MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by rayiner | 2025-06-07 14:46:03+00:00
Correct. Republicans voted to close the border and deport illegal aliens, not cut the budget deficit. The fiscally responsible republican party hasn’t existed since the 1920s. Trump has been consistent on this since 2016: he considers Medicare and Social Security untouchable. (The other republicans weren’t going to cut those either, but they were going to talk about reforming them.)
by state_less | 2025-06-07 14:46:15+00:00
What does SpaceX have to do with the Musk/Trump spat? Shouldn't those SpaceX contracts be based on how well the country is served by them and at what price.

Trump needs to take his lumps on his BBB. That bill is full of pork for billionaires and cuts funding for poor folks. It should come as no surprise that people don't like it.
by decartesfolium | 2025-06-07 14:46:25+00:00
Questions like this that embody existential crisis are bound to emerge in a thinking person's life. History is our guide.

Science has faced such challenges almost always, sometimes by the industry, sometimes by a government. How would have the Manhattan Project scientists (every brilliant scientist was related in some way) felt when General Groves took the charge of the atomic bomb? How about the Bikini Atoll Atomic Bomb testing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_testing_at_Bikini_Atol...)?

Some say that when it comes to industry, this is an inevitable outcome of capitalism, the ism that prefers the "unequal but fair" acts to "equal but unfair" acts.

One way out (of the psychological suffering) is to trust the overall human goodness (even gullibly). We should all support it with our actions, however. Suppose you are contributing to an open-source project. You do your "work" to the best of your ability and then trust that others will do the same. And when the feared dystopian future does arrive eventually, we can at least accept it solemnly.

Have you considered academia? Many say that that is equally (or more) compromised (or just plain "bad").

I somehow think that the professors I grew up admiring and learning from can't be "all bad". Almost every US university has at least a few amazing professors and teachers who teach and contribute to research. Why not work with them? Your pay will be automatically limited (you are not after getting a tenure, are you?) and you won't have the guilt of amassing a fortune that eventually disillusions you. Some really difficult problems, on the other hand, will make you focus on work more than anything else. It may also make you use of AI tools meaningfully. If you like to teach, you may get to do that as well. That way, you can contribute to shape younger minds in more ways than one.

Without working fiercely in your own private Idaho solving objective problems and rather blindly trusting others' conscience, I am not sure how you can remain sane.
by BirAdam | 2025-06-07 14:46:44+00:00
So, the government would do what, lean on Russia with whom the USA is currently engaged in a proxy war? Also, for Boeing or Blue Origin, the cost would currently be higher per launch, and as far as I know, no one has the kind of satellite network that SpaceX does.

Of course, those are sane considerations. I suppose I shouldn’t accuse the Donald of any kind of rational thinking.
by lisper | 2025-06-07 14:46:50+00:00
Thanks, but I think Steven Olson actually deserves more credit than I do:

https://patents.google.com/patent/US6368227B1/en

I thought I would have to disguise the bogosity under some plausible-sounding pseudo-science, and to be fair, it's actually quite tricky to figure out why my invention doesn't work (though the fact that it doesn't work, and can't possibly work, should be pretty obvious to a patent examiner). But at this point I think I could probably get a patent for summoning dragons to slay my enemies. (Hm, there's an idea...)
by squidproquo | 2025-06-07 14:47:04+00:00
Agree with this. Human language is also not very information-dense; there is a lot of redundancy and uninformative repetition of words.

I also wonder about the compounding effects of luck and survivorship bias when using these systems. If you model a series of interactions with these systems probabilistically, as a series of failure/success modes, then you are bound to get a sub-population of users (of LLM/LLRMs) that will undoubtedly have “fantastic” results. This sub-population will then espouse and promote the merits of the system. There is clearly something positive these models do, but how much of the “success” is just luck.
by hinkley | 2025-06-07 14:47:14+00:00
The first SAT solver case that comes to mind is circuit layout, and then you have a k vs n problem. Because you don’t SAT solve per chip, you SAT solve per model and then amortize that cost across the first couple years’ sales. And they’re also “cheating” by copy pasting cores, which means the SAT problem is growing much more slowly than the number of gates per chip. Probably more like n^1/2 these days.

If SAT solvers suddenly got inordinately more expensive you’d use a human because they used to do this but the solver was better/cheaper.

Edit: checking my math, looks like in a 15 year period from around 2005 to 2020, AMD increased the number of cores by about 30x and the transistors per core by about 10x.
by Trenthug | 2025-06-07 14:47:17+00:00
You're making an elegant but brutal distinction between existence and symbol, Truth and justification. I respect the urge to treat reality as sacred and thought as ornamental. But even your statement — 'Truth is a perturbation of existential reality' — is itself a symbolic construct. So the paradox remains: to speak of Truth, one must enter the realm of exotic shit. Where do you draw the line between a symbol that reflects a perturbation, and one that merely pretends to? Or is the line unknowable?" The argument would benefit from clarifying what “perturbation of existential reality” really entails. Is it sensory? Is it phenomenological? Is it measurable? That would move this from poetic metaphysics to rigorous ontology.
by aDyslecticCrow | 2025-06-07 14:47:22+00:00
> It still has to be JIT compiled

Eeh. Comparing a garbage collected jit language to bytecode jit parsing is... quite possibly the most insane argument you could make.

And what does instruction count have to do with optimization? Most languages optimize in architecture invariant representations before creating the bytecode. So the wasm binary is already optimized.

From searching the web to make sure; the language barrier between wasm and js is the highest performance bottleneck. So its generally recommended to not bother for simple algorithms until it gets better.
by gametorch | 2025-06-07 14:47:57+00:00
So I tried to fix it.

I was too lazy to even type out a full prompt, just clicked the "touch-up" button which feeds in this prompt:

"please upscale and touch up, but keep the transparent background because this is a video game sprite"

And I got this result:

https://gametorch.app/commons/edits/24

That's with today's models. Six months from now they will be exponentially better and cheaper.
by _0ffh | 2025-06-07 14:48:18+00:00
You're welcome!

Just keep in mind there's not much research about how this may change metabolism compared to a strict fast.

It may reduce any desired autophagy effects, which are unfortunately not very well-studied in the first place, but it may just es well increase them! I've seen both POVs argued in various articles.

The only actual scientific study I can find (1) does show some interesting effects on various metabolic markers, though (in rats).

1. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38401196/
by pacetest | 2025-06-07 14:48:43+00:00
Its not just a stabilization/rate control loop but the NN does both guidance and control. It is an MLP that takes state + upcoming gate positions/waypoints and controls the motors directly. I.e. there is no explicit path planning going on but rather the NN outputs motor commands that hopefully help the drone traverse the given waypoints in minimum time. I think this is quite cool because running a similar Optimal Control MPC setup is really not at all feasible on a normal STM32H7 Flight controller, especially at 1kHz.
by rayiner | 2025-06-07 14:49:36+00:00
They’re to powerful men with huge egos who fundamentally disagree on political priorities. Trump had a platform: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/platform. Balancing the budget wasn’t on it, but the following was: “FIGHT FOR AND PROTECT SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE WITH NO CUTS, INCLUDING NO CHANGES TO THE RETIREMENT AGE” (all-caps original).
by username223 | 2025-06-07 14:49:47+00:00
> Usually this comes towards the end of a dictatorship.

It doesn't seem that way to me, e.g. Putin arrested Khodorkovsky (the richest man in Russia) in 2003. The way I see it, the politician needs the oligarch's money to gain political power, but then he has actual state power, including guns and the judicial system. At that point the oligarch has no purpose -- after all, the politician can just make new ones -- so it makes sense to cast him out or destroy him.

Trump could bankrupt SpaceX with the stroke of a pen and bleed Tesla dry by revoking EV credits. He could even try to revoke Musk's citizenship over (real or fake) issues with his immigration status in the past. If Elon thought he was buying the presidency in exchange for favors, he wasn't thinking things through.
by kentonv | 2025-06-07 14:49:55+00:00
I'm fairly confident that it's not just plagiarizing because I asked the LLM to implement a novel interface with unusual semantics. I then prompted for many specific fine-grain changes to implement features the way I wanted. It seems entirely implausible to me that there could exist prior art that happened to be structured exactly the way I requested.

Note that I came into this project believing that LLMs were plagiarism engines -- I was looking for that! I ended up concluding that this view was not consistent with the output I was actually seeing.
by afavour | 2025-06-07 14:49:59+00:00
> “ The thing that will fundamentally change things is with Donald Trump out of the White House. Not a joke,” Biden told reporters at a diner in Concord, New Hampshire. “You will see an epiphany occur among many of my Republican friends.”

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/14/politics/joe-biden-republican...

And Schumer:

> When it happens, I am hopeful that our Republican colleagues will resume working with us. And I talk to them. One of the places is in the gym. When you’re on that bike in your shorts, panting away next to a Republican, a lot of the inhibitions come off.

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/schumer-resign-bi...

You seem to be making the common mistake of conflating online discourse with the reality in DC. Senior Democratic politicians have openly stated time and time again that they believe their Republican friends are going to come around, that they’re going to be sane and that this is all a fever that’s going to break.

> The West Wing Dems could actually bring themselves to hold their noses and cut a deal with their Republicans

They keep doing this? Look at the Senate approvals for Trump’s appointees. Democrats voted in favor of a ton of them thinking it was the bipartisan thing to do and got absolutely nothing in return for it. It’s only a recent phenomenon that Democratic voters are actually punishing them for it.
by Dzugaru | 2025-06-07 14:50:02+00:00
Not possible, because can't be guardrailed with 100% accuracy. You'll ask it something outside of the Warcraft world (e.g. US politics), and it'll happily oblige. I imagine NPCs will generate really weird immersion breaking stuff even if you cannot freeform interact with them anyway.

Not to mention the current token cost.
by maxemitchell | 2025-06-07 14:50:12+00:00
Your rephrasing better encompasses my idea, and I should have emphasized in the post that I do not think this is a good idea (nor possible) right now, it was more of a hand-wavy "how could we rethink source control in a post-LLM world" passing thought I had while reading through all the commits.

Clearly it struck a chord with a lot of the folks here though, and it's awesome to read the discourse.
by hliyan | 2025-06-07 14:50:50+00:00
Interesting that multiple people are noticing this same thing. For me, this could have been:

"We found that a large portion of the 48 hours taken to backup our rails respository was due to a function in `git bundle create` that checks for duplicate references entered as command line arguments. The check contained a nested for loop ( O(N2) ), which we replaced with a map data structure in an upstream fix to Git. The patch was accepted, but we also backported fix without waiting for the next Git version. With this change, backup time dropped to 41 minutes."
by CamperBob2 | 2025-06-07 14:51:09+00:00
There's nothing invalid about meritocracy, but that's not what we have. We have some other kind of "ocracy": government by the lucky. I lack the Greek literacy to name the phenomenon correctly but that's what it would translate to in English.

Neither Trump nor Musk has any business running anything more impactful than a used car lot or a corner Starbucks franchise, but their competition was permanently out to lunch in both cases, and here we are. How can anyone be surprised when two merit-free, chaos-loving narcissists fail to get along?
by coffeemug | 2025-06-07 14:51:42+00:00
There is no myth. Both Trump and Elon have generational talent in their respective domains. This is the kind of talent that’s so unique, it creates its own domain that didn’t exist before, and that no one will be able to replicate after.

But they’re both unstable, and have many other negative features.

One can have an extraordinary talent in starting generational companies, and have a social media addiction (among possibly other addictions and problems) that makes one unstable. These aren’t mutually exclusive.
by MontyCarloHall | 2025-06-07 14:51:56+00:00
I agree that aircraft autopilot/other basic applications of control theory are not usually considered "AI," nor were they ever — control theory has its roots in mechanical governors.

Certain adaptive cruise control systems certainly are considered AI (e.g. ones that utilize cameras for emergency braking or lane-keep assist).

The line can be fuzzy — for instance, are solvers of optimization problems in operations research "AI"? If you told people in the 1930s that computers would be used in a decade by shipping companies to optimally schedule and route packages or by militaries to organize wartime logistics at a massive scale, many would certainly have considered that some form of intelligence.
by Freedom2 | 2025-06-07 14:52:57+00:00
Last time I said "you shouldn't do X" in an in person interview, I failed and the feedback was "candidate was not cooperative with the interviewer".

So even if the candidate is not using an LLM, the interview process is so messed up now that people willingly go along otherwise they may be rejected for, you know, actually stating what their experience was like.

Funnily enough, that was a YC funded company that I was interviewing for, and I expected a lot better.
by steveBK123 | 2025-06-07 14:53:23+00:00
> If Elon thought he was buying the presidency in exchange for favors, he wasn't thinking things through.

This is the funniest part to me, in the context of THIS president. The guy that demands fully loyalty but gives none?

I can't imagine being the richest guy in the world, and embarrassing myself to such a degree all for.. what? He paid maybe $300M to help elect the guy, wore all the stupid hates, lavished orange man with praise.. and for what. What was ever the upside? The possible downside was obviously asymmetric to any clear eyed viewer.

And so that asymmetric downside now begins.
by tetromino_ | 2025-06-07 14:53:34+00:00
> If we were making a list of "kinds of people who are likely to talk lots about their personal lives in a work environment", then bi trans poly folks would not be at the top of it.

Correct. The #1 position for people who talk about their personal life and interests at work, far ahead of anyone else, would be the people who really love bicycles. Straight people with kids would be somewhere in the top 10, although perhaps not in the top 5. And gay, bi and trans folk would not even be in the top 10.
by overu589 | 2025-06-07 14:54:17+00:00
> build systems where the whole is bigger than the sum of its parts.

Any “product” can be thought of this way.

Of systems there are many systems nested within systems, yet a simple singular order “emerges”, usually it is the designed intended function.

The trick to discerning systems lies in their relationships.

Actors through interfaces have a relationship (usually more than one so think of each relationship as its own system dynamic.)

A relationship is where the magic happens, usually a process with work being done (therefore interface inputs must account for this balance.)

Vectors. Vectors I am thinking are the real intellectual and functional mechanisms. Most systems process inputs of potential (“energy”) control signal (“information”) and assets (other actors for nested systems). Processes do the work of adding vector solutions [for some other problem] for whatever the output is.

That’s the topology as I am seeing it.
by athenot | 2025-06-07 14:54:18+00:00
I’ve had a similar experience. If it’s a “I must do” with high stakes, I get a fear of failure, fear of disappointing and if left unchecked it unfortunately becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

However, challenges that start with “I wonder if”—like wondering if some bold idea just might actually be possible—give me a huge reservoir of energy to work well beyond my normal limits and find new solution that truly make a difference.

Of course in most projects, actual innovation is only a fraction of the work so some reframing of “run the business” tasks is necessary. That’s when I tap into gratitude: for being able to work on a project, for being entrusted with a particular task, etc.
by inadequatespace | 2025-06-07 14:54:58+00:00
To be fair, I don't have any great specific ideas, but "Work Without the Worker" for example talks about how a lot of LLMs are fueled by neo-colonialist exploitation.

So I guess broadly speaking there could be strategies involving attempting to influence governmental policy rather than by consumer choice.

Or more radically, trying to change the structure of the government in general such that the above influences actually are more tractable for the common person.
by Al-Khwarizmi | 2025-06-07 14:55:59+00:00
You can do that also while playing a traditional tabletop RPG. Players typically don't do it because why would they ruin immersion?

I understand that in multiplayer with strangers it would be a problem because you could affect other players' experiences, but in a single-player game I don't see this as a big issue, as long as the NPC doesn't spontaneously bring immersion-breaking topics into the conversation without the player starting it (which I suppose could be achieved with a suitable system prompt and some fine-tuning on in-lore text).

If it's the player that wants to troll the game and break immersion by "jailbreaking" the NPCs, it's on them, just like if they use a cheat code and make the game trivial.
by kbolino | 2025-06-07 14:56:09+00:00
The way Zig addresses it also discards all of the runtime variability too. In Go, an error can say something like

unmarshaling struct type Foo: in field Bar int: failed to parse value "abc" as integer

Whereas in Zig, an error can only say something that's known at compile time, like IntParse, and you will have to use another mechanism (e.g. logging) to actually trace the error.
by jmyeet | 2025-06-07 14:56:12+00:00
SpaceX is critical infrastructure to the US at this point and its continued availability and operation is of national security interest.

That may sound like it gives Elon power. It's the opposite, actually. No US administration will take lightly threats to national security infrastructure like this. The nuclear option for any administration is to nationalize SpaceX, which they absolutely could do.

Less nuclear: the US has a lot of control over what SpaceX does. The FAA (and to a lesser extent the NOAA) has to approve every launch. They could simply gorund SpaceX.

If you think SpaceX could simply move operations elsewhere, think again, The US prohibits ASML, a Dutch company, from selling EUV lithography machines to China.

Apart from all of that, SpaceX is absolutely dependant on US government funding and contracts. Withdrawing those, or even the threat of such, allows the US to wield a lot of power over SpaceX.

What's rather surprising about this feud is that Trump is currently the adult and has been uncharacteristically restrained in his response thus far. Of course, all that could change. It was Elon who heavily implied that Trump was a pedophile, which is an absolutely insane thing to do.
by wrasee | 2025-06-07 14:56:13+00:00
I think you missed the point. The claim is that AI training from public information is no different from humans learning from public information.

My argument is precisely that the mechanisation of information is fundamentally different from the scale at which a human can learn. One immediate consequence being there is no longer a natural brake on the scale of what can be sourced for use in a derivative work.

To be clear this is not a value judgement, just to point out that it _is_ different, just as driving is fundamentally different from what one can do with one’s own feet. Of course the mechanisation of transport is history and seems daft to argue against. But it is different. Whether that’s good or bad is a much harder question.
by dahart | 2025-06-07 14:56:26+00:00
Are you sure? You know that Trump constantly talks about his TV ratings? I forget who it was, but I remember there being a story last year or the year before, of someone who was publicly criticizing Trump met with him and was expecting to be absolutely whipped and scolded, instead behind the scenes Trump thanked them for making good television. The financial impact on Musk’s companies do make this seem real, but somehow I wouldn’t be surprised if this drama was fake. It did occur to me, and I can tell I’m not the only one... the top Google autocomplete for me for “is the trump” is “is the trump musk feud real”.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/president-trump...

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/28/us/politics/television-tr...
by margalabargala | 2025-06-07 14:56:45+00:00
> What does SpaceX have to do with the Musk/Trump spat?

Well, SpaceX is owned by Musk. Therefore Trump, if seeking to hurt Musk, could attempt to hurt SpaceX.

The ends justify the means. The country's best interests are collateral damage, the benefit that SpaceX offers the country is not relevant to Trump's ego/feelings having been hurt.
by MstWntd | 2025-06-07 14:57:19+00:00
The demand is higher for FE Engineers precisely because it's easier. You have a low entry bar and more mediocre/inexperienced devs get in, create a mess and move on to better opportunities because now they have the 1 or 2 years extra of engineering xp and have also padded their resumes a bit.. also they need to higher more devs because tickets churn out rate is not the best either..

if you agree no need to up vote.. but if you disagree then do up vote as I told you something you needed to hear..
by thrance | 2025-06-07 14:58:25+00:00
I enjoy getting my ale at the click of a button, and keep my arguing capabilities for stranger online.

There may be a place for AI driven games but there is literally no reason to shove it everywhere. Pre-written dialogue is much more enjoyable to engage with on the long term, contrasted with having to think about phrasing for an NPC that spouts generic fantasy speak.