MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by trashtester | 2025-06-11 06:21:10+00:00
Ironically, finding ways to spin stories like that IS one way of taking responsibility, even if it's only a way to take responsibility for the narratives that are created after things happen.

Because those narratives play an important role in the next outcome.

The error is when you expect them to play for your team. Most people will (at best) be on the same team as those they interact with directly on a typical day. Loyalty 2-3 steps down a chain of command tends to be mostly theoretic. That's just human nature.

So what happens when the "#¤% hts the fan, is that those near the top take responsbility for themselves, their families and their direct reports and managers first. Meaning they externalize damage to elsewhere, which would include "you and me".

Now this is baseline human nature. Indeed, this is what natural empathy dictates. Because empathy as an emotions is primarily triggered by those we interact with directly.

Exceptions exist. Some leaders really are idealists, governed more by the theories/principles they believe in than the basic human impulses.

But those are the minority, and this may aven be a sign of autism or something similar where empathy for oneself and one's immediate surrounding is disabled or toned down.
by watwut | 2025-06-11 06:22:36+00:00
I stopped reporting bugs when projects started to deploy bots that close "stale" bugs. No, someone ignoring my issue for 3 months does not imply issue went away.

I was cool when bugs waited for proper prioritization 6 months later. Ok, it took time, but someone is busy. When they are getting closed automatically, there is no reason to bother.
by Doohickey-d | 2025-06-11 06:22:38+00:00
There's also another version of the story of why they removed it:

> So basically, Microsoft's claim of Aero being "cheesy" "and "dated" are just lies to cover up the fact where the original Surface RT is not powerful enough to handle them.

https://old.reddit.com/r/windows/comments/38vyn7/the_true_re...
by jiggawatts | 2025-06-11 06:24:40+00:00
I once bluntly refused to deploy an app to production because it was a finance system that handled billions of dollars and the personal data of a million children. The HTTPS certificates couldn’t be organised on time (don’t ask), so I simply refused to deploy it using HTTP only “just for now” (=years).

The look of stunned shock on the project manager’s face is something I’ll never forget.

He was apoplectic with mixed rage and incredulity.

“How dare you refuse a direct order!?” — but now picture a red face and spittle literally flying around the room.

He immediately called my supervisor and up all the way to the CEO of my consultancy.

That’s what happens when individual contributors push back. In general there are zero legal, corporate, or personal protections.

“Do as I say or consequences.” is the norm.

In this situation I was incredibly lucky that the CEO trusted my judgement and told the PM to take a hike. Even if I had been fired I would have been okay.

Most people can’t take risks like that on principle.

That’s fundamentally why enshittification happens, and why every mobile apps’ data collection dragnet would make an NSA spook blush.

Only consequences for directors and up matter. They're the ones that need to feel the fear, not the poor outsourcer struggling to put food on his family table.
by nicbou | 2025-06-11 06:24:44+00:00
> models can absolutely "experience the world"

How does the banana bread taste at the café around the corner? What's the vibe like there? Is it a good place for people-watching?

What's the typical processing time for a family reunion visa in Berlin? What are the odds your case worker will speak English? Do they still accept English-language documents or do they require a certified translation?

Is the Uzbek-Tajik border crossing still closed? Do foreigners need to go all the way to the northern crossing? Is the Pamir highway doable on a bicycle? How does bribery typically work there? Are people nice?

The world is so much more than the data you have about it.
by petesergeant | 2025-06-11 06:25:09+00:00
Providers are exceptionally easy to switch. There's no moat for enterprise-level usage. There's no "market share" to gobble up because I can change a line in my config, run the eval suite, and switch immediately to another provider.

This is marginally less true for embedding models and things you've fine-tuned, but only marginally.
Show HN: Kotobase: Slack translation for EN/JP teams
by raleighm | 2025-06-11 06:25:17+00:00
Sharing a simple plug-in that auto-translates messages between English & Japanese in Slack. We developed it to solve our own problem: getting a diverse multilingual (English & Japanese speaking) team on the same page. It’s dramatically improved our alignment and team cohesion. If you happen to have the same problem, give it a whirl. We (Fujitsu Launchpad) cover up to 1M tokens/month for free; after that, just use your own OpenAI API key.
by lvcabral | 2025-06-11 06:25:46+00:00
I've been developing, since 2019, the BrightScript Simulation Engine, to allow devs for the Roku platform test their apps without the need of a device. The project just reached a new milestone, as now we can stream videos and run full SceneGraph apps. Take a look the new features in this video, then try it on https://brsfiddle.net
by devmor | 2025-06-11 06:27:00+00:00
As the AI growth cycle stagnates while valuations continue to fly wildly out of control and more and more of the industry switches from hopeful to a bearish sentiment, I’ve started to find this genre of article extremely funny, if not pitiable.

Who are you trying to convince with this? It’s not going to work on investors much longer, it’s mostly stopped working on the generically tech-inclined, and it’s never really worked on anyone who understands AI. So who’s left to be suckered by this flowery, desperate prose? Are you just trying to convince yourselves?
by wobfan | 2025-06-11 06:27:24+00:00
I am amazed about people geniunely arguing about the article. It's obvious from the first sentences that it's either sarcastic or just a person without a lot of knowledge about anything he or she is talking about.

I still loved to read it because it seems to represent people from a old time. The usual "no no no, new thing bad because old thing can do brrrr" without really going into any specifics at all. But from probably 25 years ago. I liked it.
by nikolayasdf123 | 2025-06-11 06:27:26+00:00
that's the problem. market is already oversaturdated. just check HN posts about App Store crisis we have now

gatekeeping on distribution is unbelievable. getting something to financially work requires marketing and "white passs from gatekeepers" expenditures which eat away any margins you may have

if you get laid off by big tech (no matter years of experience) chances are you are going to be doing Doordash and living in a tent
by lutusp | 2025-06-11 06:28:32+00:00
> The old standard for Linux used to be the a.out format; this has since been superceded [sic] by ELF (Executable and Linkable Format), but the end result is the same: You're not actually running machine language.

This is not correct. The difference between the examples is not whether the computer runs machine language, it's how the code is wrapped for delivery. The above hyperbolic claim will mislead people unfamiliar with computer programming and add to an unwarranted atmosphere of mystery.

> In MS-DOS, you can type a command like "cd.." to move up a level, and it will work fine. In Linux, it will not; you need to type "cd ..". The different [sic] is the space in between.

No, grammar issues aside, the difference is that Linux rejects special cases that shouldn't exist. Command-line commands should be consistent and the parser should reject operator errors in a robust and repeatable way. Were this not true, a command-line parser would take:

# rm-rf/*

And execute it, instead of replying, "You really want to do that, pilgrim?"

The above example, were it to exist, would mix commands and arguments in a way that would make black-hat hackers' lives very easy.
by 47282847 | 2025-06-11 06:28:54+00:00
It sounds like early access will speed things up for them/their users. I read nothing in the thread about a general inability to continue nor the danger of having to shut it down?

I very much applaud the goal of trying to be up to date within a few days of new releases and I hope they find both good devs and gain access. I can also see how that may impact morale in the longer term if they don’t.
by leakycap | 2025-06-11 06:29:30+00:00
I remember the little clear IV looked like saline and the nurse said, "Your insurance is getting billed $75,000 for this, so lay back and enjoy" - that was one of many expensive treatments, I was very lucky to have good insurance.

I was told the rapid debulking was because the first infusion I got was a targeted drug that specifically found and destroyed the cancer cells.

The follow up chemo was R-CHOP (Rituximab, Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, Vincristine, and Prednisone), and my understanding this regimen is still being used.
by ankit219 | 2025-06-11 06:29:39+00:00
I see this and immediately relived the last two years of the journey. I think some of the mental model that helped me might help the community too.

What people expect from finetuning is knowledge addition. You want to keep the styling[1] of the original model, just add new knowledge points that would help your task. In context learning is one example of how this works well. Just that even here, if the context is out of distribution, a model does not "understand" it and would produce guesswork.

When it comes to LoRA or PEFT or adapters, it's about style transfer. And if you focus on a specific style of content, you will see the gains, just that the model wont learn new knowledge that wasnt already in original training data. It will forget previously learnt styles depending on context. When you do full finetuning (or SFT with no frozen parameters), it will alter all the parameters, and results in gain of new knowledge at the cost of previous knowledge (and would give you some gibberish if you ask about topics outside of domain). This is called catastrophic forgetting. Hence, yes, full finetuning works - just that it is an imperfect solution like all the others. Recently, with Reinforcement learning, there have been talks of continual learning, where Richard sutton's latest paper also lands at, but thats at research level.

Having said all that, if you start with the wrong mental model for Finetuning, you would be disappointed with the results.

The problem to solve is about adding new knowledge, while preserving the original pretrained intelligence. Still in wip, but we published a paper last year on one way it could be done. Here is the link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.17171 (it also has results for experiments all different approaches).

[1]: Styling here means the style learned by the model in SFT. Eg: Bullets, lists, bolding out different headings etc. all of that makes the content readable. The understanding of how to present the answer to a specific question.
by motorest | 2025-06-11 06:32:45+00:00
> I think you'll have a lot more independent software devs. I think that's good, corporations were surprisingly bad at developing software.

Will you, though? I mean, working on software for a living means having someone paying you to do something. If a corporation with an established business and reliable revenue can't justify paying you for your work, who do you expect to come in and cover your rent?
by motorest | 2025-06-11 06:34:58+00:00
> gatekeeping on distribution is unbelievable. getting something to financially work requires marketing and "white passs from gatekeepers" expenditures which eat away any margins you may have

That is one way of putting it.

Another way to put it is that app stores are so saturated with N versions of the same God damned app doing exactly the same God damned thing that even when they start to charge a gatekeeping fee you still get marker saturation.
by timewizard | 2025-06-11 06:36:14+00:00
I'm naturally conspiratorial; but, this is possibly why search results were intentionally degraded over the past 5 years. Which has had an impact on overall site traffic that has not gone unnoticed. Google's been trying their luck with "creator summits" over the past few years but the creators are starting to smell a rat.

So you have Google which famously does not want people to actually leave their property. Infoboxes, calculator, extraction of semantic data for direct display in search results.

Would a company like that intentionally downgrade search results making quality content harder for users to find, then train their LLMs on this highly valuable content, ultimately creating an unnatural shift away from the previous model to the "weak AI chatbot" model?

I know HN hates conspiracies but there's trillions of dollars at stake here. We know companies will poison entire communities and create flammable rivers just to shave a few million off the expenses. Who knows what Google will do to keep it's market position?
by mkfs | 2025-06-11 06:37:10+00:00
> the trick involves a use-after-free in the world collision cache (fun fact: a lot of speedrun techniques are security flaws!

In other words:

> Hey, you know those super difficult parts from games of your childhood that you're probably curious to see how we, the supposed speediest of gamers, swiftly navigate? Well, guess what? We just skip them altogether by glitching! Any% new record!

That's why no one cares about this. These people will play the same game or level thousands of times to trigger 1/1,000,000 glitches to skip huge swaths of games, then claim some made-up "record."

This is not skill. Even the non-glitch speedruns are more down to persistence (if not mental illness) than skill--which is a result of deliberate practice--like one sees in competitive shooters or fighting games. And these people throw tantrums constantly, like children, and curse the "RNG" (an admission this isn't about skill) the way a primitive tribesman might damn the gods for a prolonged drought.
by vanschelven | 2025-06-11 06:37:54+00:00
> New abstractions and techniques... hide complexity, and that complexity requires new ways to monitor and measure.

If the abstractions hide complexity so well you need an LLM to untangle them later, maybe you were already on the wrong track.

Hiding isn't abstracting, and if your system becomes observable only with AI help, maybe it's not well designed, just well obfuscated. I've written about this before here: https://www.bugsink.com/blog/you-dont-need-application-perfo...
by molinwow | 2025-06-11 06:38:14+00:00
Chinese computer giant Huawei is switching gears in its latest pre-built PC and using homemade silicon instead of Western-built 12th Gen Alder Lake CPUs. As reported by Huawei Central, the new Qingyun W515x is equipped with China's bleeding-edge octa-core Kirin 9000C processor, which clocks up to 3.1 GHz.

The new system is a slimline OEM PC that targets large businesses. It sports a plain black finish and a slim Micro-ATX form factor that only supports low-profile PCIe cards. The Quingyun W515x has three hardware configurations: 8GB + 256GB, 8GB + 512GB, and 16GB + 512GB memory and storage combinations. The storage options include a single NVMe M.2 PCIe slot.
by tsimionescu | 2025-06-11 06:39:27+00:00
Do you have any proof whatsoever that non-programmers are using LLMs to write small bespoke apps for them successfully? Programming ecosystems are generally very unfriendly to this type of use case, with plenty of setup required to get something usable out even if you have the code available. Especially if you'd like to run the results on your phone.

Sure, an LLM might be able to guide you through the steps, and even help when you stumble, but you still have to follow a hundred little steps exactly with no intuition whether things will work out at the end. I very much doubt that this is something many people will even think to ask for, and then follow-through with.

Especially since the code quality of LLMs is nowhere near what you make it out to be. You'll still need to bear with them and go through a lot of trial and error to get anything running, especially if you have no knowledge of the terms of art, nor any clue of what might be going wrong if it goes wrong. If you've ever seen consumer bug reports, you might have some idea of the quality of feedback the LLM may be getting back if something is not working perfectly the first time. It's very likely to be closer to "the button you added is not working" than to "when I click the button, the application crashes" or "when I click the button, the application freezes for a few seconds and then pops up an error saying that input validation failed" or "the button is not showing up on the screen" [...]
by xp84 | 2025-06-11 06:39:34+00:00
I was not a close friend by any stretch. But I did have the honor of meeting him years ago through friends and spending a little time with him socially.

He loved and did so much for his family, and for the JS community as well.

I am so sad and honestly, angry that he was taken from us so young. He would have done so much more. But also, he certainly did enough. I hope he felt good in the end about how he spent his time.

Rest in peace, Mikeal.
by favflam | 2025-06-11 06:40:07+00:00
I take it as a P = NP problem.

I either: a. spend money on a person and take money and time to specify the business problem to this person and take money and time to judge the results b. skip the person and just use the AI itself

The difference between the two is that I don't have some metaphorical hostage to execute in "b". If the task is trivial enough, I don't need a hostage.
by MindTheAbstract | 2025-06-11 06:40:30+00:00
While I tend to agree, I wonder if synthetic data might be reaching a new high with concepts like Google's AlphaEvolve. It doesn't cover everything, but at least in verifiable concepts, I could see it produce more valuable training data. It's a little unclear to me where AGI will come from (LLMs? EBMs - @LeCun)? Something completely different?)
by hyperadvanced | 2025-06-11 06:40:38+00:00
If you assume that AI will further enshittify the corporate software program writ large, it’s no easy to see how this is analogous to the dot com boom where new good ideas get sidelined and easy ones get mainlined, and the outsiders ultimately storm the castle and win. Granted, I don’t really think that is the case, but it’s a possibility
by Barbing | 2025-06-11 06:40:42+00:00
Good eye! In this case, complaints are numerous. See a web search for:

openai persona verification site:community[.]openai[.]com

e.g. a thread with 36 posts beginning Apr 13:

"OpenAI Non-Announcement: Requiring identity card verification for access to new API models and capabilities"

But always good to be on look out for shenanigans :)
by crop_rotation | 2025-06-11 06:40:45+00:00
Nintendo does care, just not about the fringe reddit crowd. Nintendo cares enough to ensure all their games are extremely polished and everyone can have fun in almost any Nintendo game. If they cared about random redditors, they will have to make a linux running device which can run a full stack web app with cheap games and steam deck like specs (and the fringe crowd might even then not buy that device holding out for some more features). So I think they are doing all right.
by rerdavies | 2025-06-11 06:41:05+00:00
I hope you're looking carefully at COM/OLE Automation, which achieved pretty much all of those things.

- In-process and cross-process language-agnostic API bindings.

- Elaborate support for marshalling objects and complex datastructures across process boundaries.

- Standardized ways to declare application and document object models that can be used by external applications, or internally by application add-ons.

- A standardized distribution system for application extensions, including opportunities for monetization.

- Standardized tools for binding application APIs to web services and database services.

- A default scripting engine (VBA) that can be embedded into applications.

- Admittedly primitive and mostly ill-advised support for dynamically typed objects, and composable objects.

And it provides opportunities for all of the levels of application customization you seem to be looking for.

- Trivial tiny customizations using in-app VBA.

- The ability to extend your application's behavior using addons downloadable from a marketplace WITHOUT trying to capture a percentage of licensing revenue from those who want to monetize their add-ons.

- The ability to write scripts that move data between the published document object models of various applications (and a variety of standard data formats).

- The ability to write fully custom code that lives within applications and interacts with the UI and with live documents within those application (i.e. write-your-own add-ons).

Plus it would be enormously fun to build the equivalent functionality of COM/OLE with the all the benefits of hindsight, and none of the cruft incurred by Visual Basic, with lessons in hand from some of the things COM didn't do well. (svg as a graphics transport, perhaps? A more organized arrangement of threading model options? Support for asynchronous methods? A standardized event mechanism?)

Questions that come to mind:

- What can you get away with not doing that COM does do? Not much, I think.

- How could you make it better? A bunch of ways!
by motorest | 2025-06-11 06:43:52+00:00
> I used to think the same way. But life taught me that responsibility is a fairy tale only for the bottom 90% — a story told to keep them obedient, hardworking, and self-blaming.

I think you're missing the big picture. You're focusing on your conspiracy theory that the hypothetical 10% are the only ones valuing responsibility as a manipulation tactic. However, what do you do when anyone, being it a team member or a supermarket or an online retailer or a cafe employee fails to meet your bar of responsibility? Do you double down on their services, or do you adapt so that their failure no longer affects your day?

You've put together this conspiracy that only higher ups value responsibility, and only as a crowd control strategy. If you take a step back and look at your scenario, you'll notice that it is based on how you are in a position where you are accountable to them. Is that supposed to mean that middle management is not accountable for anything at all? Is no mom and pop shop accountable for anything? Why is Elon Musk crying crocodile tears over how unfair the world is and for having been kicked out of DOGE and the world stopping buying Tesla cars?
by rramadass | 2025-06-11 06:45:02+00:00
See my previous comment here for how to get started - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33628025

I highly recommend downloading Understanding Signals with the Propscope from Parallax (available for free online) and following the tutorials from it with an Arduino+Analog Discovery 2/3 device. You can use the Digilent "Real Analog" learning course along with it - https://digilent.com/reference/learn/courses/real-analog/sta...

The real motivation in Electronics comes from understanding in visual form (using a Oscilloscope/Multimeter etc.) how things work in a circuit and how your calculations match up to what you see on the screen. Even as simple as the beginner LED circuit can teach you a lot when you use a potentiometer and see how voltage/current graphs change.
by submeta | 2025-06-11 06:45:13+00:00
I have started to write „organic“ content again, as I am fed up with ultra polished super noisy texts by colleagues.

I realise that when I write (no so perfect) „organic“ content my colleagues enjoy it more. And as I am lazy, I get right to the point. No prelude, no „Summary“, just a few paragraphs of genuine ideas.

And I am sure this will be a trend again. Until maybe LLMs are trained to generate these kind of non-perfect, less noisy texts.