MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ggm | 2025-06-03 05:11:38+00:00
> Any licensing agreements would likely involve a settlement of the suit between the two sides, and require some amount of damages paid for the use of music so far. Agreements would also likely involve the music companies taking stakes in the AI companies. Music companies often take stakes as part of licensing agreements with startups. Universal, Warner and Sony had stakes in Spotify when the music-streaming service launched.

"If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
by stop50 | 2025-06-03 05:11:47+00:00
Lets analyze this: 1. Paragraph: intro and an citation

2. paragraph:

2 wrong things, Airdrop is proprietary, the opensource programs are reverse engineered and the EU gave Apple two options that they can do within the timeframe they gave: open it for others to use and implement or to replace it with an existing public solution.

3. paragraph:

Mostly the authors opinion

4. Paragraph:

captures what the EU intends to do. Apple could allow an service to read notifications or send the notifications themself to an device by making the protocol public.

5. Paragraph:

Another Opinion. Nothing to judge at.

last paragraph:

The Allegory is in my opinion wrong: not all doors need to be open. To stay in the Hotel:

The customer checks in but he needs to use an unreliable keycard instead of his phone for opening the door, because only Apple devices can open the door to the room. With an Appledevice the room is already at the temperature, the light is at an prefered color and the staff knows at which time you want to be waked up. with any other phone you have to manually adjust the temperature, the lightcolor is an uncomfortable white that can't be changed and you have to inform the staff by going down about the wakeup time.
by lechatonnoir | 2025-06-03 05:11:55+00:00
One question is whether, even after all that backpedaling, you feel you could've achieved the same or a similar result in those five days. My findings have been that it's a net plus for productivity, but I'm a bit less sure whether I prefer the way work feels when a lot of it is just going back and cleaning up after the growth. (Of course, that sounds like a familiar statement for a lot of engineers before LLMs, too.)
by tho23j4o3j4324 | 2025-06-03 05:12:01+00:00
Cursor is proprietary, but is known to index code for doing queries etc.

Cline is closer in spirit to GPTel, but since CLINE is an actual business, it does seem to do well off the bat. That said, I haven't found it to be "hugely better" compared to whatever you can hack in GPTel.

Quite frankly being able to hack the tools on the go in Elisp, makes GPTel far far better (for some of us anyway).

(Thanks for creating GPTel BTW!)
by vojtechrichter | 2025-06-03 05:12:20+00:00
Very relatable, and I agree to some extent. At least part of the things you're pursuing should be fun to you, because if they're not, why even bother?

I've been stuck in this mindset that I need to find a niche people care about, a problem people have, but none of this is gonna get any results (most likely), if you're not passionate about the topic.

So just do what interests you, what you find cool, and the world will adapt.
by throw310822 | 2025-06-03 05:13:13+00:00
The meaning I get from your comment is:

"We're unwillingly and blindly stepping into a war, we should have done more war!"

Maybe we should have done less war and less talking about war, don't you think? Talked more with Russia (let alone not provoke it into a confrontation for an entire decade- ask Victoria "fuck the EU" Nuland), built up clear and safe and agreed boundaries, etc.
by pranav_harshan | 2025-06-03 05:13:23+00:00
I absolutely agree, taking notes yourself is a key part of learning. This isn’t trying to replace that. It’s more of a backup for when lectures are long, fast-paced, or you just can’t stay fully engaged the whole time.

The idea is to support the process — help with review, fill in gaps, and make it easier to revisit and actually use what was said in class.
by motorest | 2025-06-03 05:13:59+00:00
> My problem I guess is that maybe this is just Dunning-Kruger esq. When you don't know what you don't know you get the impression it's smart. When you do, you think it's rubbish.

I see your point. Indeed there are two completely different points of view regarding the output of LLMs:

* Hey, I managed to vibecode my way into a fully working web service with a React SPA after a couple of prompts, and a full automated test suite to boot.

* This project is nowhere as clean as I would have written it, and doesn't even follow my pet coding conventions.

One side lauds LLMs, the other complains they output mainly crap.

The truth of the matter is that the vast majority of software engineers write crap code, as the definition of "crap code" is "something I would have done differently". Opinionated engineers look at the output of LLMs and accuse it of being crap code. Eppur si muove.
by simonw | 2025-06-03 05:14:02+00:00
The first comment on that article caught my attention:

> I am a grad student in the philosophy department at SFSU and teach critical thinking. This semester I pivoted my entire class toward a course design that feels more like running an obstacle course with AI than engaging with Plato. And my students are into it.

It would be interesting to take a class of students and set them an assignment to come up with assignments for their fellow students that could not be completed using ChatGPT.

About ten years ago I went to a BarCamp conference where one of the events was a team quiz where the questions were designed to be difficult to solve using Google - questions like "What island is this?" where all you got was the outline of the island. It was really fun. Designing "ChatGPT-proof assignments" feels to me like a similar level of intellectual challenge.
by petersellers | 2025-06-03 05:14:26+00:00
I'm not so sure that would work well in practice. How would the inexperienced developer know that the code created by the AI was correct? What if subtle bugs are introduced that the inexperienced developer didn't catch until it went out into production? What if the developer didn't even know how to debug those problems correctly? Would they know that the code they are writing is maintainable and extensible, or are they just going to generate a new layer of code on top of the old one any time they need a new feature?
Show HN: Opensports.ai – Ask Cricket Stats in Natural Language
by anipeas | 2025-06-03 05:14:33+00:00
Hello!

I built opensports.ai, a lightweight web app that lets you explore cricket stats (and soon other sports) using natural language. Just type something like:

“Kohli’s performance in overs 11–15 at Chinnaswamy”

“Top 10 IPL players with 600+ runs in a season”

“Dhoni vs left-arm spinners in IPL death overs since 2018”

It uses a fine-tuned LLM to convert your query into SQL and generate a table or plot. The data comes from detailed ball-by-ball match info and updates weekly.

This started as a fun scrappy weekend project and has grown into something usable. Still a bit rough in parts, but it’s been super rewarding to build as a cricket + AI nerd

Would love your thoughts, feedback, or ideas on what else to add.

Try it here: https://opensports.ai Happy to activate accounts—just comment or DM (keeping it small for now due to infra costs)!
by wltr | 2025-06-03 05:16:03+00:00
Do they? Your sources are what, Russians saying they have 6 thousands warheads? Well, yeah, the last time they tested something to scare everyone, their scary missile did not work. I expect most of their warheads in the state of being dysfunctional. It’s a paper tiger, it’s not China, it’s a fake state, a failed one. A mafia covered as a state.

Also, do they invest enough to keep it working? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44165277

So, which 6,000 are you talking about?
by gtani | 2025-06-03 05:16:22+00:00
This is a complex set of constraints, and people in Arizona, Nevada and Colorado etc have different perspectives on this. In my mind Lakes Powell/ Mead running low is somehow congruent to the /ZB Treasury futures contract (30 year) running lower, somehow there's a common economic invariant lurking in there.

The somewhat brighter bullet points: Northern California reservoirs are doing prety well, and the Bureau of Reclamatn can again kick the can by draining Flaming Gorge but i think this only works every few years:

https://graphs.water-data.com/flaminggorge/

https://cdec.water.ca.gov/resapp/RescondMain

______________________________

weekly watch, showing, surprisingly, nontrivial drought in Florida but drought did visibly abate in Nebraska: https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/Maps/CompareTwoWeeks.aspx
by ggm | 2025-06-03 05:16:40+00:00
The curse of the port is the 3 fold nature of it's design.

1) the form factor universality is both a strength and a curse. This one physical form factor is small enough it can live for a couple of decades, and can handle high current, high speed video and data in general as well as slow speed HID device attachment.

2) they allowed more than one protocol to co-exist inside the physical form factor. If Thunderbird was not USB-C there would be one less problem to deal with

3) acceptance demanded they make it easy to be USB3/2 and old form factor downgrade compatible, but they didn't stipulate packing density. Thus we have Macs which will happily talk to a USB-A connector in a dongle, but the physical spacing of the ports mean having two devices plugged in can be impossible.

There is a fourth thing outside their control: How licenced protocols like HDMI and Displayport want to play over this transport. I have Lenovo/Thinkpad badged dock, it says its conforming to spec. There are things I simply can't do over it, like run two displayports, despite having two display port holes on the back of the dock: Some selection of passthrough and downgrade (refresh rate? pixel count) gets in the way between Lenovo and my Mac. (I am using industrial strength high grade cables)

There is a fifth problem: The chipset inside the cable.

There is a sixth problem: Power draw negotiation protocols (pick one? two?)
by simonw | 2025-06-03 05:16:56+00:00
I think Joel is a professional, and that's why he says "reading code is harder than writing code".

You seem to be misunderstanding me. I'm not saying "anyone who thinks reading code is harder than writing code is an amateur". I'm saying "reading code IS harder than writing code, which is why being good at reading code is what separates experienced programmers from beginners."
by leoedin | 2025-06-03 05:17:02+00:00
I briefly got excited about the possibility of local LLMs as an offline knowledge base. Then I tried asking Gemma for a list of the tallest buildings in the world and it just made up a bunch. It even provided detailed information about the designers, year of construction etc.

I still hope it will get better. But I wonder if an LLM is the right tool for factual lookup - even if it is right, how do I know?

I wonder how quickly this will fall apart as LLM content proliferates. If it’s bad now, how bad will it be in a few years when there’s loads of false but credible LLM generated blogspam in the training data?
by pier25 | 2025-06-03 05:17:08+00:00
I'm mostly skeptical about AI capabilities but I also think it will never be a profitable business. Let's not forget AI companies need to recoup a trillion dollars (so far) just to break even [1].

VCs are already doubting if the billions invested into data centers are going to generate a profit [1 and 2].

AI companies will need to generate profits at some point. Would people still be optimistic about Claude etc if they had to pay say $500 per month to use it given its current capabilities? Probably not.

So far the only company generating real profits out of AI is Nvidia.

[1] https://www.goldmansachs.com/insights/articles/will-the-1-tr...

[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/02/business/ai-data-centers-...
by _Algernon_ | 2025-06-03 05:17:09+00:00
Structural incentives explain the computer trajectory. While they were purely in the academic realm they were a force of empoverment, but this ended when economic incentives became the main driver. AI has speedrun the academic stage—if it ever existed—and is now speedrunning the enshittification stage.

But there is very little you or I can do about it except choosing not to partake.
by antognini | 2025-06-03 05:17:16+00:00
Biological analogies are always a bit dodgy, but biology hints that this doesn't work very well. Vision is important, particularly for path planning, but the immediate feedback of proprioception and touch is more important for stability. Think of how hard it is to walk normally when your leg has fallen asleep --- your visual cues remain unchanged, but you lose the immediate feedback loop from your leg. You can do it, but your gait is very unnatural and inefficient.
by 6LLvveMx2koXfwn | 2025-06-03 05:17:31+00:00
Unfortunately Capitalism unhindered by regulation is what we wanted, and Capitalism unhindered by regulation is what we have. We, in the western world, were in the privileged position of having a choice, and we chose individual profit over the communal good. I'm not entirely sure it could have been any other way outside of books given the fact we're essentially animals.
by orsorna | 2025-06-03 05:17:52+00:00
Neither of you read the content of the OP methinks. Many of the AI skeptics framed in the blog do not leverage agentic frameworks. In fact, they are explicitly turned off by how the chat interface cannot tackle large codebases as you can't just throw vector embeddings into the chat window. Thus, they write off AI completely. In order to do this you need to set up your IDE and connect it to an API, either local or one of the paid services. I am not aware of any paid service that has an unlimited token plan through the API.
by lechatonnoir | 2025-06-03 05:18:44+00:00
I somehow can't reply to your child comment.

It depends on whether the cost of search or of verification dominates. When searching for common consumer products, yeah, this isn't likely to help much, and in a sense the scales are tipped against the AI for this application.

But if search is hard and verification is easy, even a faulty faster search is great.

I've run into a lot of instances with Linux where some minor, low level thing has broken and all of the stackexchange suggestions you can find in two hours don't work and you don't have seven hours to learn about the Linux kernel and its various services and their various conventions in order to get your screen resolutions correct, so you just give up.

Being in a debug loop in the most naive way with Claude, where it just tells you what to try and you report the feedback and direct it when it tunnel visions on irrelevant things, has solved many such instances of this hopelessness for me in the last few years.
by quanto | 2025-06-03 05:18:57+00:00
> Today, engineers working on AI systems also need to think deeply and critically about the relationship between language and culture and the history and philosophy of technology. When they fail to do so, their systems literally start to break down.

Perhaps so. But not in the (quasi-)academic sense that the author is thinking. It's not the lack of an engineer's academic knowledge in history and philosophy that makes an AI system fail.

> Then there’s the newfound ability of non-technical people in the humanities to write their own code. This is a bigger deal than many in my field seem to recognize. I suspect this will change soon. The emerging generation of historians will simply take it for granted that they can create their own custom research and teaching tools and deploy them at will, more or less for free.

This is the lede buried deep inside the article. When the basic coding skill (or any skill) is commoditized, it's the people with complementary skills that benefit the most.
by soulofmischief | 2025-06-03 05:19:28+00:00
Reminds me of the Transcendental Painting Group in the early 20th century around Santa Fe, New Mexico, whose members explored the nature of substance and form and spirituality within the total abstract.

It was a reaction to the fact that too many contemporary painters in the region focused on landscapes, capturing the beauty of the area through rigid photorealism. This was seen to TPG as derivative and completely missing the essence of painting; after all, cameras were now able to take increasingly vivid shots of natural landscapes, and as such the value of such paintings began to decline.

An excerpt from their manifesto:

The Transcendental Painting Group is composed of artists who are concerned with the development and presentation of various types of non-representational painting; painting that finds its source in the creative imagination and does not depend upon the objective approach. The word Transcendental has been chosen as a name for the group because it best expresses its aim, which is to carry painting beyond the appearance of the physical world, through new concepts of space, color, light and design, to imaginative realms that are idealistic and spiritual. The work does not concern itself with political, economic, or other social problems. Methods may vary.

Your observation is astute: The recent revolution in generative art and human interfaces is here to stay, and it is the next disruptive and contemporarily misunderstood evolution in art, just as film was to painting. Regardless of how current-generation artists feel, next-generation artists will be born into these tools and adopt them without question, whether directly or through subversion.

One future is in realtime hypercontextualization... Art installations which prize subjectivity more than TPG could ever hope to achieve in their time, creating the abstract not from the mind of the artist, but the observer. Art which is not just observed subjectively, but created subjectively, the observer being able to fully experience themselves from new angles, guided by the hand of the artist.

These installations may be physical or digital, and will use all sorts of signals as input. Local signals, remote signals, colors, shapes, sounds, brain waves, weather patterns, HUMINT, data dumps, trending topics... you name it. Any information will be fair game for integration and resynthesization. Observers will weep, will walk away with a new feeling or realization about themselves, will stay up that night staring at the ceiling and contemplating deep, unearthed aspects of themselves. And for some installations, the observer may continue to participate with the installation over a period of time, whether in person or digitally, and sometimes in a way which incorporates the interactions between observers. This kind of experience is only possible at scale with generative art.

And while still a pipe dream 10 years ago, it's become an increasingly viable reality, especially with the recent upgrade to GPT 4o's generation capabilities, or tools like Sora, or the incredible community tooling around Stable Diffusion, etc.
by scarface_74 | 2025-06-03 05:19:31+00:00
One hand, I used my time at BigTech starting at 46 to pay off debt, decontent my life, move to a tax free state (worked remotely) and be in a position where I didn’t need the stress of having to chase BigTech income and to put it on my resume. I had a game plan going in to only stay for the four year initial offer.

My wife and I are both short so business class is not a big deal for us. But we do spend $2000 a year for lounge access to airport lounges via 2 credit cards and we are both Platinum Medallion on Delta which gives us automatic C+ regional upgrades.

But I just can’t care enough about First class flights. I’ll take regional free upgrades but that’s about it. While we travel a lot domestically as a hobby post Covud and post kids. We don’t look forward to long international flights and are doing our first 10 hour+ non stop flight in a couple of weeks and we aren’t looking forward to being in a metal tube that long.

We are at most going to do two or three long flights a year.

As far as the personal trainer, my commitment device use to be teaching fitness classes as a hobby and running races with friends. Then it was having a home gym with cardio equipment and a big screen TV on the wall.

Now at 50 it’s I never want to be tired running through the airport with a 50 pound book bag on my back and walking around a city when I travel. I bought my current condo purposefully to be right above the gym.

But as far retirement? It scares me more than I look forward to it. With my working remotely, work is not the gating factor for anything in my life.

But on the other hand, while my wife travels a lot domestically by herself, I don’t think she would ever want to fly economy as a single woman internationally. I get it.

No one would ever call us frugal when it comes to travel, lounge access, month long stays in different cities. But I’m very frugal when it comes to fixed expenses.
by bmo-at | 2025-06-03 05:19:40+00:00
Location: Germany

Remote: Yes, ideally 100% with occasional travel possible

Willing to relocate: Within Germany depending on offer

Technologies: Go, Docker, Kubernetes, JavaScript/Typescript, NodeJS, Git, Github, CI/CD, Postgres, SQL, Prometheus, Grafana, Windows/Unix/Linux

Résumé/CV: https://beemo.at

Email: jan-robin [at] aumann.org

Recent masters graduate in applied compsci, with a few years of experience as a corporate student during my studies, developing mostly web backend with some full stack experience. Consider myself to be an allrounder, from DevOps to Monitoring I can basically pick up anything pretty quickly. I prefer to work in Go, and my array of private projects reflects that. If you are interested, just shoot me an informal email and get to know me.
by mtlmtlmtlmtl | 2025-06-03 05:20:49+00:00
That's all well and good for this particular example. But in general, the verification can often be so much work it nullifies the advantage of the LLM in the first place.

Something I've been using perplexity for recently is summarizing the research literature on some fairly specific topic(e.g. the state of research on the use of polypharmacy in treatment of adult ADHD). Ideally it should look up a bunch of papers, look at them and provide a summary of the current consensus on the topic. At first, I thought it did this quite well. But I eventually noticed that in some cases it would miss key papers and therefore provide inaccurate conclusions. The only way for me to tell whether the output is legit is to do exactly what the LLM was supposed to do; search for a bunch of papers, read them and conclude on what the aggregate is telling me. And it's almost never obvious from the output whether the LLM did this properly or not.

The only way in which this is useful, then, is to find a random, non-exhaustive set of papers for me to look at(since the LLM also can't be trusted to accurately summarize them). Well, I can already do that with a simple search in one of the many databases for this purpose, such as pubmed, arxiv etc. Any capability beyond that is merely an illusion. It's close, but no cigar. And in this case close doesn't really help reduce the amount of work.

This is why a lot of the things people want to use LLMs for requires a "definiteness" that's completely at odds with the architecture. The fact that LLMs are food at pretending to do it well only serves to distract us from addressing the fundamental architectural issues that need to be solved. I think think any amount of training of a transformer architecture is gonna do it. We're several years into trying that and the problem hasn't gone away.
by cyberax | 2025-06-03 05:21:27+00:00
I looked through the source code, and it looks reasonable. The code is well-commented (even _over_ commented a bit). There are probably around ~700 meaningful lines of pure code. So this should be about 2 weeks of work for a good developer. This is without considering the tests.

And OAuth is not particularly hard to implement, I did that a bunch of times (for server and the client side). It's well-specified and so it fits well for LLMs.

So it's probably more like 2x acceleration for such code? Not bad at all!