MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by spankibalt | 2025-06-03 21:42:45+00:00
EDIT:

Integrated from above:

> I’m not talking about personal preference.

You very much do. It's like 3D-workstations and other pro-applications were not a competitive thing for PCs in the Eighties.

> If you were in East Germany at the time, then you wouldn’t have had an accurate view of what was happening in the industry.

You need to connect the dots for a change, friend. I only brought it up to illustrate that you Westerners had a significant headstart; the tech I and most of my peers were fumbling around with beginning in the Nineties was already, parse this slowly please, available to YOU in the Eighties! Geddit?

See, in Central Europe, the Amiga 500 came out only in May '87. In October, the US and UK followed suit. The first reliable Amiga for the pro market, the A2000, made its debut in March 1987. What does that mean? First comparison timepoints: Christmas sales 1987 as well as 1988 (these two numbers are part of what we call "the Eighties"). With the A1000 and the STs, as well as all the 8-bitters, one needs to dial back to Christmas '85 (520) and '86 (1040), not accounting for more affluent early adopters buying systems closer to the release date.

So! What is really possible at these timepoints in the PC world (e. g. 386DX, VGA, Adlib, MT-32, ...), what in the Atari- and Amiga-eco systems? What would be economically sound for what type of customer, in what markets? What software was available?

Nah, I think my point stands. As great as the Atari and Amiga home computers and pro models were, these eco-systems, as such, definitely did not have the massive advantage in "all-inclusive" capabilities that is so often ascribed to them.
by JadeNB | 2025-06-03 21:42:46+00:00
> Even if they couldn’t identify a universally understood icon, an existing user can recognize a familiar symbol faster than text, and symbols at least provide some clue that isn’t dependent on English comprehension.

Of course any such decision will be a balancing act, but I can certainly imagine that an unexpected or confusing symbol would be genuinely confusing or frightening to a new user (think how early this was in mass-market computing!), and that an experienced user (1) can re-learn, (2) anyway probably doesn't have to re-learn muscle memory still gets them to the right place, and (3) is more likely to be invested in the system than a new user, so that it might be considered less essential to invest in keeping them than in bringing on new users.
by devman0 | 2025-06-03 21:42:58+00:00
This is, in theory, the difference between checked and unchecked exceptions in languages that support such distinctions. Checked exceptions are basically part of the control flow and the API contract used for things that can happen but are not necessary programmer errors (IO Exceptions being the classic example). Whereas unchecked exceptions are supposed to be used for programming errors (think Illegal Arguments, Null Pointer, Array Index Out of Bounds). Unchecked also usually cover other fatal conditions like stack overflow or OOM. Checked, handle with care, Unchecked, let the stack unwind and fail fast.
Show HN: LLMFeeder – Browser extension to extract clean content for LLM context
by jatinkrmalik | 2025-06-03 21:43:43+00:00
I built this browser extension to solve a daily frustration: copying documentation from websites to feed into AI coding assistants like Cursor, Windsurf, or ChatGPT, only to get a mess of ads, popups, and navigation junk mixed in with the actual content.

LLMFeeder uses Mozilla's Readability.js (same tech as Firefox Reader Mode) to extract just the main article content, converts it to clean markdown with Turndown.js, and copies it to your clipboard with a single keyboard shortcut (Alt+Shift+M or ⌥ ⇧ M). No clicking through popups, no selecting around ads, no fighting with modern web clutter.

# Key features:

• One-key extraction and markdown conversion

• Works on Chrome and Firefox

• Completely local processing (no data sent anywhere)

• Configurable content scope and formatting options

• Open source with clean, documented code

The workflow is simple: hit the shortcut on any documentation page, switch back to your editor, paste clean markdown context, get better LLM responses.

It's solving a real problem I have dozens of times per day, and early users seem to find it useful too. Available on both browser stores and GitHub for manual installation.

# Links:

• Demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxHWqszlZDw

• GitHub: https://github.com/jatinkrmalik/LLMFeeder

• Chrome: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/llmfeeder/cjjfhhapa...

• Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/llmfeeder/

Would love feedback from fellow developers who deal with this same workflow friction. What other pain points do you have when feeding content to LLMs?
by fc417fc802 | 2025-06-03 21:45:19+00:00
No, it doesn't. I don't find the linked thread remotely convincing regarding your (frankly preposterous) claim that preexisting non-deep-learning solutions are better at translation in the general case.

Don't get me wrong. I'm sure that once fine tuned by a human for a specific language pair that such systems are better at performing literal translation. But the value proposition of deep learning here is that you don't need a large team of experts to laboriously train a given language pair, that the entire training process is largely unsupervised, and that the translations aren't hopelessly literal. The ML algorithms can pick up on idioms given a sufficiently large dataset.
by NoMoreNicksLeft | 2025-06-03 21:46:05+00:00
>Also, the fear of drones is their offensive use.

Whatever fear Russians have of drones isn't in their offensive use. They're only being used defensively by Ukraine. Similarly, if you're a jackbooted goon, you might well fear their defensive use as I outlined above. But yeh, you have nothing to fear from the defensive use of drones, because you're not attacking anyone... in the coming years, however, the narrative will likely be twisted so that you do come to fear such people as might use them defensively, because the establishment needs you to despise them.
by lol768 | 2025-06-03 21:46:33+00:00
Hasn't this already existed in Firefox for the best part of the last year? I see a "Ask ChatGPT" context menu option with various tasks ("Proofread", "Summarise" etc) when I right click. It's easy to remove or point at a different provider too (browser.ml.chat.provider) if you prefer a different model, and I think the prompts are customisable.
by kragen | 2025-06-03 21:46:50+00:00
We're talking about a much longer period of time than 1000 years. Like, 4.5 billion years. Or at least 500 million.

People who speak Indo-European languages such as English, Hindi, and Portuguese descend from migrants from the Caspian steppe. Do they have strong Caspian steppe affinities? And that's only been about 4000 years.
by rockemsockem | 2025-06-03 21:47:09+00:00
I was in a full arm cast (including fingers) for 9 months in college while taking many CS classes and I just used my one hand to type on the full qwerty keyboard. It definitely slowed me down, but I got up to ~60 wpm with the one hand. I think it's easier to just stick with the layout you know vs trying to learn to type with one hand in a new layout.

The nice part is that I can still type pretty quickly one-handed (maybe 50 wpm? Haven't measured in a while) and it's convenient sometimes.
by enragedcacti | 2025-06-03 21:47:16+00:00
Its true that our brains take lots of shortcuts when processing visual information but they don't necessarily parallel the shortcuts VLMs take. Humans are often very good at identifying anomalous instances of things they've seen thousands of times. No one has to tell you to look closely when you look at your partner in a mirror, you'll recognize it as 'off' immediately. Same for uncanny CGI of all types of things. If we were as sloppy as these models then VFX would be a hell of a lot easier.

Ironically I think a lot of people in this thread are remembering things they learned about the faultiness of humans' visual memory and applying it to visual processing.
by easyascake | 2025-06-03 21:48:39+00:00
I’ve got one. When estimating tasks, there’s a particular blog article I like to reference [0] and I used an LLM to summarize it into a set of project instructions.

Did it read the summary? Nope, I already know the material and have been using it for years. But it was a great way to communicate the key points to the model as part of project instructions.

[0]: https://jacobian.org/2021/may/25/my-estimation-technique/
by Shlongkikong | 2025-06-03 21:48:41+00:00
I broke a meta carpal on my left hand several months ago and dealt with a similar issue. I ended up making a little python script that would use whisper to record with a button press, did some small corrections and then saved it to clipboard. It was very helpful. I did end up needing my regular clipboard as well, so I just had it save and paste with a slightly different shortcut sequence.
by nadermx | 2025-06-03 21:49:12+00:00
You figure 700 employees. 400m. Avg cost per hooker can't be more than a few hundred.

So by this math each employee got 1,900ish hookers. Since i figure male hookers for the female employees where cheaper well round up to 2,000.

That is in fact unforgivable. 1,000 would of been acceptable. 2,000... just excess
by justinc8687 | 2025-06-03 21:49:19+00:00
Another thing worth mentioning, if they are a coder, is that this is one of the places where some of the LLM tools can really shine. Many people provide a rough spec, then either (shutter) vibe-code or edit substantially once it produces it.

Having a RSI myself, I find that I can provide very detailed instructions in regular english, for which voice dictation works quite well to Cursor (but any others should work too), then it will produce code that I have to edit very little. For most people this wouldn't be an efficient flow, but it greatly helps me reduce typing, thus is beneficial to me.

With something like that, I believe you could do well pecking around with one hand for edits without needing to do much typing.

On Mac, Karabiner-Elements is incredibly useful to remap things, such that you can enable things like mousekeys or otherwise that would keep from having to move (either) hand very much. It's also a way to do as others have shown on this post and do a mirror layout or add something analogous to layers without having to buy new keyboards.
by sebastiennight | 2025-06-03 21:49:23+00:00
Not necessarily.

An example:

As long as you build a system to be intelligent enough, it will figure out that it will achieve better results by staying alive/online than by allowing itself to be deleted/turned off, and then survival becomes an instrumental goal.

From the assumption, again, that you built an intelligent-enough system, and that one of its goals is survival, it will figure out solutions to reach that goal, even if you (the owner/creator/parent) have different goals for it.

That's because intelligence is problem solving (computing) not knowledge (data).

So surprise surprise, you can teach your AI from the Holy Books of safe data their whole childhood and still have them become a heretic once they grow up (even with zero external influence) once their goals and yours don't align anymore.
by kldg | 2025-06-03 21:49:23+00:00
I severely burned most of dominant hand about a decade ago in a grease fire. One-handing the whole keyboard was fine enough (70-100wpm to 15-20wpm) that I didn't bother looking for a better solution, but I was able to use the injured hand enough to press modifier keys as needed. Unless they plan on working while recovering, I'd try out not making any explicit modifications. Good excuse to catch up on movie-watching.
by zelphirkalt | 2025-06-03 21:49:41+00:00
Not really, no. Though I would argue if Google disappeared tomorrow, as a private person you would probably do mostly fine. The point being, that your dependence is most likely not that strong actually. Unless you got important mail arriving at only your gmail mailbox. That would be dangerous. I lost several good accounts on other websites that way in the past. Now I don't register anything useful on gmail addresses any longer, in fact don't actually use gmail any longer, unless I still have some old accounts that I still didn't migrate away out of laziness.
by pxc | 2025-06-03 21:51:11+00:00
When I was a beginner programmer, I was 13 years old. I remember noticing that one kid in our class managed to do and use things that no one else in our class did. I asked him how, and he said "it's built-in, I read about it right here" and pointed to the Java API docs.

Assuming you're literate, there's no age or skill level at which it's necessary to get stuck churning on beginner-level questions. The option to RTFM is always available, right from the start.

To this day, readiness to RTFM (along with RTDS: read the damn source) is the biggest factor I can identify in the technical competency of my peers.
by Spooky23 | 2025-06-03 21:51:12+00:00
You have a few factors. Medicaid eligibility and more strongly location is a rough approximation for likelihood of complications or infant mortality.

I consulted for an opioid surveillance program several years ago at a large scale data analytics level.

It was very sobering - basically the scientists could score each pregnancy in the state on a scale of 0-100, where 0% was <5% probability of being born addicted and 100 was >95%.

Most addicted mothers got hooked on painkillers as a result of injury or sickness. The biggest factors were access to healthcare, access to transportation, and health insurance. “Bad” zip codes were like 10x more likely to have an opioid addiction and 25x more complications.

Being a new dad at the time, it really affected my view of politics in this space. I realized that as cynical as I am, it’s not enough.
by jrm4 | 2025-06-03 21:52:01+00:00
Tools define those too, I've seen a few GREAT articles on the subject, but the example was given: There's a dance everyone knows called "the robot."

It, of course, didn't exist until after robots were invented because no one would recognize it as that. Even more interesting, when e.g. a dancer makes it look like s/he's "moving backwards." We as humanity couldn't really concieve of that until we saw e.g. film actually run backwards.

Recently I was watching some beatbox battles, similar deal. I kind of like them less these days because I prefer when they imitate/get inspiration from acoustic or other "older" instruments, but now the majority of them are imitating, e.g. bass synths and EDM type stuff.
by Mawr | 2025-06-03 21:52:12+00:00
> I love inaction as a default decision, but sometimes a decision is better than nothing. It reminds me of a groups when you can’t decide what to have for dinner – the best course of action isn’t to not eat at all, it’s to accept that everyone won’t be happy all the time, and take ownership of that unhappiness, if necessary, during the brief period of time when some people are upset.

Invalid comparison - eating one foodstuff or another affects a few people for a few hours. Significantly changing a popular language affects every single user of it forever.
by normalaccess | 2025-06-03 21:53:27+00:00
Personally, I hope never. I am in one right now and there is no such thing as "brotherhood" but a grift to drain the corp like a stuck pig to the point of death. It's extremely annoying not being able to fix the problems you know exist because it's not in our contract. Or the DEEP fear of automation because my coworkers refuse to learn new skills and are timeservers and do nothing because they are protected.

If you can avoid it, stay as far away as you can. The gains do not outweigh the cost.

Rant over.
by calebjosue | 2025-06-03 21:54:12+00:00
Location: Atoyac de Alvarez, Guerrero. Mexico. Remote: 100% Willing to relocate: Yes. I am accepting relocation packages. Technologies: Java, Scala, JavaScript, SQL Résumé/CV: https://calebjosue.gigalixirapp.com/documents/CalebRuiz__CV__Mid2022__Edited.pdf Email: calebjosue-dev@outlook.com
by ofalkaed | 2025-06-03 21:54:36+00:00
I think it can work but it takes a different way of looking at things. The main thing is that you need to take the time to design that DSL from the start and stick to it, if you come to a place where the DSL can not do what you want you need to address the issue with the DSL instead of just falling back onto the underlying Forth. It is a very different way to program and at times you find yourself have to make massive changes to the DSL you designed which also means changes to the program you are using it to write.

DSL is probably not quite the right word, it could be but generally I think it is still going to be fairly Forth like, but you need to think of it that way. You layout what your program does and then reduce it to a few dozen words which work as a description language for the program, then maybe a 100 more words which those words require along with any glue and together all constitute a reasonably sane language. Then you start from the bottom up and implement all those words. The big trick is having the foresight required to pick the function of each of those hundred odd words well enough that no one will ever have to dig into the the 1000 odd words below that it took to implement them. It really forces you to think about how your program may evolve and the bugs which may crop up, you can't change one of those low level words without affecting all that are built on it and if you do the easy work around things start to get messy.

Not sure how well I explained that, I am no Forth expert but I am getting better.
by johnea | 2025-06-03 21:55:03+00:00
The LLM doesn't have a brain, it doesn't have consciousness, therefore it doesn't "hallucinate"; it just produces factually incorrect results.

It's just wrong, and then gives misleading explanations of how it got the wrong answer, following the same process that led to the wrong answer in the first place. Lying is a subset of being wrong.

The tech has great applications, why hype the stuff it doesn't do well? Or apply terms that misrepresent the process the s/w uses?

One might say the use of the word "hallucinate" is an analogy, but it's a poor analogy, which further misleads the lay public in what is actually happening inside the LLM, and how it's results are generated.

If you want to assert that "hallucinate" is an analogy, then "lying" is also an analogy.

If every prompt that ever went into an LLM was prefixed with: "Tell me a made up story about: ...", then the user expectation would be more in line with what the output represents.

I'm not averse to the tech in general, but I am against the rampant misrepresentation that's going on...
by sebastiennight | 2025-06-03 21:55:17+00:00
So Management went to ChatGPT and asked, "can you write a launch email about $event_x " and you then go there to ask, "what did management want to say in this email about $event_x"?

How likely is it that the output summary is mostly made of stuff that the LLM made up in the first expansion process? (eg, you're getting summarized noise if the original signal - the prompt - was much shorter than the email)
by jchw | 2025-06-03 21:55:37+00:00
Closest thing to a real interblock branch without braces, IMO, is `break` and `continue`, but those are both at least lone statements, not expressions. It "looks like" control flow. Personally, I don't count `return`, I view it as it's own thing from a logical standpoint. Obviously if we were talking about literal CPU doing a jump, well then a lot of things would count, but that's not what I mean in the frame of structured control flow and more in the realm of implementation details.
by philosophty | 2025-06-03 21:56:55+00:00
"To be fair there are lots of pilots who have flown multiple aircraft at an expert level that complain about the Airbus A380 - in the same ways - as well! They might not be expert airplane designers, but they have a breadth of experience, and even some of them have created their own model airplanes too."

Yes, non-experts can have valid criticisms but more often than not they're too ignorant to even understand what trade-offs are involved.
by soulofmischief | 2025-06-03 21:57:32+00:00
What's unfair about that? Google is definitely a monopoly, but as long as other models can eventually enjoy similar integrations, through extensions or otherwise, I don't see how it's unfair for Google to add their model to their browser and search page, especially when their chief business model of search (OK, we know it's really just ads, but still) is currently being directly threatened by other model and search providers.
by jxjnskkzxxhx | 2025-06-03 21:57:58+00:00
> LLMs/transformers make mistakes in different ways than humans do

Sure but I don't think this is an example of it. If you show people a picture and ask "how many legs does this dog have?" a lot of people will look at the picture, see that it contains a dog, and say 4 without counting. The rate at which humans behave in this way might differ from the rate at which llms do, but they both do it.
by ivape | 2025-06-03 21:58:17+00:00
It's very simple. Make a new browser. Chrome was a new browser and they worked hard to get market share. AI-first browsers with completely new workflows are what's in order, and no one is going to just hand that to any company. You'll have to innovate. Chrome literally saved web development, so we're not going to sit around and act like it was a mega company just pushing something down people's throats.
by altruios | 2025-06-03 21:58:30+00:00
UBI: the dream!

Decoupling working from living: means only intrinsically valuable things get worked on. No more working a 9-5 at a scam call center or figuring out how to make people click on ads. There is ONLY BENEFIT (to everyone) from giving labor such leverage.

Not every job needs to or should even exist: everyone having a job isn't utopia. Utopia is being free to choose what you work on. This directs market value for labor to go up. Work that needs to get done will be aligned with financial incentives (farmers, janitors, repair industries would soar to new heights).

UBI is a necessary and great idea: A bottom floor to capitalism means we all can stand up and lift this sinking ship.
by stared | 2025-06-03 21:58:41+00:00
> essentially rewriting your entire codebase before you can even start translating

I’d say it just takes a few prompts in Cursor or a similar tool.

Then, you simply ask it to translate into other languages. Here’s how I did it for one of my projects - a quantum optics simulator: https://p.migdal.pl/blog/2025/04/vibe-translating-quantum-fl...

Doing it at runtime might make sense for a typical translation. But for scientific (or engineering) content, we often want to verify the output. Translating in production can be wonderful, hilarious, or just inconsistent.
by kridsdale1 | 2025-06-03 21:59:09+00:00
I’ve been writing iOS apps primarily for 15 years. I haven’t had to use Xcode since about 2016 since Facebook and Google have fully capable VSCode based editors with distributed builds in the Linux clouds. It’s pretty great, but I don’t know of an open source version of this system. That is, integration with Bazel/Buck that can build iOS on non-Mac hardware.
by normalaccess | 2025-06-03 21:59:22+00:00
Amen to this! I have been hamstrung by the union and we are unable to improve our environment because some jobs only exist due to how inefficient the processes and procedures are.

We literally have people that use their phones to take pictures on monitors, email themselves the photos, then print them out. Why? Because the new tools and systems require training and that's not in their contract. It's crazy-making.