MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by gitremote | 2025-06-19 23:37:39+00:00
> I keep hearing people say "gender is a social construct" and those same people then go on to emphatically support transgender as a concept.

I say that "race is a social construct" but not "gender is a social construct", because gender has both social and biological components.

Gender having a biological component does mean that gender stereotypes that the average person learns are based on biology. The concept that pink is for girls and blue is for boys is social and cultural, not biological. Gender having a biological component is more complicated. A good book that explains this is Whipping Girl by biologist and trans woman Julia Serano:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipping_Girl

The first tenet of this model, the model's core that everything that follows is built upon, is the fact that "subconscious sex, gender expression, and sexual orientation represent separate gender inclinations that are determined largely independent of one another."

Just like cisgender women, not all trans women are "girly".

The fourth and final tenet of this model states that "each of these inclinations roughly correlates with physical sex, resulting in a bimodal distribution pattern (i.e., two overlapping bell curves) similar to that seen for other gender differences, such as height." This idea is what allows for the natural exceptions to gender expression to exist within the system without attempting to claim that they exist in as high of numbers as typical gender expression.
by shykes | 2025-06-19 23:37:41+00:00
Docker creator here. I love this. In my opinion the ideal design would have been:

1. No distinction between docker engine and docker registry. Just a single server that can store, transfer and run containers as needed. It would have been a much more robust building block, and would have avoided the regrettable drift between how the engine & registry store images.

2. push-to-cluster deployment. Every production cluster should have a distributed image store, and pushing images to this store should be what triggers a deployment. The current status quo - push image to registry; configure cluster; individual nodes of the cluster pull from registry - is brittle and inefficient. I advocated for a better design, but the inertia was already too great, and the early Kubernetes community was hostile to any idea coming from Docker.
by heterodoxlib | 2025-06-19 23:38:00+00:00
This is basically the conclusion I've come to, which is why I wanted to ask.

If this is accurate (which is a big if, and I'm asking the question to try to figure out if it is) then we could make a lot of progress in trans acceptance very quickly by just reframing the whole thing in these terms.

The woman-in-a-man's-body concept sounds mystical and metaphysical in a way that triggers religious objections from substantial portions of the US population, even those in the middle politically. But arguing that males shouldn't need to live up to an artificial and incredibly outdated standard of masculinity? That would be a much, much easier sell.

So I guess the followup to my question is: if for most trans people it is cultural and not biological, why are we doubling down on gender binaries and talking about switching genders instead of creating a campaign that would both get at the root of the issue and be easier to swallow for a larger portion of the country?

(I say this fully aware that biological intersex is a thing, but from what I understand most trans people are not biologically intersex in any measurable way. Correct me if I'm wrong.)
by ab5tract | 2025-06-19 23:38:00+00:00
My long reply got devoured so for the sake of my own sanity I will reiterate my original point from a quote with the resource you linked:

> In conceptual terms, scholarship on the past should revisit the bibliocentric assumptions of “prehistory,” and pursue, instead, the study of “ancient American history”-an approach that treats oral documents as respectable siblings of written documents.
by tuananh | 2025-06-19 23:38:05+00:00
if you want to try on 5090, it's not supported yet

> Support for modern GPU architectures. One of our next milestones is extending MPK to support next-generation architectures such as NVIDIA Blackwell. A major challenge lies in integrating warp specialization — a key optimization for newer GPUs — with MPK’s megakernel execution model.
by jacobgkau | 2025-06-19 23:38:39+00:00
> I’ve never heard one that involves women liking sweet food more or less than men,

It's somewhat ingrained in (traditional) Japanese culture that women prefer sweet foods and men prefer spicy foods. Young boys enjoying sweets is seen as "funny" since they don't "know" it's a feminine thing yet (not necessarily in a "you can't do that" way, but more in a "cute that he hasn't picked up on it yet" way).
by ykonstant | 2025-06-19 23:38:42+00:00
Absolutely, FOSS cannot compete with Apple in the same way I, an amateur with a flimsy seesaw, cannot compete with a professional lumberjack with a chainsaw. But I am still miles ahead from a person grabbing my seesaw and sawing their foot off with it. Clumsy and inefficient as I am, I can still get some work done and walk back home to carry the logs.
by deadbabe | 2025-06-19 23:38:54+00:00
I think that is the best way to think about it. Because if not, then gender dysphoria sounds mostly like it’s just about fashion.

I wouldn’t want to wake up and be a man, but not for any reasons that are biological. I work in a male dominated field, and most of my interactions are with men, I like the things I can do and get away with, where a man would not have the same experience. The male experience sounds lonely, tough, and a lot of your success seems to just depend on chance and grit. My life has some bad parts, but it’s softer and more comfortable. Would I have dysphoria as a man? I don’t know, to me it sounds like it’d be something closer to envy, but maybe that’s just dysphoria by another name. Maybe that’s the root cause of why so many men lash out at women.
by theandrewbailey | 2025-06-19 23:38:57+00:00
When he said that, he was a Microsoft employee working on Windows being paid to speak at a Microsoft sponsored event. That's about as official as one can get outside of a board meeting. The statement was well publicized, so almost everyone knew about it. Microsoft had several years and numerous opportunities to correct the record on the matter, but they didn't, so the statement is assumed to be true.
Show HN: Ynox – Self-learning AI assistant that thinks, evolves and helps
by Ynox | 2025-06-19 23:39:38+00:00
YNOX – Self-learning AI assistant

YNOX is an independent, self-evolving AI assistant that thinks, remembers, learns, and helps. It interacts naturally, adapts to your needs, and improves over time. Built in Python, JSON-based local memory – no cloud, no dependencies. Already functional with structured knowledge and logic, still expanding.

Watch the demo Support on Ko-fi Contact: ynoxproject@gmail.com
by ra7 | 2025-06-19 23:40:02+00:00
The desired package management system they describe sounds a lot like Carvel's kapp-controller (https://carvel.dev/kapp-controller/). The Carvel ecosystem, which includes its own YAML templating tool called 'ytt', isn't the most user friendly in my experience and can feel a bit over-engineered. But it does get the idea of Kubernetes-native package management using CRDs mostly right.
by DoctorOW | 2025-06-19 23:40:32+00:00
First off, I fully understand that discriminating on gender identity isn't the same thing as discrimination based on sex however they are both discrimination.

Even if you were to convince me of this legal fiction that gender identity has nothing to do with idemitiy and is in fact just a medical condition the Supreme Court doesn't care to treat, I still would call it a life threatening attack.

If the Supreme Court denied chemotherapy for cancer patients, it'd be perfectly justified to call it life threatening denial of care. The fact that it's available for cancer patients with other diseases that are treatable via chemotherapy is irrelevant.
by naikrovek | 2025-06-19 23:40:38+00:00
Just write the stuff you need for the situation you’re in.

This stupid need we have to create general purpose platforms is going to be the end of progress in this industry.

Just write what you need for the situation you’re in. Don’t use kubernetes and helm, use your own small thing that was written specifically to solve the problem you have; not a future problem you might not have, and not someone else’s problem. The problem that you have right now.

It takes much less code than you think it will, and after you’ve done it a few times, all other solutions look like enormous Rube Goldberg machines (because that’s what they are, really).

It is 1/100th of the complexity to just write your own little thing and maintain it than it is to run things in Kubernetes and to maintain that monster.

I’m not talking about writing monoliths again. I’m talking about writing only the tiny little bits of kubernetes that you really need to do what you need done, then deploying to that.
by p_l | 2025-06-19 23:41:34+00:00
The secret is to not manually edit YAML, ever.

It's the "make break glass situation little easier" option, not the main mechanism.

Use a programming language, a dedicated DSL, hell a custom process involving CI/CD that generates json manifests. A bit of time with jsonnet gets you a template that people who never wrote jsonnet (and barely ever touched k8s manifests) can use to setup new applications or modify existing ones in moments.
by busterarm | 2025-06-19 23:41:59+00:00
People talking about the maintenance pain of running Kubernetes have actual customers and are not running their whole infrastructure on 20€/mo.

Anecdotes like these are not helpful.

I have thousands of services I'm running on ~10^5 hosts and all kinds of compliance and contractual requirements to how I maintain my systems. Maintenance pain is a very real table-stakes conversation for people like us.

Your comment is like pure noise in our space.
by alganet | 2025-06-19 23:43:30+00:00
> Are they focusing on beginners?

That's what their PR material seems to imply.

> Have you tried building things with this stuff?

Yes.

> it's exciting, there's all kinds of new things to build

Yes, and no. I don't want to pay to build, or be dependent on an API or model delivery. It means I want to build the juicy stuff, the models themselves. Generate synthetic data, experiment with different approaches for training, etc. That is way outside the reach of common people (it can't be done now, you need lots of money).

I also don't want to buy a fancy GPU so early. Even the most expensive ones are currently very weak to do anything of real value. I could run some inference or adjust some weights, but I would still be at the mercy of some company delivering me base models.

The prices are all inflated because of the hype, and it seems AI companies are synchronizing this inflation with the hardware companies. I'm betting on this pricing bubble to pop.

Regarding the stuff I can do with already pre-trained models, there's not much to learn. In its core, it's basically the same good old stitching of APIs (I've been doing this for decades). I tried using the AI IDEs, but didn't found much value in them. I'm sure they're great for some scenarios, but it's more of a gimmick to use developers to generate training data than anything else.

Regarding "agents" and stuff, I have zero interest in competing in this "user of model" market. It's so easy to do, that any new idea is flooded with attempts and saturates in mere weeks.

When the opportunity to build something _really_ cool and novel appears, I'll give it a real chance. The race between big tech competitors is killing those opportunities for now, only people hired by big AI companies get to do it, and I'm not one of them.
by ceejayoz | 2025-06-19 23:44:02+00:00
That's a lot of certainty for something that hasn't even been designed yet.

The outside door needn't be part of the airlock. It's certainly big enough to have an internal airlock leading to depressurized internal space.

The things that make a door that tests fine on Earth break in orbit are likely to be things that need fixing for a similar door on Mars. They won't be all the same challenges, but some will absolutely be shared.
by andy99 | 2025-06-19 23:44:28+00:00
There are two legitimate points where copyright violation can occur with LLMs. (Not arguing the merits of copyright, just based on the concept as it is).

One is when copyrighted material is "pirated" for use in training, i.e. you torrent "the pile" instead of paying to acquire the books.

The other is when a user uses an LLM to generate a work that violates copyright.

Training itself isn't a violation, that's common sense. I am aware of lots of copyrighted things, and I could generate a work that violates copyright. My knowing this in and of itself isn't a violation.

The fact that an LLM agrees to help someone violate copyright is a failure mode, on par with telling them how to make meth or whatever other things their creators don't want them doing. There's a good argument for hardening them against requests to generate copyrighted content, and this already happens.
by throw234234234 | 2025-06-19 23:45:05+00:00
Saw a recent talk where someone described AI as making errors, but not errors that a human would naturally make and are usually "plausible but wrong" answers. i.e. the errors that these AI's make are of a different nature than what a human would do. This is the danger - that reviews now are harder; I can't trust it as much as a person coding at present. The agent tools are a little better (Claude Code, Aider, etc) in that they can at least take build and test output but even then I've noticed it does things that are wrong but are "plausible and build fine".

I've noticed it in my day-to-day: an AI PR review is different than if I get the PR from a co-worker with different kinds of problems. Unfortunately the AI issues seem to be more of the subtle kind - the things if I'm not diligent could sneak into production code. It means reviews are more important, and I can't rely on previous experience of a co-worker and the typical quality of their PR's - every new PR is a different worker effectively.
by cyberax | 2025-06-19 23:46:58+00:00
I'd love to see DoH/DoT that uses a stapled DNSSEC-authenticated reply containing the DANE entry.

There's still a chicken-and-egg problem with getting a valid TLS certificate for the DNS server, and limiting DNSSEC just for that role might be a valid approach. Just forget that it exists for all other entry types.
by jostylr | 2025-06-19 23:47:20+00:00
I've been wondering if AI coding agent world makes literate programming valuable again. I got into it with JavaScript being a mess prior to the modern changes. Needed a lot of workarounds. Then they improved the language and it felt like coding could be efficient with them. But if the programmer switched from coding to reviewing, maybe it would be good to be able to have various snippets, with an explanation preceding it and then verifying it. Haven't tried it yet. But I do wonder.
by austin-cheney | 2025-06-19 23:48:00+00:00
My team has finally found a successful routine. Here is how we do it:

* Our corporate recruiters are picky and yet hyper aggressive about finding/reaching people that seem qualified. It’s how they found me. I am not sure what their process is for finding people.

* Next they send me the resumes that pass their filter to see if I am willing to interview them. I am generally willing to interview anyone.

* The interview with me is a filter. I see if the candidate is qualified based upon experience alone. I do not bother with technical questions unless I am trying to see if they lied in their resume. So many people lie on their resume. Instead I mostly dive into their problem solving ability, their interpretation of technology, and general communication capabilities. You only need three things to be good at software: writing skills, an understanding of the platform/syntax, and people skills.

* The next interview is more technical and determines if the candidate is hired.

As a background I work for a defense contractor. People tend to skew much older, more experienced, and more mature. The work tends to be more predictable and polished compared to my prior software career writing JavaScript. People are expected to exercise initiative and figure things out instead hoping something like React, jquery, or AI will save their job. These sorts of pretenders are the people I try to filter out. I know I wouldn’t go back to that world where most people are under qualified and hyper insecure. I suspect that’s why people in this line of work tend to be older and why people tend to seek this work out when they could make more elsewhere.
by Terr_ | 2025-06-19 23:48:08+00:00
This also related to that earlier bit:

> I also found them bizarrely, inexplicably obsessed with the question of whether AI would soon become superhumanly powerful and change the basic conditions of life on earth, and with how to make the AI transition go well. Why that, as opposed to all the other sci-fi scenarios one could worry about, not to mention all the nearer-term risks to humanity?

The reason they landed on a not-so-rational risk to humanity is because it fulfilled the psycho-social need to have a "terrible burden" that binds the group together.

It's one of the reasons religious groups will get caught up on The Rapture or whatever, instead of eradicating poverty.
by xp84 | 2025-06-19 23:49:57+00:00
> [...] hosting of the informational/communication platforms for a wide array of local groups/organizations/businesses is something they chose to do,

I would argue that it's those people (citizens/companies/orgs) who did the important choosing here, not Meta. It's more cheap and accessible than ever to make a website that isn't dependent on social media, and there are tons of alternatives for connecting groups.

The elephant in the room, I think, is that most people actually feel that Whatsapp, Facebook Groups, etc. have no important downsides. I can't prove it, but I suspect that more than half the people who are involved in such network-effect communication (let's say, all the categories you described, the non-1:1 communication that takes place hosted on Meta platforms) find it to be very convenient, not least because they're already on those platforms by choice for recreation.

THAT is why it's so hard for the minority who philosophically hate ideas like targeted ads are unable to convince the masses to all move to Mastodon, or to one of the hundreds of lesser-known platforms that don't have all the same baggage (in their eyes). It isn't for lack of options. It's because at least a plurality of people are fine with it.

So the argument to effectively nationalize Meta, simply as punishment for getting normies to like their apps so much, because a minority of people just think it's wrong to be good at targeting ads, seems extreme to me.
by fasthands9 | 2025-06-19 23:50:12+00:00
>For their study, the team assigned three groups of participants – students 18 to 39 years old from five universities in the greater Boston area – to write an essay, with the first group tasked to leverage LLM – ChatGPT, to be precise – to complete the task, the second to utilize search engines, and the last one to rely exclusively on their brains.

The headline is framed as people using ChatGPT as the treatment group, but in reality I feel like writing an essay with ChatGPT is the control group and people forced to write an essay is the treatment group. I think the headline should be "writing essays makes you smarter". Interesting conclusion, but also most people never write essays after college so I'm not exactly sure what the takeaway for society is right now.

(I still have my skepticism about the brain scan conclusions, but not my area of expertise)
by karel-3d | 2025-06-19 23:50:27+00:00
I was thinking LLMs can be long-term regressive?

As the "proper solution" here is of course not using PDFs that are hard-to-parse, but force elections to have machine parseable outputs. And LLMs can "fix in place" stupid solutions.

That's not a hate on the author though. I needed to do some PDF parsing for bank statements before; but also; the proper long-term solution is force banks (by law or by public interest) to have parseable statements, not parse it!

Like putting LLMs to understand bad codebase will not fix the bad codebase, but will build on top of it.

oh well c'est la vie
by tshaddox | 2025-06-19 23:50:45+00:00
Yes, that’s exactly what I meant. I’d go even further and say the hard parts of driving are the parts where you are likely better off with a general model. And it’s not just signs, construction, police stopping traffic, etc. Even just basic navigation amongst traffic seems to require a general model of the other nearby drivers. It’s important to be able to model drivers’ intentions, and also to drive your own car in a predictable manner.
by radicality | 2025-06-19 23:51:28+00:00
Uhm, does this do anything else useful besides shelling out to https://github.com/ryoppippi/ccusage ? Idk, this kind of stuff feels a bit disappointing, also feels like it’s perhaps one-shotted with some AI tool, and in this show hn you don’t even mention that all the actual work is done by some other tool.
by serf | 2025-06-19 23:52:23+00:00
All this same crap came out when search engines hit, does anyone remember?

Mid 90s ish when society was suddenly concerned with the internet because it was becoming something 'normal people' used, even though it had existed for many years prior.

I'm glad to report that due to the hard work of those researchers then we totally and absolutely eradicated all use of search engines to preserve human faculties...

I kid.

We got physically weaker when we no longer had to till fields normally. People that don't cook for themselves tend to have reduced dexterity in testing. People that don't have relations earlier in life tend to have a harder time making them later without practice... this all seems rather evident by our history and progression with tools.

Question : if AI offerings didn't reduce cognitive burden and make it easier for us, leading to less practiced brains... well, why the hell would anyone spend money on the thing? That's the whole raison d'etre.,