MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by somenameforme | 2025-06-19 16:12:54+00:00
Trump's daughter is married to an Orthodox Jew and also converted to Judaism herself. That's something that's not like other religions where you can just say you're a Christian (of this denominator or that) - it's an official, tested, and very extended affair, particularly in the Orthodox tradition. In other words, it's "real." And Trump has always been deferent, come obsequious, to Israel, like many US politicians. In fact he was the first sitting President to visit the Wailing Wall back in his first term - traditionally US Presidents do that before elections.

Evangelicals are also probably the most reliable base for the Republican party (though remain a minority within it), and they have an extremely positive relationship with Israel.* And then on top of this the Israel lobby is well funded and tends to shower pro-Israel politicians in money in public, and I doubt the support ends there.

This is a somewhat long-winded way to say that - yes I do believe this administration is completely and sincerely focused on Israel and the interests of Israel, and I think there are a million reasons to think this is the case. And I also don't think this is a good thing, because the Israeli government seems to have lost their minds, and I think the world was already far closer to WW3 (and has been for a number of years now) than most appreciate.

What would be billions dead because of a nutter government and US politicians love affair with Israel would make just about as much sense as Brits killing Germans because a Bosnian Serb assassinated an Austro-Hungarian royalty.

----

* - that's actually changing with younger generations, but it still remains mostly true.
by anon7000 | 2025-06-19 16:13:09+00:00
There are dozens of OS designs available for Linux. Unlike windows or Mac, you could change most things you think are ugly. There are large parts of windows I think are ugly, for example. Gnome isn’t ugly at all, and actually performs many times better than windows (and sometimes mac). Bad performance is ugly to me.

There are a huge number of examples here: https://www.reddit.com/r/unixporn/
by kypro | 2025-06-19 16:14:02+00:00
There are few things I hold strong opinions on, but where I do if they're also out of step with what most people think I am very vocal about them.

I see this in rationalist spaces too – it doesn't really make sense for people to talk about things that they believe in strongly but that 95%+ of the public also believe in (like the existence of air), or that they don't have a strong opinion on.

I am a very vocal doomer on AI because I predict with high probability it's going to be very bad for humanity and this is an opinion which, although shared by some, is quite controversial and probably only held by 30% of the public. Given the importance of the subject, my confidence, and that fact I feel the vast majority of people are even wrong or are significantly underweighting caetrosphohic risks, I have to be vocal about it.

Do I acknowledge I might be wrong? Sure, but for me the probability is low enough that I'm comfortable making very strong and unqualified statements about what I believe will happen. I suspect others in the rationalist community like Eliezer Yudkowsky think similarly.
by frakt0x90 | 2025-06-19 16:14:54+00:00
In addition to being great artists, I also learned dynamic programming from this guy via his outstanding lectures: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tp4_UXaVyx8&list=PLJl4xQazDg...

It looks like there's a more recent series as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4-cftqTcdI
by ceejayoz | 2025-06-19 16:15:51+00:00
"Explode until you figure it out" served Falcon 9 well.

I'm inclined to see Constellation/SLS/Orion/etc. as at least as wasteful as the explosions, at least so far. Which one wins out will depend on the end results.

I'd also note Apollo 13 was definitely a failure.
by Ccecil | 2025-06-19 16:15:57+00:00
Columbia river would be my guess.

Explains the Cooper's ferry evidence in Idaho [1].

I hear there is oral tradition from the coastal and Oregon tribes about the glacial "Missoula floods" which took place repeatedly between 10k-20k years ago.

[1] https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/artifacts-in-idaho...
by rxtexit | 2025-06-19 16:16:03+00:00
I think part of the problem is that people have the wrong mental models currently.

I am a non-software engineer and I fully expect someday to be a professional "vibe coder". It will be within a domain though and not a generalist like a real software engineer.

I think "vibe coding" in this context will have a type of relationship to software engineering the way excel has a relationship to the professional mathematician.

The knocks on "vibe coding" by software engineers are like a mathematician shitting on Excel for not being able to do symbolic manipulation.

It is not wrong but missing the forest for the trees.
by badc0ffee | 2025-06-19 16:16:50+00:00
> Your displays are high enough resolution that you may not notice the compromises being made, especially if you don’t get an opportunity to compare it with real fractional rendering, but the compromises are real, and pretty bad at lower resolutions. Pixel-perfect lines are unattainable to you, and that matters a lot in some things. And you might be shocked at how much crisper and better old, subpixel-enabled text rendering is on that same display.

Do you have a test case where I can see this in action?
by charcircuit | 2025-06-19 16:17:09+00:00
>Riot doesn't really have much of a choice

True, but the main point of a kernel mode anticheat is the ability to verify that the OS and game isn't being tampered with. If the OS has that capability already built in, then the needed for a kernel mode anticheat diminishes.

>they certainly would produce a loadable module if there was enough install base to justify it

It's not realistic for there to be such an install base to support such complexity compared to having them implement a simple API into their game and server.
by diggan | 2025-06-19 16:17:41+00:00
I think this is the moment you're referring to? https://youtu.be/LCEmiRjPEtQ?si=QWkimLapX6oIqAjI&t=236

> maybe you've seen a lot of GitHub code is not just like code anymore there's a bunch of like English interspersed with code and so I think kind of there's a growing category of new kind of code so not only is it a new programming paradigm it's also remarkable to me that it's in our native language of English and so when this blew my mind a few uh I guess years ago now I tweeted this and um I think it captured the attention of a lot of people and this is my currently pinned tweet uh is that remarkably we're now programming computers in English now

I agree that it's remarkable that you can tell a computer "What is the biggest city in Maresme?" and it tries to answer that question. I don't think he's saying "English is the best language to make complicated systems uncomplicated with", or anything to that effect. Just like I still think "Wow, this thing is fucking flying" every time I sit onboard a airplane, LLMs are kind of incredible in some ways, yet so "dumb" in some other ways. It sounds to me like he's sharing a similar sentiment but about LLMs.

> although it's "in one ear, out the other" with most of his audience.

Did you talk with them? Otherwise this is just creating an imaginary argument against some people you just assume they didn't listen.

> If I give you a glazed donut with a brief asterisk about how sugar can cause diabetes will it stop you from eating the donut?

If I wanted to eat a donut at that point, I guess I'd eat it anyways? But my aversion to risk (or rather the lack of it) tend to be non-typical.

What does my answer mean in the context of LLMs and non-determinism?

> You also expect deterministic outcomes when making analogies with power plants and fabs.

Are you saying that the analogy should be deterministic or that power plants and fabs are deterministic? Because I don't understand if the former, and the latter really isn't deterministic by any definition I recognize that word by.
by yamazakiwi | 2025-06-19 16:18:06+00:00
Wisdom tends to resemble shallow aphorisms despite being framed as universal. Rather than interrogating wisdom's relevance or depth, many people simply repeat it uncritically as a shortcut to insight. This reflects more about how people use wisdom than the content itself, but I believe that behavior contributes to our perception of the importance of wisdom.

It frequently reduces complex problems into comfortable oversimplifications.

Maybe you don't think that is real wisdom, and maybe that's sort of your point, but then what does real wisdom look like? Should wisdom make you considerate of the multiple contexts it does and doesn't affect? Maybe the issue is we need to better understand how to evaluate and use wisdom. People who truly understand a piece of wisdom should communicate deeply rather than parroting platitudes.

Also to be frank, wisdom is a way of controlling how others perceive a problem, and is a great way to manipulate others by propping up ultimatums or forcing scope. Much of past wisdom is unhelpful or highly irrelevant to modern life.

e.g. "Good things come to those who wait."

Passive waiting rarely produces results. Initiative, timing, and strategic action tend to matter more than patience.
by vel0city | 2025-06-19 16:18:07+00:00
I've seen a lot of transportation infrastructure projects at least partially funded from the bill around me. I've charged at EV charging locations funded by NEVI, and I've charged at some stations built expecting NEVI funding that is now on hold. I've ridden on busses purchased by grants issued through the IIJA. I've seen the ground broken for building new bike trails around me based on grants from the IIJA, and they're getting close to done. The highways around me have current construction projects underway which were funded through the IIJA.

I see some of the things funded by the IIJA every day of my life.

And that's not including the projects which are still being worked on getting approved including projects to replace sewage lines in my area, reworking stormwater drainage systems, and additional flood control projects, all of which are planned to be funded through the IIJA and all of which I think my city could really use. 60% of the IIJA funding hasn't been spent yet.
by codingdave | 2025-06-19 16:18:09+00:00
Slack is free for small teams that don't need lots of chat history. By the time you get big enough to need those features, you probably have some standard platform in place for email, almost all of which also have chat solutions from the same vendor.

So I'm not terribly interested in new competitors in this space because for larger orgs, chat is an add-on to other services, and I don't want to bring in a new vendor just for a chat alternative, even if the existing solution has problems.

Basically, price isn't the true barrier - simplicity in vendor relations and enterprise tech footprint is the bigger concern.
by adrian_b | 2025-06-19 16:18:10+00:00
The example where computing an expression with posits has much better accuracy than when computing with IEEE FP32 is extremely misleading.

Regardless whether you use 32-bit posits or IEEE FP32, you can represent only the same count of numbers, i.e. of points on the "real" numbers axis.

When choosing a representation format, you cannot change the number of representable points, you can just choose to distribute the points in different places.

The IEEE FP32 format distributes the points so that the relative rounding error is approximately constant over the entire range.

Posits crowd the points into the segment close to zero, obtaining there a better rounding error, with the price that the segments distant to zero have very rare points, i.e. very high rounding errors.

Posits behave pretty much like a fixed-point format that has gradual overflow instead of a sharp cut-off. For big numbers you do not get an overflow exception that would stop the computation, but the accuracy of the results becomes very bad. For small numbers the accuracy is good, but not as good as for a fixed-point number, because some bit patterns must be reserved for representing the big numbers, in order to avoid overflow.

The example that demonstrates better accuracy for posits is manufactured by choosing values in the range where posits have better accuracy. It is trivial to manufacture an almost identical example where posits have worse accuracy, by choosing values in an interval where FP32 has better accuracy.

There are indeed problems where posits can outperform IEEE FP32, but it is quite difficult to predict which are those problems, because for a complex problem it can be very difficult to predict which will be the ranges for the intermediate results. This is the very reason why floating-point numbers are preferred over fixed-point numbers, to avoid the necessity of such analyses.

While for IEEE formats it is possible to make estimates of the relative errors of the results of a long computation, due to the guaranteed bounds for the relative error of each operation, that is pretty much impossible for posits, where the relative error is a function of the values of the operands, so you cannot estimate it without actually doing the computation.

For scientific and technical computations, posits are pretty much useless, because those have very wide value ranges for their data, also because those computations need error estimations, and also because posits can have significant advantages only for small number formats, of 32 bits or less, while those computations need mostly 64-bit numbers or even bigger.

Nevertheless, for special problems that are very well characterized, i.e. you know with certainty some narrow ranges for the values of the input data and of the intermediate results, posits could get much more accuracy than IEEE FP32, but they could have good performance only if they were implemented in hardware.
by atomicnumber3 | 2025-06-19 16:19:30+00:00
What desktop env are you using when you try linux? And what non-linux UI are you used to?

I've found Ubuntu's default, and "vanilla gnome shell" to both be pretty cohesive and "modern".

And at the same time, I've never really felt like Windows or Mac actually end up with a more cohesive UI than the various linux desktop envs. For every Qt/GTK theming mismatch, I find a Windows mismatch between apps due to Windows being 12+ generations of design languages and toolkits built on top of each other. (e.g. the 3+ distinct "current" windows control panel looks (11, then 10, then 7, then XP as you keep digging into more and more obscure settings). And apps typically "freeze" at the UI design when they're born. e.g. XP apps still look XP, and so on.

And on Mac, you have the (relatively!) small number of apps actually artfully designed for macos. And then you have all the other ones - electron, java-based, cross-platform Qt apps (which naturally look like Qt apps... just like on KDE/gnome).

There's of course various quibbles over font render, that have existed since time immemorial. I don't think any one platform really wins hands-down here, though it's my understanding that mac typically does the best (as long as none of the non-mac-native apps manage to mess it up).

I really think people just have double-standards at this point, where their "home" platform's flaws are minor, and candidates to replace it must be flawless. (I'll also admit I'm the same, though NATURALLY I think I'm right - i figure if everything is electron and mismatched anyway, I might as well have a free-as-in-freedom operating system under it. Nobody is putting ads in my start menu or advertising xbox game pass to me in my notifications.
by simiones | 2025-06-19 16:19:37+00:00
I'm not talking about fuel that you need to get back, we're still at the "leaving Earth" case. The point is that you need, say, 1000 tons of fuel to leave the Earth. Your rocket then will weigh [weight of empty rocket] + [weight of payload] + 1000 tons. And it is this mass that the engines will have to push while ascending. Of course, the fuel gets spent as you ascend - by the time you reach orbit, your rocket is now 1000 tons lighter.
by jandrese | 2025-06-19 16:20:06+00:00
They remind me of the "Effective Altruism" crowd who get completely wound up in these hypothetical logical thought exercises and end up coming to insane conclusions that they feel trapped in because they got there using pure logic. Not realizing that their initial conditions were highly artificial so any conclusion they reach is only of academic value.

There is a term for this. "Getting stuck up your own butt." It wouldn't be so bad except that said people often take on an air of absolute superiority because they used "only logic" and in their head they can not be wrong. Many people end up thinking like this as teenagers or 20 somethings, but most will have someone in their life who smacks them over the head and tells them to stop being so foolish, but if you have enough money and the Internet you can insulate yourself from that kind of oversight.
by Eggpants | 2025-06-19 16:20:06+00:00
Just wait for the enshitencation of LLM services.

It going to get wild when the tech bro investors demand ads be the included in responses.

It will be trivial for a version of AdWords where someone pays for response words be replaced. “Car” replaced by “Honda”, variable names like “index” by “this_index_variable_is_sponsered_by_coinbase” etc.

I’m trying to be funny with the last one but something like this will be coming sooner than later. Remember, google search used to be good and was ruined by bonus seeking executives.
by bigyabai | 2025-06-19 16:20:35+00:00
Many of the Chinese expats I've talked to cite this as one of the primary suffocating factors in Chinese society today. Want a girlfriend? Grandma picks who you're dating. Want a child? Grandpa decides your due date. Trying to attend higher education? Your parents might disown you for not starting a family instead.

There are pros and cons to filial relations like this, but my understanding is that it's pushed to it's logical conclusions in much of China. One of my childhood friends from China called his parents "the ball and chain" around other people.
by dzonga | 2025-06-19 16:20:48+00:00
I thought this would be written along the lines of an lllm going through your code - spinning up a railway file. then say have tf for few of the manual dependencies etc that can't be easily inferred.

& get automatic scaling out of the box etc. a more simplified flow rather than wrangling yaml or hcl

in short imaging if k8s was a 2-3 max 5 line docker compose like file
by gametorch | 2025-06-19 16:21:12+00:00
> I hear there is oral tradition from the coastal and Oregon tribes about the glacial "Missoula floods" which took place repeatedly between 10k-20k years ago.

Very cool.

You can still see the ripples from the proglacial lake in Missoula today. [1]

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glacial_Lake_Missoula#/media/F...
by pama | 2025-06-19 16:21:34+00:00
Your experience with fabs must be somewhat limited if you think that the state of the art in fabs produces deterministic results. Please lookup (or ask friends) for the typical yields and error mitigation features of modern chips and try to visualize if you think it is possible to have determinism when the density of circuits starts to approach levels that cannot be imspected with regular optical microscopes anymore. Modern chip fabrication is closer to LLM code in even more ways than what is presented in the video.
by hearsathought | 2025-06-19 16:21:45+00:00
> This insinuation really is only made to Jewish people

Certainly is news to japanese americans ( literally put in concentration camps ), chinese americans, german americans, mexican americans, arab americans, italian americans, catholics in general, indian americans, russian americans, etc.

> so of course they are more aligned with their country than ours, even if they have no direct ties to it whatsoever.

But there are plenty of jewish americans who are pro-israel. Such as jewish americans who joined the israeli military rather than american military.

It doesn't help that jewish americans were the main proponent to allowing dual citizenship in the US.
by ben_w | 2025-06-19 16:21:54+00:00
I don't see it.

To me, it seems to have the same problems as the Google Glass, in that it's far too expensive and doesn't have a clear idea what its own USP is.

That said, while I've played with a few different VR headsets, I've not had a chance to play with the VP, so perhaps there's something in the quality that would become visible if not for the prohibitive price.
by hombre_fatal | 2025-06-19 16:23:05+00:00
Interesting trivia.

After all, if you're not controlling a mechanical print head, then LF+CR vs CR+LF should always land you immediately in same place anyways because you're just moving the pointer around a virtual grid.

So it makes sense to get it wrong in 1998 since you're post-teleprinter while also in the early days of the convention becoming crystalized.
by 0manrho | 2025-06-19 16:23:14+00:00
Precisely. It's why I find this pursuit of making a computer think like a human a fucking fools errand. Great. It can make mistakes at 1 Billion times a second, but do so confidently and convincingly enough that people just believe them due to their "humanlike" qualities.

Don't get me wrong, AI has incredibly potential and current usecases, but it is far far from flawless. And yes, I'm thoroughly unconvinced we're anywhere close to AGI/Sentience.
by wat10000 | 2025-06-19 16:23:36+00:00
Any reasonable meaning of “proper” would include not causing memory issues, so you’ve just defined away any problems. Note that this is substantially different from not having any problems.

The great lesson in software security of the past few decades is that you can’t just document “proper usage,” declare all other usage to be the programmer’s fault, and achieve anything close to secure software. You must have systems that either disallow unsafe constructs (e.g. rust preventing references from escaping at compile time) or can handle “improper usage” without allowing it to become a security vulnerability (e.g. sandboxing).

Correctly use your concurrency primitives and you won’t have thread safety bugs, hooray! And when was the last time you found a bug in C-family code caused by someone who didn’t correctly use concurrency primitives because the programmer incorrectly believed that a certain piece of mutable data would only be accessed on a single thread? I’ll give you my answer: it was yesterday. Quite likely the only reason it’s not today is because I have the day off.
by zeta0134 | 2025-06-19 16:24:09+00:00
There is no reason Linux could not support sensible userland anti-cheat protections. What Linux wrappers mostly refuse to actually support is rootkits and exploits. Linux should not support rootkits and exploits, and frankly neither should Windows, but I suppose Microsoft doesn't care all that much about security in a games context.

Linux's inability to run specific anti-cheat solutions is a vendor support issue on the anti-cheat maker's part, because they don't care about your security, and they've managed to convince game developers that this practice is acceptable. It's not. Vote with your wallet.
by diggan | 2025-06-19 16:24:10+00:00
> Is that bad?

It doesn't have to be. But it does get somewhat boring and trite after a while when you start noticing that certain subjects on HN tend to attract general and/or samey comments about $thing, rather than the submission topic within $thing, and I do think that is against the guidelines.

> Please don't post shallow dismissals [...] Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes. [...]

The specific part of:

> English is a terrible language for deterministic outcomes

Strikes me as both as a generic tangent about LLMs, and the comment as a whole feels like a shallow dismissal of the entire talk, as Karpathy never claims English is a good language for deterministic outcomes, nor have I heard anyone else make that claim.