MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Firfi | 2025-06-09 15:59:29+00:00
Just feeling and experience, really. For me, if I spent time with the vibe code snippet and improved it until I can say "yes I would've written this" it's not slop anymore, even if it was written by Claude initially.

On the contrary, if I glanced over the code and could say "ok it doesn't look terrible, no obvious `rm -rf` and all", even if I changed a couple obvious mistakes, I still consider it vibe.
by graypegg | 2025-06-09 15:59:32+00:00
I love the UI concept. Being able to point at a broken thing rather than try to uniquely describe the position/state/path to a broken thing is smart!

Hooooever, "bug" could be a bit ambiguous to a lot of people. Looks like in a real deployment, you have a little tooltip that says "Spotted a bug? Drag me there!". That makes sense to developers and the like... but those are also the sorts of people most likely to write a good bug report anyway. The people most unlikely to write a bug report are the sorts of people who will read "spotted a bug" as "there is an insect... game?... on this site?".

"Issue" or "Problem" would be better, but keep the bug graphic! It's cute. :)
by recursivedoubts | 2025-06-09 15:59:37+00:00
Anyone owning a pit who isn't both strong & physically large is putting other people and animals at risk. I have met many, many sweet pits, but all dogs can lose it and if a pit goes many of the pit owners I've seen couldn't do a damned thing about it: they are incredibly powerful animals.

To be honest I think that's what attracts many inappropriate owners to them.

Two pit stories:

I saw a fat guy walking a relatively small pit and took my dogs off to the side, about 20 feet away to let them pass. The pit pulled out of his (inappropriately fastened) muzzle backwards (they are smart dogs) and took a dead no-bark run at my terrier. I had my 35 lb terrier in the air and kicked that dog as hard as I could in the side to get the situation under control.

Our neighbor had a BIG pit named Thor (big guy, he could control the dog, but kept him leashed out front.). Thor got off leash once and came over and messed w/our goats. We had one goat (the smallest) who we kept horns on and Thor found out the hard way that that goat wasn't going down w/o a fight. Thor survived but didn't mess w/the goats any more after that.

Again, I like most of the pits I've met, but I see a lot of irresponsible owners.
by throwaway095775 | 2025-06-09 15:59:37+00:00
> Diverse conversations are actually pretty rare in reality when conflicting opinions exist

So are we just not supposed to debate anything ever? Just find a convenient excuse to ban/block/mute and move on?

> The paradox of tolerance pretty much demands you weed out the extremists or they will be all that's left

Too bad everyone has a different idea of who an "extremist" is, and conveniently ignores the ones on their side.
by rdtsc | 2025-06-09 15:59:49+00:00
> Britain and France may have had mainly good intentions, but their policies did not prevent the disasters.

They had an absolute lack of appetite for fighting since the WWI was not long ago. I don't know if the Germans were smart enough to understand that and fully took advantage of it or were just lucky. For the Germans it worked with Czechoslovakia so they figured it would work with Poland as well.

Stalin I think is more interesting. He was prepared to "defend" the Czechs as well. He just needed permission to take his armies across Poland and Romania. He quickly switched sides after the agreement and signed the Soviet-German agreement.

Not too long ago I also learned about the secret military cooperation between the Soviets and the Germans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany%E2%80%93Soviet_Union_r.... The German air force was training its pilots in the Soviet Union:

> In 1925, a flying school was established near Lipetsk (Lipetsk fighter-pilot school) to train the first pilots for the future Luftwaffe

Reading that it's like reading some alternative universe fan-fiction. So that makes Stalin's position interesting. He was supposed to be allied with the French and the British officially but non-officially was assisting the Germans.
by Supermancho | 2025-06-09 16:00:04+00:00
>>>> ICE's actions are wildly illegal.

>>> No they're not. Deporting illegal aliens is not "wildly" illegal. - anonfordays

>> Cherry picking isn't compelling.

> Glad that's not what I'm doing. - anonfordays

Yes it is. "Actions" is broader than your cherry picked singular action - "deporting illegals". Rephrasing, graciously, something like "the deporting of illegals is the goal and that's lawful" would be more correct. Unfortunately, I don't think you have anything to add to a good faith discussion. Good luck with whatever.
by pxtail | 2025-06-09 16:00:34+00:00
I won't report bugs in paid software/services because it's not my job, I'm not paid for it, I'm user of the service, not free workforce so they can reduce amount of QA staff or skip it completely. Give me a discount and then maybe, just maybe I'll think twice about reporting something. Bugs renders your soft unusable? Fine, there is plenty of competition out there who will do it right.
by frmersdog | 2025-06-09 16:00:41+00:00
Needs a (2016).

Because of my age, Prince was not "Prince" for much of my childhood; I was introduced to him as "The Artist Formerly Known As Prince" and just assumed that that was all we'd ever call him in the future.

Renaming oneself is surely not any new phenomenon, but the reasons seem to get more and more interesting. Malcolm Little famously erased his "slave name" and replaced it with an X. I also just recently learned about FM-2030. And then there's the self-naming practices that grew around the hacking and early web scenes, and which still features prominently in places like the FGC and furry fandom.

So you've got a guy fighting cynical capitalist legalism, a guy attempting to erase the detritus of colonialism from his identity, another guy trying to erase his ties to tribalism, and then a bunch of people trying to mask their identities in presumed Dark Forest (concluding in, essentially, the creation of alter egos).
by yqiang | 2025-06-09 16:00:55+00:00
I'm working on an app in this area [1], and I've spent a lot of time exploring how to responsibly use AI for food tracking.

My conclusion is that while AI is excellent for augmenting your tracking experience, it's not yet reliable enough to be the primary tracking method. Consistency is key to successful food tracking, and AI can certainly help users avoid the common issue of missing a meal and losing momentum. However, inaccuracies, like consistently being off by 100-200 calories per day, can significantly impact results, especially for those on lower-calorie diets (like 1,200-1,500 calories/day, which is common for many women due to their physical size).

With FitBee I landed on communicating to the user that these are estimates and you probably shouldn't use it as your primary method of tracking calories.

[1] https://fitbee.app
by PaulHoule | 2025-06-09 16:01:14+00:00
Lately I've been thinking "there is no such thing as an application, there are only screens" in the context of HTMX-enhanced web applications.

If your persistence layer and long-term data structures are solid you can accept shoddy coding in screens (e.g. a small bundle of http endpoints.) From that viewpoint you modernize an application a screen at a time and if you don't like a shoddy screen you create a new screen. From that viewpoint you vibe code screens but schemas and updating are carefully handwritten code, though I think deterministic code generation from a schema is the power tool for that.
by starkparker | 2025-06-09 16:01:35+00:00
This sets up a pointless strawman about reviews for the headline that distracts so much from the point that I only caught it on second read:

Restrict agentic workflows to implementation details, hand-write the higher-level logic and critical tests, and only pay attention to whether those human-written tests pass or fail. Then you don't have to worry about reviewing agent-generated code as long as the human-written tests about the functionality pass.

(Still not sure I agree, not least of which for security and performance reasons at existing orgs; this assumes very good test coverage and design exist before any code is written. Interesting for greenfield projects though.)
by throwawaymaths | 2025-06-09 16:01:40+00:00
do they matter in a practical sense? an LLM can write a structured essay better than most undergrads. and as for measuring "smart", we throw that word around a lot. a dog is smart in a human way for being able to fetch one of 30 objects based on name or to drive a car (yes, dogs can drive), the bar for "smart" is pretty low, claiming llms are not smart is just prejudice.
by lambda | 2025-06-09 16:02:42+00:00
You're leaving out their training costs. And while you might say "well, once they're trained you don't have to spend more on that", but as we've seen they have to keep training new models on new data, such as current events and new language features and APIs. And some aspects of that training are becoming more costly, or more scarce, as companies like Reddit and Stackoverflow restrict and sell their data, less data gets produced on Stackoverflow as people switch to using LLMs instead, website operators go to more extreme measures to block AI scrapers that ignore robots.txt, etc.

Yeah, people tout RAG and fine tuning, but lots of people just use the base chat model, if it doesn't keep up to date on new data, it falls behind. How much are these companies spending just keeping up with the Joneses?
by dylan604 | 2025-06-09 16:02:47+00:00
“How many people can just say ‘Hey, I’m changing my name to this symbol so can you use it from now on?’ and everyone’s like ‘Alright. Okay. No questions asked. You’re Prince! We’ll do it!’ It was kind of funny to me.”

Um, "You're Prince!" No, I'm not. That's the point of this conversation. I am no longer Prince. Do not call me that.
by hosh | 2025-06-09 16:02:50+00:00
I am not familiar with that book and that sounds interesting. I have not read that book so I won't make a recommendation on where to start.

I was working through "Promise Theory: Principles and Applications" and read through the first handful of chapters. For me at least, it was more accessible than math-heavy books. Yet, I can tell that it helped sharpened my reasoning ability about promises. I only made it through the first handful of chapters and yet it set a foundation that I was able to use over the years. Reading through some of the comments and reviews again, I see there are even more ideas that I could understand if I make my way through the book.
by ben_w | 2025-06-09 16:02:59+00:00
There is no other (let alone better) option — those cover all possibilities.

If you don't check papers (or an equivalent), you automatically don't control immigrants at all once they're in your borders. To control them requires everyone has an ID, because otherwise some immigrant who doesn't want to have ID for whatever reason can just say "of course I don't have papers, only immigrants have papers and I'm not an immigrant".

The entire point of papers is to determine if someone is or isn't in some category (including but not limited to "immigrant").

What you can do is automate ID checks. So long as you don't mind your ID being tested at random, and the way that such systems have a tendency to randomly fail and deport people who were actually allowed to remain.
by nyarlathotep_ | 2025-06-09 16:03:00+00:00
Was on a few of these as a consultant, all major F500 companies. Most recent was a few months ago.

Every instance was some variation of RAG chat/langgraph thing. On multiple occasions, I heard "I don't see what value this has over ChatGPT", except they now had 5-6 figure cloud bills with it.

Technical users really weren't thrilled with it (i.e they wanted usable insights from their data (something best served by a db query), but ended up with LLM copypasta of internal docs) and seemed to expect significant functionality and utility on top of "regular" LLM use.

Stakeholders constantly complained (rightfully so) about issues with inaccuracy in responses, or "why is this presented in this fashion", resulting in hours of the data team folks coming up with new prompts and crossing fingers.
by I_dream_of_Geni | 2025-06-09 16:03:05+00:00
You write that "reporting bugs is usually a terrible experience". I find bugs ALL THE TIME, and yet, when I even try to find a way to contact ANYONE, let alone a developer, they leave no door open at all. No method, no form, no contact name, no nothing. I (along with many, I presume), actually want those companies to excel. I WANT to let them know what to fix. But, they just don't want to hear about it. Really sad I think.
by jwarden | 2025-06-09 16:03:14+00:00
In the example in the article, many more people did contribute to the lead pipes (100 people vs. 10 for the art museum). And they still get only a fraction of the funding that the art museum gets.

Agree, coordination is a larger threat to QF. But this issue has been discussed extensively. In this article I wanted to point out all the other assumptions behind QF and what happens when they don't hold.
by Aloisius | 2025-06-09 16:03:39+00:00
> Apparently we share about 50% of our DNA.

This feels like the "we share 50% of our genes with bananas" factoid.

Considering humans have 3.1 billion base pairs and the most fungi have 30-300 million, I'm not sure how this could be true without some major caveats. Admittedly, a lot of our DNA is considered "junk" - though whether it all is or not is a question.

(the banana one is that they're talking specifically about protein coding genes which makes up about 2% of our DNA)
by dijksterhuis | 2025-06-09 16:03:59+00:00
that’s not really how training works.

changing the input (data) means you get a different output (model).

source data has nothing to do with model determinism.

as an end-user of AI products, your perspective might be that the models are non-deterministic, but really it’s just different models returning different results … because they are different models.

“end-user non-determinism” is only really solved by repeatedly using the same version of a trained model (like a normal software dependency), potentially needing a bunch of work to upgrade the (model) dependency version later on.
by gjsman-1000 | 2025-06-09 16:04:14+00:00
When I took a look quickly, it also shows the "Spotted a bug? Drag me there!" every time the page loads - which could quickly get overwhelming, and make the user wonder why the developer is so certain that they will run into a bug. (Why do developers not make "report a bug" obvious? Because just seeing it implies there are enough bugs that a link is necessary.)

I also have no idea how well this works on mobile - and seeing that the Pro plan doesn't remove attribution seems like a mistake.
by gbacon | 2025-06-09 16:04:23+00:00
Regarding both perfect knowledge and equilibrium discovery, consider Hayek’s work on what he called the knowledge problem, beginning with “The Use of Knowledge in Society.” No person or entity possesses perfect knowledge of the current state, and no one has perfect knowledge of the follow-on simple or higher-order effects. Instead, apply the insight from public choice theory that state actors make self-interested choices. Cui bono?

I am far from denying that in our system equilibrium analysis has a useful function to perform. But when it comes to the point where it misleads some of our leading thinkers into believing that the situation which it describes has direct relevance to the solution of practical problems, it is time that we remember that it does not deal with the social process at all and that it is no more than a useful preliminary to the study of the main problem.

https://www.kysq.org/docs/Hayek_45.pdf
by sfpotter | 2025-06-09 16:04:27+00:00
Something interesting here is that although Clenshaw-Curtis rules with N nodes only exactly integrate degree N-1 polynomials while Gauss rules integrate degree 2N-1, they are frequently competitive with Gauss rules when integrating general analytic functions. So while the space of polynomials being integrated is crucial, there are nevertheless many possible interpolatory quadrature rules and how they behave is not completely straightforward.
by gs17 | 2025-06-09 16:04:37+00:00
> My main issue with vibe coding etc is I simply don't enjoy it.

I almost enjoy it. It's kind of nice getting to feel like management for a second. But the moment it hits a bug it can't fix and you have to figure out its horrible mess of code any enjoyment is gone. It's really nice for "dumb" changes like renumbering things or very basic refactors.
by rindeer | 2025-06-09 16:05:36+00:00
As solo founders, we're here to build businesses, not spend endless hours chasing SEO.

But the reality is: no content, no ranking. No ranking, no visibility. I've been there wasting hours on keyword tools, empty docs, and constant edits. So, I built Rindeer, a fully autonomous SEO content platform specifically designed for indie hackers and solo founders.

With one click, Rindeer researches, writes, cites, and publishes detailed, fact-checked, long-form blog posts with use images and diagrams optimized to rank and for reader too. No babysitting, no prompt engineering required.
by fotta | 2025-06-09 16:05:57+00:00
> Ironically, this steep grade saved the J-Church line from being replaced by buses. After World War II, San Francisco began replacing the streetcar lines with buses, but the Church Street hill proved too steep.

Little bit of columns A and B

https://www.opensfhistory.org/osfhcrucible/2019/08/10/the-j-...
by 0xbadcafebee | 2025-06-09 16:06:10+00:00
Nice! I haven't seen these before, woodblock prints depicting foreigners in Japan: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search?q=kimono+jap...

I think this is my favorite, Foreign Business Establishment in Yokohama: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/73415
by wnorris510 | 2025-06-09 16:07:11+00:00
We do! You can read about our original approach back at Google AI in our CVPR publication here:

https://openaccess.thecvf.com/content/CVPR2021/papers/Thames...

We've since come up with a much more accurate approach. That said we also try to do some advanced technique to figure out what people were trying to log and not what the amount of food in the photo was. So for example if take a bite out of a bagel, we'll try to say 1 bagel since it's unlikely you wanted to log a bagel less a bite.
by soulofmischief | 2025-06-09 16:07:33+00:00
> This is a really negative and insulting comment towards people who are struggling with a very real, very emotional response to AI

I disagree that my comment was negative at all. Many of those same people (not all) spend a lot of time making negative comments towards my work in AI, and tossing around authoritarian ideas of restriction in domains they understand like art and literature, while failing to also properly engage with the real issues such as intelligent mass surveillance and increased access to harmful information. They would sooner take these new freedom weapons out of the hands of the people while companies like Palintir and NSO Group continue to use them at scale.

> super-concerned about both the real and potential negatives that the rabid boosters won't even acknowledge

So am I, the difference is I am having a rational and not an emotional response, and I have spent a lot of time deeply understanding machine learning for the last decade in order to be able to have a measured, informed response.

> You don't have to "play the game" to make an impact, it's valid to try and challenge the math and change the rules too

I firmly believe you cannot ethically outlaw math, and this is part of why I have trouble empathizing with those who feel otherwise. People are so quick to support authoritarian power structures the moment it supposedly benefits them or their world view. Meanwhile, the informed are doing what they can to prevent this stuff from being used to surveil and classify humanity, and to find a balance that allows humans to coexist with artificial intelligence.

We are not falling prey to reactionary politics and disinformation, and we are not willing to needlessly expand government overreach and legislate away critical individual freedom in order to achieve our goals.
by jcrawfordor | 2025-06-09 16:07:57+00:00
This is definitely an area for debate. I've seen the physical resolution of a 70/15 film frame estimated at 70MP, which is obviously a lot more than the ~8MP of 4k. The MP comparisons between film and digital are a little iffy though, and digital ought to be sharper within the limitations of that resolution than film. Ultimately it comes down to marketing but, having not had a direct comparison, I would still expect 70mm to look better than a digital projection system.

I think that digital LED domes might beat film because of the excellent light output and color reproduction, but I guess I'll have to shell out for the Sphere to find out as there are very few of that size.
Show HN: Glowstick – type level tensor shapes in stable rust
by bietroi | 2025-06-09 16:08:22+00:00
Hi HN,

In the past few years I've become more interested in machine learning. Since I'm sure the same is true for many here, I wanted to share this project I've been working on: glowstick uses type-directed metaprogramming to keep track of tensor shapes in Rust's type system and determine which operations are permitted or not at compile time.

I find Rust has a lot of strengths when it comes to ML applications, but waiting until runtime to find shape related issues feels a bit strange since normally I don't run the code all that often while developing. Given Rust has fancy types available, I figured I'd try my hand at using them to address this.

I've added integration crates for the two ML frameworks I use most frequently, candle and burn, and included examples of implementing llama 3.2 in each using typed shapes for much of the model internals and inference loop. Mixtures of static and dynamic dimensions should be supported well enough for most applications at this point, though there are of course still improvements to be made.

Any feedback is appreciated!
by philonoist | 2025-06-09 16:08:41+00:00
From The FAQS - https://eu-os.eu/faq

Why does EU OS propose to rely on Fedora-based Linux distributions?

First of all, EU OS is not a product (yet), but only a Proof-of-Concept. The choice of Fedora-based Linux distributions or the desktop environment KDE is not a core concern as it does not impact much how admins manage users and their data, software and devices.

Nevertheless, EU OS cannot avoid to pick one base Linux distribution to start with. The founding project member Robert has previously used:

opensuse at home from about 2007 to 2024 (in 2007 distributed on 8 DVDs or so) debian at the university department from 2007 to 2013 scientific linux at some research department from 2009 to 2011 opensuse Kalpa (in alpha) at home in 2024 Fedora Kinoite (stable) at home since 2024

Is EU OS a project of the European Union?

Right now, EU OS is not a project of the European Union. Instead, EU OS is a community-led Proof-of-Concept. This means it is lead by a community of volunteers and enthusisasts.

The project goal is to become a project of the European Commission in the future and use https://code.europa.eu. For this EU OS is in touch with the public administration on member state and EU level. So far, EU OS relies on https://gitlab.com/eu-os.
by jraines | 2025-06-09 16:08:42+00:00
The benefit of AI as a feature in calorie counting apps is great. But you have to track stuff manually for a while to realize the benefit. Specifically: using AI for restaurant meals is a convenient starting point, from which you use your hard-won feel for weight & caloric density of things to tweak the first pass to something closer to the mark.

As of now I would not at all trust a fully AI calorie counting app