MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by sgarland | 2025-06-21 02:15:24+00:00
> getting hierarchical data based on parent_id

So, an adjacency list (probably, though there are many alternatives, which are usually better). That’s not complex, that’s a self-join.

> trigram functions

That’s an indexing decision, not a query. It’s also usually a waste: if you’re doing something like looking up a user by email or name, and you don’t want case sensitivity to wreck your plan, then use a case-insensitive collation for that column.

> I agree knowing SQL is still useful, but more for double checking the queries from LLMs

“I agree knowing Python / TypeScript / Golang is still useful, but more for double checking the queries from LLMs.” This sounds utterly absurd, because it is. Why SQL is seen as a nice-to-have instead of its reality - the beating heart of every company - is beyond me.
by Manuel_D | 2025-06-21 02:16:13+00:00
The majority of the sample met the criteria for gender dysphoria as listed in the DSM. Gender non-conforming behavior is just one criterion, multiple of which need to be met to categorized as gender dysphoric. This is the same set of criteria that a medical professional would use to approve a patient for puberty blockers.

The predominant approach back then was not to suppress incongruent gender identity. The approach was to take a neutral stance and neither foster not suppress the patient's gender identity, called "watchful waiting".
by LightHugger | 2025-06-21 02:17:10+00:00
the xlibre guy said "no dei" in a fork that is separating from a company embroiled in racist discrimination lawsuits for using DEI to hurt real people.

Is that really involving politics? In a way it is, sure, but again, unlike red hat, IBM and friends, he has pledged not to discriminate against contributors on the basis of politics. Red hat and IBM openly continue to discriminate against contributors and employees on not only the basis of politics but skin color as well. They wield their CoC like a cudgel to get rid of anyone they don't like with no semblance of fair enforcement. It's a series of struggle sessions, man.

So, if you're accusing him of being political, but you're not accusing red hat of being political, you're probably not really accusing him of being political, you're probably just either woefully misinformed or outright racist.

Can you explain why you think someone who pledges not to discriminate against people for politics (while forking from a corp that does, it's not just a random comment, it's part of the reason a fork is needed) is more political than a company that actively discriminates against people for politics and also their skin color?
by ReaLNero | 2025-06-21 02:17:24+00:00
There were unusual elements characteristic of the decay chain following a fission.

After a U-235 atom undergoes fission, one of the outcomes is it releases Barium and Krypton (and some neutrons), which then eventually decay to stable/semi-stable elements. If one of those stable elements is common in the deposit but otherwise rare naturally, it would point to a nuclear reaction having occurred.

Also note that the U-235 decay chain generally looks different from the decay chain following a fission reaction of U-235.
by skinnymuch | 2025-06-21 02:17:27+00:00
My point is that most people who see that think a country like America or Europe are democracies and that is partly why it would be a misnomer. When it is arguable that DPRK state is more a will of the people than the west.

The elite letting the people choose between a few candidates is not a democracy. There are no “democratic” countries in that way.
by ziggure | 2025-06-21 02:19:04+00:00
The concept of repeated operations executing with respect to some condition is always going to be a bit different in declarative / functional constructs than in imperative ones. A purely functional language is never going to have the equivalent of: for (...) a++;

Good functional languages like Clojure make something like this awkward and painful to do, because it doesn't really make sense in a functional context.
by like_any_other | 2025-06-21 02:19:10+00:00
> Who owns MSFT? You, probably, through your 401k.

All or nothing fallacy. People have VASTLY different degrees of ownership, and this is reflected in their degree of control.

> Nobody is stopping you from creating a coalition of similarly minded shareholders

Such coalitions already exist. They have names like BlackRock, Vanguard, and Fidelity Investments [1]. Good luck competing with them. Especially if you abdicate your role in democracy, don't agitate for legal change, and restrict yourself to only market-based means of change (not BlackRock and ilk though - they use every lever available to them, they don't handicap themselves).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_asset_management_firms
by nradov | 2025-06-21 02:21:16+00:00
It won't kill the service. The media executives who run YouTube are well aware of how advertising volume affects viewership so they'll titrate up or down as needed to maximize profit.

But don't worry, something else will eventually kill YouTube. Most likely they'll miss some sort of disruptive innovation. Like maybe in 30 years everyone will have content beamed directly into their neutral implants and only a few old people will still watch online videos.
by genidoi | 2025-06-21 02:21:33+00:00
GLSL is fine. People don't understand that shaders are not just programs but literal works of art[0]. The art comes from the ability to map a canvas's (x,y) -> (r,g,b,a) coordinates in real time to create something mesmerising, and then let anyone remix the code to create something new from the browser.

With IV code, that goes out the way.

[0] examples Matrix 3D shader: https://www.shadertoy.com/view/4t3BWl - Very fast procedural ocean: https://www.shadertoy.com/view/4dSBDt
by bsder | 2025-06-21 02:21:39+00:00
Annoyingly, everything is converging to C++-ish via Slang now that DirectX supports SPIR-V.

OpenCL and GLSL might as well be dead given the vast difference in development resources between them and HLSL/Slang. Slang is effectively HLSL++.

Metal is the main odd man out, but is C++-like.
by latency-guy2 | 2025-06-21 02:21:49+00:00
For photo negatives - usually doesn't matter. I am not up to date with what the vision folks are doing at these companies, but images are usually single channel, and more likely than not for regular images in greyscale. Otherwise in complex domain for the radar folks, and those are not RGB based images at all, rather scatterer defined.

Additional channels being recognized in training usually didn't matter for the experiments and models I used to deal with before 2022, and if they were, certainly did not matter for colors. Then again, the work I was doing was on known (and some additional confusers) classes for object detection and classification where the color pretty much didn't matter in the first place.
by alisonatwork | 2025-06-21 02:22:00+00:00
This is basically what Microsoft wants to do with Recall and they got slammed for it. Which drives me nuts because it's the only feature from the recent AI hype wave that excites me because it's the only thing so far that sounds like it will actually make my life better. But then I thought about it a bit more and I realized that what I really want is not AI, I just want my computer to have a detailed local history and search functionality.

My computer should remember everything I did on it, period. It should remember every website I visited, exactly how far down I scrolled on each page, every thought I typed and subsequently deleted before posting... And it should have total recall! I should be able to rewind back to any point in time and track exactly what happened, because it's a computer. I already have a lossy memory of stuff that happened yesterday and that's inside my head. The whole point of having my computer remember stuff for me is that it's supposed to do it better than me.

And I want the search to be deterministic. I want to be able to input precise timestamps and include boolean operators. Yes, it would be helpful to have fuzzy matches, recommendations and a natural language processing layer too, but Lucene et al already did that acceptably well for local datasets 20+ years ago. It's great we have a common corpus, but I don't care about getting tokenized prose from the corpus, I care about the stuff I did on my own computer!

From my perspective LLMs don't bring much value on the personalized search front. The way I understand it, the nature of their encoding makes it impossible to get back the data you were actually looking for unless that data was also stored and indexed the traditional way, in which case you could have just skipped the layer of indirection and queried the source data in the first place.

I am also curious to see how all of this develops. I get a sense that the current trend of injecting LLMs everywhere is a temporary stop-gap measure used to give people the illusion of a computer that knows everything because researchers haven't yet figured out how to actually index "everything" in a performant way. But for the use case of personalized search, the computer doesn't actually need to know "everything", it only needs to know about text that was visible on-screen, plus a bit of metadata (time period, cursor position, clipboard, URL etc). If we currently still need an LLM to index that because snapshotting the actual text and throwing it into a traditional index requires too much disk space, okay, but then what's next? Because just being able to have a vague conversation about a thing I kindasorta maybe was doing yesterday is not it. Total recall is it.
by cAtte_ | 2025-06-21 02:22:20+00:00
this solution is just fundamentally insufficient. in the age of LLMs it's pretty insane to imagine programmers manually hard-coding an arbitrary subset of grammatical corrections (sure: it's faster, it's local first, but it's not enough). on top of that, English (like any other natural language) is such a complicated beast that you will never write a classic deterministic parser that's sophisticated enough to allow you to reliably implement even the most basic of grammatical corrections (check the other comments for examples). it's just not gonna happen.

i guess it's a nice and lightweight enhancement on top of the good old spellchecker, though
by toast0 | 2025-06-21 02:22:25+00:00
The article says it was a 45 second attack. I used to run a high profile website which used to get a lot of 90 second attacks. Best I could figure was some of the ddos as a services would give a short attack as a free sample, and people picked us cause we were high profile. Thankfully, these would almost always attack our website rather than our service, and availability for our website didn't really matter. Most of the attacks weren't a big deal, and they'd get bored and move on to something else. The ones that did take a web server down were kind of nice... I could use those to tune both the webservers and the servers doing real work.
by jandrewrogers | 2025-06-21 02:23:00+00:00
As someone who was heavily involved in AI research in the 1990s, of a Schmidhuber flavored variety though I’ve never interacted with him, I do think there is some underlying truth to his general point. Most of the current theory isn’t actually new and at least some people should know better that are kind of pretending it was invented out of whole cloth recently. But at the time a lot of this was invented, the hardware simply wasn’t capable enough to reduce it to practice — it is why I got out — and a lot of people who are piling into the field are simultaneously disinterested in that history and claiming every idea that crosses their mind as a novel invention.

This is not unique to AI. Many other subfields of computer science have a similar dynamic e.g. databases. I’ve seen people claiming novelty in ideas that were fully proven out in real systems in the 1970s (and abandoned, for good reason) but are oblivious to this fact because if it isn’t trivially discoverable on the Internet then it doesn’t exist. There is still a lot of interesting computer science research that only exists on physical paper, if you can find a copy. Maybe we should be better about digitizing the pre-Internet research but the value of that research isn’t always obvious and the terminology has changed. We don’t give enough credit to how clever some of those early researchers actually were, working from much more primitive foundations.

Having gone spelunking a number of times into the old literature, it never ceases to amaze me the number of times I have found an insight that is neither known nor cited in modern literature. Literally lost knowledge. It is ironic that computer science, of all fields, should suffer from this.
by o11c | 2025-06-21 02:23:08+00:00
I've had extensive thoughts about a space-based coöp 4X-like game with fog of war - jump drives can only take you near the speed of light (skipping the need for fueling g-drives and forbidding unstoppable kinetic kills), not faster, so you have to send one or more players to each system if you want to make decisions there without waiting multiple in-game years. The nice thing about relativity is that it doesn't matter if all your players are active at the same time, since the causation won't reach anyone for a while.

I did prove that this general kind of "blind coop" game/quest can be fun in a different setting ... but it was way too much work without more automation than I managed to implement. Balance and mechanics are hard to get right with constraints like this, and AIs are dumb so it's hard to automate your testing ... for something the players (and QM) will probably only stick around for once.
by BriggyDwiggs42 | 2025-06-21 02:23:15+00:00
There’s no morality one way or the other. Google couldn’t care less about me; I have no personal connection with anyone there. They’ll treat me as poorly as the law allows (and then some) if it increases their bottom line. By the same measure, I’ll do as much as I can get away with to remove the bad aspects of their service. If we lived in a system where I was using a service made by a person I knew and could talk to, then maybe there’d be more obligations to the exchange, but in this impersonal setup I feel no such obligation.
by hn_acker | 2025-06-21 02:23:53+00:00
It's bad because local Australian businesses can't use similar names to "In-N-Out" during the other 1000 days without getting sued for trademark infringement. Example from the featured article:

> In 2020, a Sydney burger chain formerly known as “Down N’ Out” lost an appeal to flip a court decision that forced it to stop using its name and hand over its signs and promotional materials after being sued by In-N-Out Burger for trademark infringement in 2017.
by alexjplant | 2025-06-21 02:24:07+00:00
I install the "Undistracted" extension in all of my Brave instances. In addition to having the ability to block arbitrary URLs it has many site-specific options like blocking YouTube recommendations or the LinkedIn timeline, all of which I ruthlessly enable. You can also set it to only work on certain days and times of the week. It's immensely useful.

I also pay for Kagi which has the ability to block certain domains from results. I'd imagine that blocking Instagram, Reddit, Youtube, etc. would also prevent rabbit-holing.
by const_cast | 2025-06-21 02:24:14+00:00
It's not about being morally just, it's about taking accountability for the things you say.

Everyone is allowed to say off-putting things. But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to deduce that making politically-charged statements might make people a bit weary of your project. That's his prerogative - but, it's not character assassination to repeat words back to people. I'm very tired of pretending it is. I find it incredibly immature when people want to play victim for being portrayed how they themselves seemingly want to be portrayed. You want to be politically charged? Bon apetite.
by pjscott | 2025-06-21 02:24:40+00:00
You stated one of their core doctrines, something they’ve been loudly preaching for as long as they’ve existed, as though it was something they disagree with and had never even considered. Can you blame them for a bit of exasperation? For wanting to simply downvote-and-disengage from someone who makes up falsehoods about them and then gloats about how it annoyed them? Life is too short to tilt at windmills.
by VivaTechnics | 2025-06-21 02:25:07+00:00
- Remote roles can somehow work for certain personality types or professions—such as scientists, writers, or artists—who thrive in solitude, prefer to think deeply, need clarity, or simply don’t enjoy crowds.

- However, remote work is generally not ideal for business, ops or engineering roles, where being close to the core problems—and the people solving them—is often essential. It's also not recommended for those who dislike being home all day.

- In a remote setup, you either need to already know what you’re doing or be fully prepared to manage yourself. We don’t know you personally and can’t offer much direct help. But based on your post, it sounds like you’re capable of figuring it out. This isn’t rocket science—just be direct with your team, ask the same questions you’ve raised here, and don’t hesitate to request support when needed. Of course, like everyone already said, communicate and communicate.

- Keep in mind that remote roles can become problematic if you have family, kids, or pets who are going to interrupt you every 30 minutes—there’s often little you can do to control those distractions.
by Aachen | 2025-06-21 02:25:25+00:00
Ransomware doesn't have to be illegal in North Korea to convict a North Korean who did it, either in absence or with extradition, in the country where the damage was done

With Alphabet being from a country with extreme capitalism, the comment you're replying to seems applicable no matter where the viewers are (regardless of whether I agree with their viewpoint/outlook). YouTube's owners can choose to block or prosecute whoever doesn't comply with their terms. Not saying that's likely, just that: this isn't a matter of needing to be on the American continent

Edit: perhaps interesting to realise that, conversely, laws in North Korea might make it illegal for Alphabet to have certain terms if they want to serve consumers in their market. (A better example here would be EU with copyright legislation that makes it illegal to sign away your moral rights, for instance.) It works both ways and both could legally prosecute the other at the same time and both win in their area! But with YouTube being able to gatekeep the content here, one has more power than the other..
by AdieuToLogic | 2025-06-21 02:25:35+00:00
> I'm not sure what point you are making with your scenario involving HTTP response codes.

My point was to identify how common the "happy path" scenario is and was in direct response to:

>> There is no value for logging "function entry/exit, with param values" when all collaborations succeed and the system operates as intended.

> Well, I agree completely, but those conditions are a tall order.

Regarding your question:

> What if the HTTP server crashes, and doesn't send a response at all?

Again, the HTTP status codes were used to illustrate the frequency of successful invocations. But to your point, if an HTTP server crashes then log entries for in-flight workflows would likely not be emitted. A similar possibility also holds for local file system logging as buffering exists (sometimes on multiple levels).

> I don't know from Writer Monads.

No worries. All it is is a formal definition of a type having specific capabilities called "laws" in the functional programming world.

> But if you only emitting log entries on some future failure or request, then that's potentially a lot of logging to keep somewhere. Where? Log aggregator? Local files? Memory?

What is meant by "future failure" is a failure potentially encountered during the evaluation of a single invocation. In the context of a HTTP server, this would be the handling of each submission to a specific HTTP endpoint and verb. This is often defined within an IO Monad[0], but does not have to be, and is out of scope for this discussion.

The answer to the rest of your questions is the deferred log entry definitions are held in memory for the duration of the single service invocation, with any log emissions produced transmitted to a network-accesible log aggregator via the logging component used.

> Let me be real clear about all calls and param values leading up to a failure.

The scenario you kindly shared is understandable, yet is one which has been unacceptable in teams I have worked with. Losing the "first error" is not an option in those environments.

0 - https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Haskell/Understanding_monads/I...
by like_any_other | 2025-06-21 02:25:50+00:00
> the installer failed to run with an obscure error message.

Some things never change: "The AARD code was a segment of code in a beta release of Microsoft Windows 3.1 that would issue a cryptic error message when run on the DR DOS operating system rather than the Microsoft-affiliated MS-DOS" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AARD_code
by psadri | 2025-06-21 02:26:48+00:00
I love the idea of Phoenix and server side rendering (I happen to work on SkyMass, a related project).

This is a tangential comment and should not detract from what Chris and team have created. I think closing the loop between agent and the running output is a great/critical step forward.

However, I find using AI to build transitional Apps with a UI is a bit like improving the way automobile steering wheels are made. In a world that soon won't need steering wheels at all.

If the AI is so good to write the code for an App, how much longer before you won't need those Apps in the first place? And then the question is, what will fill the role that Apps play today.
by monero-xmr | 2025-06-21 02:28:04+00:00
Risky idea but I’ve seen way riskier. This would be considered gray area, akin to the email spam mafia or boomer-extension scammers. You can probably get away with this if kept on the down low and make some coin. Hire a good lawyer and button up all the Ts and Cs, shifting liability as much as possible to the purchaser. Good luck
by bayarearefugee | 2025-06-21 02:28:34+00:00
The generated images are awful, downloadable local models can do a much better job than this.

And then on top of that the entire premise of this website is existentially flawed, either nobody gives a shit about your website and it fades into quick obscurity or it becomes popular and you get sued into the stone age by any and all celebrities whose likeness your model is appropriating (and the agencies that represent them, various creative unions they are part of, etc).

FWIW the former is the actual path this will take because of the low quality of the generated images, so that's actually the best outcome for you.
by felipeerias | 2025-06-21 02:30:19+00:00
The article hints at that when it describes vibe coding as “fancy UX”, but fails to connect the dots.

Essentially, we now have a system that can turn a simple problem description into an interactive tool for that problem. Even if it still does so very imperfectly, it’s easy see already the beginnings of a powerful and empowering new paradigm.
by whatshisface | 2025-06-21 02:30:58+00:00
You're asking the question in a way that's unreflective of how people think. They can do it and want to do it and would need a reason to not do it. So the question is, what would make someone feel like they were ethically compelled to watch an advertisement? It sounds impossible to me, maybe someone with a very unique perspective could chime in about themselves.

Here's an attempt at a double-negative answer: you can't be ethically compelled into an unethical contract, and since advertisements are manipulative, voyeuristic and seek to take advantage of the limitations of human attentional control, it's a priori impossible for watching an ad or downloading a tracker to ever be ethically compulsory.