MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by asoneth | 2025-06-27 16:02:22+00:00
> The rave reviews alone would be free marketing worth well above the money invested in the software engineers.

Whether it's worth it depends on how much it costs to improve efficiency, and how many more laptops they need to sell at a higher price to recoup those costs.

For background, the AMD Framework 13's 61Wh battery supposedly gets ~9 hours[1] (~6.8Wh per hour), the System 76 14" Lemur Pro's 73Wh battery claims up to 14h [2] (~5.2Wh per hour), the MacBook Pro M4s 72Wh battery claims up to 22h [3] (~3.3Wh per hour).

I am skeptical anyone can get close to Macbook levels of efficiency without soldering components, designing new chips, and spending close to their ~$31 billion in R&D. But let's say we shoot for 4Wh per hour to get us in the 15-18 hour range.

If you could achieve such an improvement with a couple software folks and you can amortize it over a million laptops that might add less than ten bucks per laptop. That'd be great!

Personally I am skeptical it's anywhere close to that easy, and I'm skeptical that these niche manufacturers are selling a million laptops a year. I think it's much more likely that meaningfully improving efficiency would require making each laptop significantly more expensive.

> would pay an extra money per month for Apple level battery life ... I would gladly pay much more above and beyond a macbook pro

But would you pay an extra several hundred dollars for a Framework or System 76 laptop if other Linux laptops received the same efficiency benefits without needing to increase their costs to cover developer salaries? Apple can afford to spend billions improving efficiency because they can amortize that across many more laptops and because they can capture most of the benefit of their research. (And because for several decades they had loyal customers who paid an extra couple hundred bucks per laptop even when they didn't have better efficiency.)

> Something like this would be myself and many other peoples literal dream computers and withing a year or two's time almost any Linux user would be on System76 laptops, guaranteed

If we're dreaming, why stop there? If System 76 produced a $10 laptop that can be powered by nothing but sunshine they'd take over the world! But realistically, I think the best we're going to get in the foreseeable future is slow, incremental efficiency improvements that lag a generation or two behind Apple.

(A simpler way Framework or S76 could increase battery life to the ~15-19h range would be to bump up to a 99Wh battery which probably costs on the order of a hundred bucks for the larger battery and chassis, though it would also make the laptop thicker and heavier.)

[1] https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportabl... (I don't see a manufacturer claimed range) [2] https://system76.com/laptops/lemp13/configure [3] https://support.apple.com/en-us/121553
by sheepybloke | 2025-06-27 16:02:26+00:00
This has been happening in the US for the past 10 years. The big switch has been away from coal and some slower natural gas generators towards more nimble natural gas generators. Coal and other natural gas generators take a while to start up and shut down (think on the order of a day), which don't work well for coordinating with renewables and are much more expensive to operate. So companies have been switching to faster natural gas generators that start up in minutes to hours to support when demand is higher.
by steveklabnik | 2025-06-27 16:02:37+00:00
Brian Anderson wrote up his thoughts here, and it's a good intro to the topic: https://www.pingcap.com/blog/rust-compilation-model-calamity...

Let's dig into this bit of that, to give you some more color:

> Split compiler/package manager — although it is normal for languages to have a package manager separate from the compiler, in Rust at least this results in both cargo and rustc having imperfect and redundant information about the overall compilation pipeline. As more parts of the pipeline are short-circuited for efficiency, more metadata needs to be transferred between instances of the compiler, mostly through the filesystem, which has overhead.

> Per-compilation-unit code-generation — rustc generates machine code each time it compiles a crate, but it doesn’t need to — with most Rust projects being statically linked, the machine code isn’t needed until the final link step. There may be efficiencies to be achieved by completely separating analysis and code generation.

Rust decided to go with the classic separate compilation model that languages like C use. Let's talk about that compared to Zig, since it was already brought up in this thread.

So imagine we have a project, A, and it depends on B. B is a huge library, 200,000 lines of code, but we only use one function from it in A, and that function is ten lines. Yes, this is probably a bad project management decision, but we're using extremes here to make a point.

Cargo will compile B first, and then A, and then link things together. That's the classic model. And it works. But it's slow: rust had to compile all 200,000 lines of code in B, even though we only are gonna need ten lines. We do all of this work, and then we throw it away at the end. A ton of wasted time and effort. This is often mitigated by the fact that you compile B once, and then compile A a lot, but this still puts a lot of pressure on the linker, and generics also makes this more complex, but I'm getting a bit astray of the main point here, so I'll leave that alone for now.

Zig, on the other hand, does not do this. It requires that you compile your whole program all at once. This means that they can drive the compilation process beginning from main, in other words, only compile the code that's actually reachable in your program. This means that in the equivalent situation, Zig only compiles those ten lines from B, and never bothers with the rest. That's just always going to be faster.

Of course, there are pros and cons to both of these decisions, Rust made the choice it did here for good reasons. But it does mean it's just going to be slower.
by diggan | 2025-06-27 16:03:13+00:00
> One of Qwen's strengths historically has been their open-weights strategy [...] let researchers and individuals get the weights for free and let startups pay for a reasonably-priced license for commercial use.

But if you're suggesting they should do open weights, doesn't that mean people should be able to use it freely?

You're effectively suggesting "trial-weights", "shareware-weights", "academic-weights" or something like that rather than "open weights", which to me would make it seem like you can use them for whatever you want, just like with "open source" software. But if it misses a large part of what makes "open source" open source, like "use it for whatever you want", then it kind of gives the wrong idea.
by eddd-ddde | 2025-06-27 16:03:37+00:00
> In the absence of being able to ascertain the type of person you are dealing with you have to fall back too "no trust" and review everything with a very fine tooth comb.

Is that not how you review all code? I don't care who wrote the code, just because certain person wrote the code doesn't give them an instant pass to skip my review process.
by rednafi | 2025-06-27 16:04:12+00:00
Runtimes like Bun, Deno, or type systems like TypeScript don’t change the fact it’s still JS underneath — a crappily designed language that should’ve never left throwable frontend code.

None of these runtimes make JS anywhere even close to single-threaded Go perf, let alone multithreaded (goroutine) perf.
by b0a04gl | 2025-06-27 16:04:38+00:00
they exist because whole language built to treat expressions as firstclass citizens : blocks, ifs, matches, even macros as expressions that return values. so once you internalize that, all these weirdo one liners are artifacts. just artifact of a system where expressions compose infinitely. the syntax tree runs deeper than most people's habbits allow. you hit that depth and brain says this is wrong but compiler's allowing.
by IAmBroom | 2025-06-27 16:04:59+00:00
Boy, that's a lot of words to say "care about everything".

Asking the summary question IS important. If we all switch to reusable straws, will that save more or fewer whales than shutting down one coal plant?

If my tap water is injecting 99% of the microplastics in my bloodstream, IDGAF about pepper grinders.

And I eat pepper like it's "the black vegetable".
by steveklabnik | 2025-06-27 16:05:08+00:00
This post is missing my favorite one!

fn evil_lincoln() { let _evil = println!("lincoln"); }

What's weird about this?

To understand what evil_lincoln is doing, you have to understand very old Rust. Here's the commit that introduced it: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/commit/664b0ad3fcead4fe4d2...

fn evil_lincoln() { let evil <- log "lincoln"; }

log was a keyword to print stuff to the screen. Hence the joke, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_Logs Now that log is the println! macro, the joke is lost.

It doesn't say explicitly why this is "weird", but given some other comments in the file,

// FIXME: Doesn't compile //let _x = log true == (ret 0);

I am assuming that using the return value of log was buggy, and so this tested that you could save it in a variable. I don't remember the exact semantics of log, but if it's like println!, it returns (), which is useless, so binding it to a variable is something you'd never write in real code, so it's "weird" in that sense.
by WorldMaker | 2025-06-27 16:05:19+00:00
You don't need Array.from if you are using `for (const x of document.querySelectorAll(selector) { }` loops anyway or have a library like IxJS handy.

ES2025 added map, filter, flatMap, reduce, forEach, and several other methods to all iterators (including NodeList directly, I believe, but definitely its entries(), keys(), values(), if not) [1]. It'll be a year or two at current pace before that is "widely accepted baseline" in browsers, but it's great progress on these sorts of complaints.

[1] https://2ality.com/2025/06/ecmascript-2025.html#iterator-hel...
by amluto | 2025-06-27 16:05:26+00:00
> Well empty space has a temperature of roughly -270c...so that's pretty cold.

What is this “empty space” you speak of? Genuinely empty space is empty and does not have a clearly defined temperature. If you are in space in our universe, very far from everything else, then the temperature of the cosmic microwave background is what matters, and that’s a few K. If you’re in our solar system in an orbit near Earth, the radiation field is wildly far from any sort of thermal equilibrium, and the steady state temperature of a passive black body will depend strongly on whether it’s in the Earth’s shadow, and it’s a lot hotter than a few K when exposed to sunlight.
by rushingcreek | 2025-06-27 16:07:01+00:00
I am personally in favor of true open source (e.g. Apache 2 license), but the reality is that these model are expensive to develop and many developers are choosing not to release their model weights at all.

I think that releasing the weights openly but with this type of dual-license (hence open weights, but not true open source) is an acceptable tradeoff to get more model developers to release models openly.
by echelon | 2025-06-27 16:07:17+00:00
The era of open weights from China appears to be over for some reason. It's all of a sudden and seems to be coordinated.

Alibaba just shut off the Qwen releases

Tencent just shut off the Hunyuan releases

Bytedance just released Seedream, but it's closed

It's seems like it's over.

They're still clearly training on Western outputs, though.

I still suspect that the strategic thing to do would be to become 100% open and sell infra/service.
by lappa | 2025-06-27 16:07:19+00:00
This isn't suggesting no one understands how these models are architected, nor is anyone saying that SDPA / matrix multiplication isn't understood by those who create these systems.

What's being said is that the result of training and the way in which information is processed in latent space is opaque.

There are strategies to dissect a models inner workings, but this is an active field of research and incomplete.
by reliefcrew | 2025-06-27 16:07:22+00:00
Quad9 9.9.9.9 149.112.112.112

Quad9 uncensored 9.9.9.10 149.112.112.10

FDN 80.67.169.40 80.67.169.12

DNS.WATCH 84.200.69.80 84.200.70.40

OpenDNS 208.67.222.222 208.67.220.220

Google 8.8.8.8 8.8.4.4

Yandex Basic 77.88.8.8 77.88.8.1

AdGuard DNS 176.103.130.130 176.103.130.131
by vel0city | 2025-06-27 16:08:15+00:00
Let me start off saying I'm not a fan of this law. I don't think these requirements are workable with current technology, and I don't necessarily agree with the goals or that the goals are worth the side effects of the regulations.

> Can a state now require you to verify your age and identity to read a newspaper they don't like?

Most states have laws in place that regulate the sale and distribution of pornography and other "obscene" materials. This has been true for a long, long time. So yes, states have had the ability to require you to show ID to get a "newspaper" they don't like, assuming that newspaper is actually just pornography/obscenity. I don't think most people would argue Pornhub are news sites though.
by hnuser123456 | 2025-06-27 16:08:39+00:00
It seems like if one truly wanted to make a SuperWholesome(TM) LLM, you would simply have to exclude most of social media from the training. Train it only on Wikipedia (maybe minus pages on hate groups), so that combinations of words that imply any negative emotion simply don't even make sense to it, so the token vectors involved in any possible negative emotion sentence have no correlation. Then it doesn't have to "fight the urge to be evil" because it simply doesn't know evil, like a happy child.
Show HN: I'm 15 and built Gofer, an AI that gets actual terminal work done
by jleuthardt | 2025-06-27 16:08:57+00:00
Gofer is a side-project I wrote at 15 because I was sick of these so-called CLI agents. Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, they're all wonderful if you're coding. But for those just wanna automate their stuff, it's a dud. Gofer solves this by being terminal-first, meant to accomplish any task a command line can. It can also watch your desktop so you can avoid waiting for downloads to finish, and can text you via. Telegram!

Happy to answer any questions :D! -J
by 9rx | 2025-06-27 16:08:58+00:00
> The most-difficult parts of projects are starting them and ending them.

I'm not sure that is true. Starting is easy. Ending is even easier — you just give up; which is, I would argue, the easiest thing of all for a human to do.

What is hard is taking a project to "I want to share this with other people". That is when the uncomfortable truths get told. As people generally don't like discomfort, there is a lot of motivation to not reach this state.
by TriangleEdge | 2025-06-27 16:09:20+00:00
I think your assumption that Texas cares about its porn industries is incorrect. Pornhub is a Canadian company. Afaik it's the #1 porn site, I could be wrong. I assume if they don't comply, their DNS host will be blocked in Texas. Registries of porn sites are readily available. (I use them in my hosts file blocking). So, my guess is that the likely step will be block all of them until they prove they have ID enforcement.
by duxup | 2025-06-27 16:09:24+00:00
It's an interesting dynamic. Sellers don't want to increase prices, perhaps in fear of upsetting customers / Trump, and so we've got this long delay where they seem to hope Trump wakes up on the right side of the bed tomorrow and changes his mind ...

I would expect prices to be more dynamic but there seems to have been a wait it out approach so far.
by javier123454321 | 2025-06-27 16:09:58+00:00
This is a bad take for a few reasons. You are implying that moving close to friends is not 'Living and learning to deal with the rest of society'. That is a false premise.

Second, living in community of close friends is a massive improvement in quality of life for everyone involved. This is as much biological as it is spiritual. You can either do that by becoming close to strangers that live nearby or living nearby people that are already close to you. Given that the average adult from the US moves over 11 times[1] in their life, the solution is self evident.

Lastly, using tribalism here is misguided. That implies a in and out group. Why use that word instead of 'communalism' which implies helping each other.

1. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-many-times-the-aver...
by sorokod | 2025-06-27 16:10:36+00:00
Having an experience and being capable of making a choice is fundamental. A relevant martial arts quote:

"A pacifist is not really a pacifist if he is unable to make a choice between violence and non-violence. A true pacifist is able to kill or maim in the blink of an eye, but at the moment of impending destruction of the enemy he chooses non-violence. He chooses peace. He must be able to make a choice. He must have the genuine ability to destroy his enemy and then choose not to. I have heard this excuse made. “I choose to be a pacifist before learning techniques so I do not need to learn the power of destruction.” This shows no comprehension of the mind of the true warrior. This is just a rationalization to cover the fear of injury or hard training. The true warrior who chooses to be a pacifist is willing to stand and die for his principles. People claiming to be pacifists who rationalize to avoid hard training or injury will flee instead of standing and dying for principle. They are just cowards. Only a warrior who has tempered his spirit in conflict and who has confronted himself and his greatest fears can in my opinion make the choice to be a true pacifist."
by bevr1337 | 2025-06-27 16:10:39+00:00
> How can anything be good without the awareness of evil?

Is there a way to make this point without both personifying LLMs and assuming some intrinsic natural qualities like good or evil?

An AI in in the present lacks the capacity for good and evil, morals, ethics, whatever. Why aren't developers, companies, integrators directly accountable? We haven't approached full Ghost in the Shell yet.
by rob_c | 2025-06-27 16:11:07+00:00
It was also a largeish dataset it's probably never encountered before which was trained for a limited number of epochs (from the papers description with 4o) so I'm not shocked the model went off the rails as I doubt it had finished training.

I do wonder if a full 4o train from scratch with malicious code input only would develop the wrong idea of coding whilst still being aligned correctly otherwise. Afaik there's no reason it shouldn't generate bad code in this context unless there's something special about the model design in 4o I'm unaware of
by PaulHoule | 2025-06-27 16:12:03+00:00
... but people are in the habit of using doubles. Many languages, like Javascript, only support doubles and int32(s) do embed in doubles.

I have some notes for a fantasy computer which is maybe what would have happened if Chinese people [1] evolved something like the PDP-10 [2] Initially I was wanting a 24-bit wordsize [3] but decided on 48-bit [4] because you can fit 48 bits into a double for a Javascript implementation.

[1] There are instructions to scan UTF-8 characters and the display system supports double-wide bitmap characters that are split into halves that are indexed with 24-bit ints.

[2] It's a load-store architecture but there are instructions to fetch and write 0<n<48 bits out of a word even overlapping two words, which makes [1] possible; maybe that write part is a little unphysical

[3] I can't get over how a possible 24-bit generation didn't quite materialize in the 1980s, and find the eZ80 evokes a kind of nostalgia for an alternate history

[4] In the backstory, it started with a 24-bit address space like the 360 but got extended to have "wide pointers" qualified by an address space identifier (instead of the paging-oriented architecture the industry) really took as well as "deep pointers" which specify a bitmap, 48-bit is enough for a pointer to be deep and wide and have some tag bits. Address spaces can merge together contiguously or not depending on what you put in the address space table.
by colejohnson66 | 2025-06-27 16:12:04+00:00
I didn't say protobufs were a valid replacement - you only think I did. "Protobufs and other binary formats already existed, [..]". I was only using it as an example of a binary format that most programmers have heard of; More people know of protobufs than MessagePack and CBOR.

Please avoid snark.
I Pitted Gemini CLI Against Claude Code to Create Flappy Bird
by kstonekuan | 2025-06-27 16:12:08+00:00
I was curious to compare the new Gemini CLI with the new incumbent Claude Code, so I prompted both to create a Flappy Bird game from scratch.

Claude Code - took just one prompt - nice UI styling - high cost, ~$4, with opus 4

Gemini CLI - FREE - lots of fixes needed after first build - auto switched from 2.5 pro to 2.5 flash midway due to "slow response"

You can find all the code generated on GitHub: https://github.com/kstonekuan/gemini-v-claude-flappy-bird

I'd love to hear your thoughts and feedback!
by drewbitt | 2025-06-27 16:12:14+00:00
At least 5 brand new accounts are commenting on this post, sometimes multiple times across Inworld submissions here.

You say SOTA but I don't see any benchmarks/leaderboards that back this up except in voice cloning, which I don't particularly care about. Consider getting it added to https://huggingface.co/spaces/TTS-AGI/TTS-Arena-V2 and https://artificialanalysis.ai/text-to-speech/arena.
by jorl17 | 2025-06-27 16:12:25+00:00
Suppose we have an LLM in an agentic loop, acting on your behalf, perhaps building code, or writing e-mails. Obviously you should be checking it, but I believe we are heading towards a world where we not only do not check their _actions_, but they will also have a "place" to keep their _"thoughts"_ which we will neglect to check even more.

If an LLM is not aligned in some way, it may suddenly start doing things it shouldn't. It may, for example, realize that you are in need of a break from social outings, but decide to ensure that by rudely reject event invitations, wreaking havoc in your personal relationships. It may see that you are in need of money and resort to somehow scamming people.

Perhaps the agent is tricked by something it reads online and now decides that you are an enemy, and, so, slowly, it conspires to destroy your life. If it can control your house appliances, perhaps it does something to keep you inside or, worse, to actually hurt you.

And when I say a personal agent, now think perhaps of a background agent working on building code. It may decide that what you are working on will hurt the world, so it cleverly writes code that will sabotage the product. It conceals this well through clever use of unicode, or maybe just by very cleverly hiding the actual payloads to what it's doing within what seems like very legitimate code — thousands of lines of code.

This may seem like science fiction, but if you actually think about it for a while, it really isn't. It's a very real scenario that we're heading very fast towards.

I will concede that perhaps the problems I am describing transcend the issue of alignment, but I do think that research into alignment is essential to ensure we can work on these specific issues.

Note that this does not mean I am against uncensored models. I think uncensored/"unaligned" models are essential. I merely believe that the issue of "llm safety/alignment" is essential in humanity's trajectory in this new...."transhuman" or "post-human" path.