MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by imiric | 2025-06-19 09:44:11+00:00
The slide at 13m claims that LLMs flip the script on technology diffusion and give power to the people. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Large corporations, which have become governments in all but name, are the only ones with the capability to create ML models of any real value. They're the only ones with access to vast amounts of information and resources to train the models. They introduce biases into the models, whether deliberately or not, that reinforces their own agenda. This means that the models will either avoid or promote certain topics. It doesn't take a genius to imagine what will happen when the advertising industry inevitably extends its reach into AI companies, if it hasn't already.

Even open weights models which technically users can self-host are opaque blobs of data that only large companies can create, and have the same biases. Even most truly open source models are useless since no individual has access to the same large datasets that corporations use for training.

So, no, LLMs are the same as any other technology, and actually make governments and corporations even more powerful than anything that came before. The users benefit tangentially, if at all, but will mostly be exploited as usual. Though it's unsurprising that someone deeply embedded in the AI industry would claim otherwise.
by GrayShade | 2025-06-19 09:44:38+00:00
> I looked at their plugins, they're compiled into WASM and run in some VM. Maybe that's part of it?

No. The ones I've looked just set up stuff, like launching a language server. They shouldn't be involved in typing.

I think it's related to the GPU usage. It's easy to introduce delays when you do GPU compositing, and the OS will already be doing its own.

As for emacs, IIRC they did some ugly things to update the UI directly instead of going through the normal event loop, which was causing compatibility issues later on.
by chantepierre | 2025-06-19 09:44:42+00:00
6" f/5 kits sold by GSO are okay, but the best choice is to find any second-hand skywatcher 6" f/5 tube on your leboncoin/craigslist equivalent and scavenge the optics. For industrial optics, they are on average exceptionnally smooth and have a good shape with few defects.

The 6" f/5 optics kit are a bit of an oddity, those we test with our interferometers are consistently good, whereas smaller or bigger diameters are subject to a lot more vatiations.
by deliriumchn | 2025-06-19 09:45:52+00:00
they are not intrusive but their entire focus changed on that instead of other features. Entire Git view feels abandoned in half done state yet they spent entire month working on AI chats, AI agents, their own AI edit (that's priced 20 per month yet they boast how light and performant it is -- why isn't it free local model then and why its priced worse than copilot?)

They're moving from "making awesome code editor" into yet another "buy our ai" product
by Cthulhu_ | 2025-06-19 09:46:14+00:00
I have a similar one that removes any fixed or sticky element, works for popovers like newsletter subscription prompts as well as long as they don't block scrolling:

javascript:void([].forEach.call(document.querySelectorAll('body *'),e=>/fixed|sticky/.test(getComputedStyle(e).position)&&e.parentNode.removeChild(e)))
Show HN: Claude Code Usage Monitor – real-time tracker to dodge usage cut-offs
by Maciej-roboblog | 2025-06-19 09:46:43+00:00
I kept slamming into Claude Code limits mid-session and couldn’t find a quick way to see how close I was getting, so I hacked together a tiny local tracker.

Streams your prompt + completion usage in real time

Predicts whether you’ll hit the cap before the session ends

Runs 100 % locally (no auth, no server)

Presets for Pro, Max × 5, Max × 20 — tweak a JSON if your plan’s different

GitHub: https://github.com/Maciek-roboblog/Claude-Code-Usage-Monitor

It’s already spared me a few “why did my run just stop?” moments, but it’s still rough around the edges. Feedback, bug reports, and PRs welcome!
by _vere | 2025-06-19 09:47:28+00:00
It's also notable that these companies often dont respect the terms of foss software at all. Anyone worth their salt can tell you that training your LLM on gpl3 code would make it a derivative product, as it is able to reproduce large parts of that code. LLMs that are currently earning Google, Facebook, Openai, etc, billions, while they obviously dont make "their" products available under gpl3.
by radu_floricica | 2025-06-19 09:48:52+00:00
The error itself is probably easily fixed. Usually the bigger the effects, easier to fix.

The real problem is the damaged infrastructure. They don't have several launch towers in the pipeline like they have Starships. This is a "pause and rebuild" scenario, with the wait time much harder to parallelize with something else. Whatever time they spend until they have the second launch tower functional, I'd bet about half of it will be an overall addition to the whole project.
by beloch | 2025-06-19 09:49:15+00:00
Speaking as a Northern neighbour of the U.S., it rings hollow when we hear American state politicians telling us that they love Canadians and really hope we visit more (tourism is down) and go back to buying American (exports are down).

The American government is waging economic war on us with the openly announced intention of annexing us. American pundits (and the idiot ambassador Trump sent us) tell us to downplay it, but the president keeps bringing it up!

I'm still working to cut more American goods and companies out of my life. I'm sorry, but Americans are responsible for what their government does. If you wish to be forgiven, you must first stop doing what you say you're sorry for!
by jph00 | 2025-06-19 09:49:55+00:00
From the RFC:

""" A well-known URI is a URI [RFC3986] whose path component begins with the characters "/.well-known/", and whose scheme is "HTTP", "HTTPS", or another scheme that has explicitly been specified to use well- known URIs.

Applications that wish to mint new well-known URIs MUST register them, following the procedures in Section 5.1. """
by jhanschoo | 2025-06-19 09:50:44+00:00
The Roman cursive is illegible to modern eyes, as is the archaic script. You may think that the archaic script would be legible once you learn the correspondence, but don't be fooled by their geometric simplicity; they possess a lot of variation in forms (still geometric due to their inscriptional nature) across time and space. Likewise, the modern lowercase letters are likely illegible to ancient Roman eyes. The inscriptional Roman styles have remained legible, because Italic typesetters and printers (see Renaissance Antiqua) have consciously revived the monumental forms for the capitals. (Contrast the ornate capitals of Fraktur, or of English Roundhand).
by adrian_b | 2025-06-19 09:51:20+00:00
All the Latin letters, except for G, which is a modified Greek letter invented by a Roman, come from the Greek alphabet, only at different times.

The original Latin alphabet had 21 letters:

ABCDE FZHIK LMNOP QRSTV X

The letter V (Greek u-psilon) was used to write the sound U, both as vowel and as consonant (i.e. like English W).

The letter F (Greek di-gamma) was used in Greek for consonant U (English W), but in Latin it was used to write the sound F, also a labial consonant, which did not exist in Greek.

In Latin, in the beginning 3 different letters were used to write the sound K, C before E or I, K before A and Q before O or U. So K belonged to the Latin alphabet since its very beginning.

Later, the rules for writing K have been simplified, so it was always written as C, except before a V (i.e. U sound) that was consonant, not vowel, i.e. like English W. Writing K has been retained only in a few traditional expressions, e.g. in "KALENDAE", which was used when writing dates.

Initially, the letter C (Greek gamma) was used both for the sound K and for the sound G. Later, the letter G has been created, by modifying the letter C. Since then, G was used for the sound G, except in a few traditional expressions, e.g. the name "Gaius" has continued to be written as "Caius", together with a few other traditional names.

The new letter G has substituted in the Latin alphabet the letter Z (Greek zeta), which was not used in Latin. Therefore the 21-letter Latin alphabet has become:

ABCDE FGHIK LMNOP QRSTV X

Several centuries later, during the Roman Empire, 2 additional Greek letters have been added at the end of the alphabet, so the 23-letter Latin alphabet was:

ABCDE FGHIK LMNOP QRSTV XYZ

The letter Z was reintroduced, but not in its original place, because it was contained in some borrowed Greek words. The same with Y. While both V and Y come from Greek u-psilon, by the time when Y has been added to the Latin alphabet it was pronounced as a vowel different from both Latin V and I, i.e. as a front rounded closed vowel, like the Scandinavian Y, German Ü (U with Umlaut) or French U.

The 23-letter Latin alphabet has become a 26-letter alphabet more than a millennium later, when the letters J, U and W have been added (J and U were required because in the Romance languages the old I consonant and U consonant had become fricative sounds, completely distinct from the I and U vowels, while W has been initially added for English, which is one of the few Indo-European languages that has retained the original pronunciation of consonant U).
by Byamarro | 2025-06-19 09:51:50+00:00
I work in web dev, so people sometimes hook code formatting as a git commit hook or sometimes even upon file save. The tests are problematic tho. If you work at huge project it's a no go idea at all. If you work at medium then the tests are long enough to block you, but short enough for you not to be able to focus on anything else in the meantime.
Show HN: Curated collection of the greatest photography books
by Henadz | 2025-06-19 09:52:01+00:00
Hi HN!

I've built a curated collection of the world's greatest photography books by legendary photographers like Henri Cartier-Bresson, Ansel Adams, Annie Leibovitz, Sebastião Salgado, and Richard Avedon.

What makes this different:

- Hand-picked selections from each master photographer's essential works - Clean, minimalist design focused on the art itself - Structured data and SEO optimization for discoverability - Real ratings and authentic reviews - Mobile-responsive design Why I built this: As a photography enthusiast, I was frustrated by the lack of quality curation in this space. Most sites either focus on gear or have poor UX. I wanted to create something that celebrates the artistic legacy of these masters while being genuinely useful for people discovering photography.

Technical details:

- Static site with semantic HTML and structured data - Optimized images and lazy loading - Clean CSS with no frameworks - Fast loading times The site covers iconic works like "The Decisive Moment" by Cartier-Bresson, Adams' landscape masterpieces, and Leibovitz's celebrity portraits. Each photographer section includes their most influential publications.

Try it out: https://photographybooks.top/

I'd love to hear your thoughts on the curation, design, or any photographers you think should be included. What photography books have influenced you?
by moffkalast | 2025-06-19 09:53:48+00:00
Well there are cases like OLMo where the process, dataset, and model are all open source. As expected though, it doesn't really compare well to the worst closed model since the dataset can't contain vast amounts of stolen copyrighted data that noticeably improves the model. Llama is not good because Meta knows what they're doing, it's good because it was pretrained on the entirety of Anna's Archive and every pirated ebook they could get their hands on. Same goes for Elevenlabs and pirated audiobooks.

Lack of compute on the Ai2's side also means the context OLMo is trained for is miniscule, the other thing that you need to throw brazillions of dollars at to make model that's maybe useful in the end if you're very lucky. Training needs high GPU interconnect bandwidth, it can't be done in distributed horde in any meaningful way even if people wanted to.

The only ones who have the power now are the Chinese, since they can easily ignore copyright for datasets, patents for compute, and have infinite state funding.
by A_D_E_P_T | 2025-06-19 09:54:00+00:00
> We need to understand why. :-)

Two thoughts:

- Most people will want to try something before handing over their personal details. Many startups, once they have your email address, will start spamming with emails, which gets annoying very fast.

- It's not clear what your product does that o3-pro/Claude4/Gemini2.5/DeepSeekR1 can't do. (Or do well.) Your video is mostly just a marketing spiel. If you can't offer an unrestricted, no-questions-asked free trial, what you want to do is show people a sort of A/B test, with your product vs. a well-prompted leading competitor like o3-pro.

Also just imagine hiring McKinsey in 2025. lmao.
by dusted | 2025-06-19 09:55:17+00:00
I don't believe in harming anyone who exists. I do think that it is in principle, less wrong to harm someone by denying them the right to violate another. It has been shown elsewhere that it is a fundamental violation of the created, to create them, regardless of their life-outcome.

The Value-null perspective is that it's not needed to consider the life-outcome, the moral wrongness of creating someone stands without it, and so, eliminates the weak side of Benatar's asymmetry argument.

However, I don't believe morality and policy should always go hand in hand, and my stance on policy is that, people should be allowed to have children if they wish so, but they should do it with the implications in mind, and they must be able to stand up to the duties involved.

I am a parent myself, I feel a tremendous responsibility, duty, towards my child, I do not regret having them, I do not wish that they were never born, I love them more than anything. People do wrong things all the times, often for the right reasons, but people should understand what they're doing, and why it might be wrong, before making the decision, they should understand the responsibility, both practical and morally, that comes with their actions.

I'm not arguing that this means to prevent your child from all pain in the world, but to prepare them for life in a way that maximizes the likelihood that they have a good life. I'm merely arguing that life in and off itself is not inherently a gift (though it can certainly be a net positive), and that there responsibilities therefore reach widely beyond the fact of having created the kid and kept them alive.
by shakna | 2025-06-19 09:56:02+00:00
Probably too much snark from me. But the gulf between interpreter and compiler can be decades of work, often discovering new mathematical principles along the way.

The idea that you're fine to risk everything, in the way agentic things allow [0], and want that messing around with raw memory is... A return to DOS' crashes, but with HAL along for the ride.

[0] https://msrc.microsoft.com/update-guide/vulnerability/CVE-20...
by bootsmann | 2025-06-19 09:56:16+00:00
> Some things are fine to let rot. Nobody should spend too much time learning Vue, React or Laravel, or even nhibernate, entity framework or structuremap, for example.

The way you phrase this you make it sound like an LLM can already solve every possible task you would ever get in Vue, React or Laravel but my entire point is that this is simply not true. As a consequence of this, whenever the LLM fails at a task (which gets more likely the more complex the task is) you will still need to know how Vue, React or Laravel work to actually finish your task but this is the exact knowledge you lose if you spend 80% of your day prompting instead of writing code. The more you rely on the LLM to write your code the more the code you are able to produce converges with the one that the LLM can put out.
by s1mplicissimus | 2025-06-19 09:56:24+00:00
Heat battery sounds pretty accurate imo. There aren't really any batteries "storing electricity directly" though. Every battery type I'm aware of stores either potential (storage lake), mechanical (swing wheels), thermal (this type) or chemical (LitIo batteries) energy, which can then be transformed into electrical energy. Electricity itself seems to be very unwilling to be stored directly.
by immibis | 2025-06-19 09:57:19+00:00
There is no reasonable doubt that the domain used is for piracy and the defendant knew as much.

"Beyond a reasonable doubt" doesn't mean you can just say "no that's not true" about anything and have it not count. It's beyond a reasonable doubt, not beyond any doubt. It's not reasonable that this tracker address was gotten from a Linux ISO. Perhaps the defendant could claim they got it from a list of trackers, but they already admitted they didn't, so that's not reasonable either.
by Someone | 2025-06-19 09:57:40+00:00
That’s an opinion. Apple’s take is that they sell ”everything that runs on your phone has gone through our reviews, so you can trust it isn’t malware”

That, in their opinion, makes it their job to prevent people from permanently installing software on other people’s phones. I’m sure they would remove the “permanently” if they could, but developers have to test builds so frequently that they can’t review them all.
by chantepierre | 2025-06-19 09:58:21+00:00
For budget entry eyepieces, the generic "goldline" eyepieces have pretty good bang for their buck, especially the 9mm/6mm ones. You can find them unbranded online, or the "redline" equivalents.

I'd recommend a quality 20/25mm plossl rather than the gold/red line 15/20mm that display a lot of issues.

For better eyepieces, at f/5, the rubber-top generic eyepieces with color bands sometimes branded as "artesky" are great for their prices too.

If you have a bit more budget, Explore Scientific is generally the overall best quality/price ratio. Avoid baader hyperions, except for the 13mm which hits above its price (second-hand)
by adrian_b | 2025-06-19 09:58:29+00:00
There has never been a 22-character Latin alphabet.

The original Latin alphabet had 21 letters. Then G has replaced Z, without changing the number of letters. Then, by the time of the Empire, Y and Z have been added at the end (the same Z that had been removed earlier, while Y had the same origin as V, but by this time it had acquired a distinct pronunciation in Greek).

Then the Latin alphabet had 23 letters for more than 1000 years.

It has grown to 26 letters during the Middle Ages, with the addition of J, U and W ("u" was originally the small letter form of "V"; distinct letters U and V have been created by making a capital "U" and a small "v").
by Cipater | 2025-06-19 09:59:53+00:00
There is now a notice on each and every US Embassy website visa home page that says:

Effective immediately, all individuals applying for an F, M, or J nonimmigrant visa are requested to adjust the privacy settings on all of their social media accounts to ‘public’ to facilitate vetting necessary to establish their identity and admissibility to the United States under U.S. law.

Pick any at random to verify.
by dobremeno | 2025-06-19 10:00:43+00:00
I assume OP meant something like this, building the image on the remote host directly using a docker context (which is different from a build context)

docker context create my-awesome-remote-context --docker "host=ssh://user@remote-host" docker --context my-awesome-remote-context build . -t my-image:latest

This way you end up with `my-image:latest` on the remote host too. It has the advantage of not transferring the entire image but only transferring the build context. It builds the actual image on the remote host.
by arkh | 2025-06-19 10:01:32+00:00
You know the saying about OSHA rules "they're written in blood"?

That's what happens with most domains. At first people don't know the dangers and can go fast and loose: surgery, radioactive material, planes, cars, trains, rockets. Then people start losing their lives or part of their bodies to "easily preventable accidents". So some rules are enacted. Decade after decade, accident after accident, more rules, more red tape: things cost more, take more time. But you get a lot less victims.

So yeah, with a good budget and in a less strict country you could get something to the moon in no time. And potentially many people' parts all over your launchpads too.
by Wololooo | 2025-06-19 10:02:10+00:00
You remind me of a movie that I can't remember the name off but it was a low budget American spy movie that was shot in Europe through European subsidies targeted at getting work in Europe for cinema crews.

One shot is supposedly happening in an American city, but it's shot somewhere in Brussels, where they discuss people hiding, then you got a transition shot where now they are supposed to be thousands of km away with said people hiding, and the second shot is filmed in the building across the street.

Many other shots were also combination of places that I knew extremely well, which really was funny at times because once you locate everything it makes the whole situation much more comedic.
by dcow | 2025-06-19 10:02:29+00:00
I’m not saying we should stop caring about online privacy, but the extent to which we fight fingerprinting while not actually solving the problem has made the web worse. It’s kinda like the argument for gun control: the unsavory folk will still fingerprint your browsing while the well-mannered sites suffer from lack of features due to aversion to any persistent handle on the users they might provide, like strong crypto because uh-oh a pub key would give your a “super-cookie” so we can’t have that.
by OtherShrezzing | 2025-06-19 10:03:05+00:00
From the 2nd link:

> Structured Outputs can still contain mistakes.

The guarantee promised in link 1 is not supported by the documentation in link 2. Structured Output does a _very good_ job, but still sometimes messes up. When you’re trying to parse hundreds of thousands of documents per day, you need a lot of 9s of reliability before you can earnestly say “100% guarantee” of accuracy.
by Propelloni | 2025-06-19 10:03:48+00:00
Yes, this will suck. No argument from me.

However, I disagree with your conception of Islam as a state, even if it was explained to you by Muslims. The strongest argument I can build from your statements is that, according to the reference to the end of the Sunni Caliphate in 1923,

p1) only Sunnis are Muslims, and

p2) the Caliphate is unique, and

p3) the Sunni Caliphate of 1923 is the original one, thus

c) it was the state of Islam.

We can disprove all of these premises. p1) is obvious, there are more Muslim religions than just Sunnis. The earliest schism was the Sunni-Shiites split, happening immediately after the first prophet's death.

About p2), while I'm fuzzy on the details, I'm pretty sure that between the 900s and the 1900s there were at least 3 major, parallel Caliphates and also a bunch of smaller Caliphates. Geographically they were even sometimes overlapping. It might be interesting that the Caliphate of the Ottoman Empire (the one in question) was a Hanafist (a Sunni splinter group) Caliphate.

On p3), the Sunni caliphate of 1923 was reestablished after a 300 year "hiatus" by the Ottoman Emperor to lay claim on Crimea. It had no representation besides a leader, the Sultan. Before the dissolution of the major Sunni Caliphate in the 1500s it relocated several times, from today's Syria to today's Iraq, to then and now Egypt. Thus we can say that the Caliphate had no continuous existence. We can furthermore say that the time the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire was the Caliph, it was because it was a diplomatic ploy of the secular power of the Ottoman Empire.

Therefore, c) must be wrong. There are more Muslims than Sunnis, the Sunni Caliphate wasn't unique, and the Caliphate that ended in 1923 was not the original one.

A less philosophical counter-argument could be the vigorous infighting between different Muslim groups we see today. I'm curious how the war on Iran changes that, if at all.