, committing to run without you.
by pizlonator | 2025-06-17 03:04:36+00:00
> Not sure what this has to do with SSA or not? Maybe you're saying if you don't have SSA then value numbering requires extra book-keeping to keep track of the names? that's true but the book-keeping only kicks when a name is updated, not at every program point.

It is the case that if you do a flow-insensitive analysis of variables over SSA, it will be equivalent to a flow-sensitive analysis of variables, because of the static single assignment property. I think that's what the author is trying to say, and I agree.

> To wit MLIR, an SSA IR, handily supports both sparse and dense dataflow analysis:

I don't think dense vs sparse analysis is the same thing as the use of the word "sparse" in the post.

> This is true of course but I struggle to think of a reasonable semantic that would enable you to refine/change/alter the type of a value that wasn't an operation.

If you're compiling a dynamically typed language, for example.
by PaulHoule | 2025-06-17 03:04:44+00:00
I dunno, this documentation is a gawdawful mess

https://mui.com/material-ui/

and you can't ^F which strings are allowed for a particular prop in the documentation because they only document what they feel like documenting (if you really want answers ^F the source code.) When I try scanning for a prop visually there's a good chance I'll skip over it in the 70 or so props that a control supports, particularly considering that only some of those are one the page for that component which says "it also supports the props of parent components" and the parent pages say that and so forth. Never mind the things that are hidden behind slots.

Ask an LLM how to customize a control and more often or not it gives the right answer and it's more straightforward to confirm how it works and really understand it by looking at the docs and the source code given that hint.

LLMs really fall down right now at pointing out references. Microsoft's Copilot frequently answers questions correctly but I can swear I've never seen it give a correct citation for anything.
by jjav | 2025-06-17 03:05:17+00:00
> If I could go back, I’d tell my younger self not to stick around under bad leadership or in an unhealthy environment.

The one thing I'd add is, be aware of the politics of the organization.

Is this new manager seen by his bosses to be doing a great job? Or are they still trying to get traction?

I once went from the best manager in my career straight to the worst one due to a reorg. But after a couple months it was starting to become clear upper management didn't think he was so great either. So I waited it out and the new manager lasted less than a year. So I didn't have to give up and leave a team & job I otherwise enjoyed. Had I reacted too quickly I probably would've quit in disgust and later regretted it when the bad manager was removed.
by rhines | 2025-06-17 03:05:32+00:00
Plenty of university students around me who will order a $8 boba tea and be disappointed that the boba is cooked poorly or the milk ratio isn't good, and then do it again a couple days later.

But the difference is that food elicits cravings - you buy it because you imagine how good it'll be if it's done right this time and your body pressures you to buy it. Apps don't do that.
by never_inline | 2025-06-17 03:06:25+00:00
Here's a system prompt I tend to use

## Instructions * Be concise * Use simple sentences. But feel free to use technical jargon. * Do NOT overexplain basic concepts. Assume the user is technically proficient. * AVOID flattering, corporate-ish or marketing language. Maintain a neutral viewpoint. * AVOID vague and / or generic claims which may seem correct but are not substantiated by the the context.

Cannot completely avoid hallucinations and it's good to avoid AI for text that's used for human-to-human communication. But this makes AI answers to coding and technical questions easier to read.
by o11c | 2025-06-17 03:06:39+00:00
This is quite informative for an introduction to one particular type of IR. It's better than some others because it actually does mention that there are alternatives in some places. And since what people are using an IR for varies a lot from program to program, there is no alternative that is always best (there are trends, but even then you should be aware of the cost comparison).

Since this post talks a lot about SSA, it might be worth mentioning the thing that probably confuses people the most: how do you know if a variable is valid in a BB. It can be informative (but memory-inefficient, and probably optimization-inefficient) to require all incoming variables to go through phi nodes. Also think about how destructors and outward `goto/break` affect dominance in strange ways.

The second understated thing about SSA is: exactly how much additional data do you store for exactly what period of time. "Don't store the extra data" means many passes will have to recompute it, but "do store the extra data" makes it costlier when passes have to invalidate it. Also make sure you don't run out of RAM!

My own post (more focused on interpreters, but not exclusively so) probably talks more about alternative implementation choices (though I do say "don't do that" for strictly-worse ones, and there are some I still haven't gone into detail about) in many compiler stages than any other source I've seen:

https://gist.github.com/o11c/6b08643335388bbab0228db763f9921...

The main aspect about the linked post that annoys me is that it falls into the trap of declaring a duality between "stack-based" and "register-based", when in fact there are so many options that the difference within each of those named categories can be bigger than the difference between them.
by SamPatt | 2025-06-17 03:09:14+00:00
I share this concern - given the trajectory of improvements I do hope that we'll have something close to this level that can run locally within 18 months or so. And of course the closed source stuff will likely be better by then, but I genuinely believe I would choose an open source version of this right now if I had the choice.

The open source alternatives I've used aren't there yet on my 4090. Fingers crossed we'll get there.
by karl11 | 2025-06-17 03:09:26+00:00
There is an important concept alluded to here around skin in the game: "the AI is not going to assume any liability if this code ever malfunctions" -- it is one of the issues I see w/ self-driving cars, planes, etc. If it malfunctions, there is no consequence for the 'AI' (no skin in the game) but there are definitely consequences for any humans involved.
by almostgotcaught | 2025-06-17 03:10:06+00:00
> A good IR means that the only contract between compiler passes is the IR itself.

this is like impossible (or at least np-hard). phase ordering exists and will always exist - SLP vectorizer will dramatically affect passes after it and sometimes even passes before it!

> Writing a cool new pass that obeys the IR’s laws is not going to break the other passes.

I don't really get how you can fail to obey the IR's laws other than just emitting unparseable IR? alternatively if you like have uses without defs or flip-flopping types, the verifier needs to catch that after the guilty pass and just bail (not put the onus on the subsequent passes to fix).

Anyway IMHO (even though no one asked me), IR needs to have enough structure/info that you can quickly reproduce whatever metadata you need for XYZ arbitrary analysis. Meaning it should represent all of the useful/necessary things (don't make me infer non-negativity structurally if I can just annotate) and it should propagate those things across rewrites.
by demosthanos | 2025-06-17 03:10:29+00:00
I spend way more time on YouTube than I ought, but it's on a pull basis, not a push basis. I go to YouTube and go to my subscriptions or to recommendations on the Home screen.

I can't imagine wanting YouTube to be able to push content onto my phone at arbitrary times of its choosing. What benefit does that give you over the subscription feed and home screen?
by lexandstuff | 2025-06-17 03:10:51+00:00
Maybe, but there's also some evidence that AI coding tools aren't making anyone more productive. One study from last year found that there was no increase in developer velocity but a dramatic increase in bugs.[1] Granted, the technology has advanced since this study, but many of the fundamental issues of LLM unreliability remain. Additionally, a recent study has highlighted the significant cognitive costs associated with offloading problem-solving onto LLMs, revealing that individuals who do so develop significantly weaker neural connectivity than those who don't [2].

It's very possible that AI is literally making us less productive and dumber. Yet they are being pushed by subscription-peddling companies as if it is impossible to operate without them. I'm glad some people are calling it out.

[1] https://devops.com/study-finds-no-devops-productivity-gains-...

[2] https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.08872