MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by em-bee | 2025-06-05 17:03:19+00:00
what this article reflects is that companies don't care about training. they want to hire everyone with experience. just look at HN whoishiring. everyone wants senior developers. now HN may be the right place for that, but everywhere else, all the jobboards i see are dominated by demand for senior devs. junior jobs are rare. maybe that is because they look for juniors elsewhere (directly in in schools for example), but i suspect it is because nobody wants to invest into the next generation.

and as the article suggests, why even hire developers at all when AI can build apps by itself. but if we ask that, we may as well ask why even send children to school. if they are not learning what the industry needs, then why bother at all?

yes, i am sarcastic, the need for experienced developers will not go away, and these developers need to come from somewhere.

next to the two options there is another option C:

send people to school until they are 30. if companies won't hire people without experience, then school needs to provide that experience. now ask yourself if that is realistic. it isn't.

so option D? let the industry crash. until companies learn that they need to train their own people.

personally, whenever i am in the position, i only hire junior developers. and if the current trend continues then the salaries for juniors will go down so that eventually they will become profitable faster.
by mouse_ | 2025-06-05 17:03:20+00:00
the only security paradigm that is 100% foolproof is to assume breach. Taking away any number of users freedoms, big or small, does not change that.

Old computers, before sandboxing and Windows defender and real-time protection, were more secure, because people were less likely to plug their bank account information, social security number, birth date, and home address into them.

At a certain point we have got to level with the idea that a smartphone is no longer a general purpose computer in your pocket. It's more like a cyber passport. It knows everything about you and authenticates formal activities.
by vel0city | 2025-06-05 17:03:47+00:00
A few tips:

When just looking at hosts in your network with their routable IPv6 address, ignore the prefix. This is the first few segments, probably the first four in most cases for a home network (a /64 network) When thinking about firewall rules or having things talk to each other, ignore things like "temporary" IP addresses.

So looking at this example:

Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : home.arpa IPv6 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 2600:1700:63c9:a421::2000 IPv6 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 2600:1700:63c9:a421:e17f:95dd:11a:d62e Temporary IPv6 Address. . . . . . : 2600:1700:63c9:a421:9d5:6286:67d9:afb7 Temporary IPv6 Address. . . . . . : 2600:1700:63c9:a421:4471:e029:cc6a:16a0 Temporary IPv6 Address. . . . . . : 2600:1700:63c9:a421:91bf:623f:d56b:4404 Temporary IPv6 Address. . . . . . : 2600:1700:63c9:a421:ddca:5aae:26b9:a53c Temporary IPv6 Address. . . . . . : 2600:1700:63c9:a421:fc43:7d0a:7f8:e4c8 Link-local IPv6 Address . . . . . : fe80::7976:820a:b5f5:39c3%18 IPv4 Address. . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.20.59 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : fe80::ec4:7aff:fe7f:d167%18 192.168.20.254

Ignore all those temporary ones. Ignore the longer one. You can ignore 2600:1700:63c9:a421, as that's going to be the same for all the hosts on your network, so you'll see it pretty much everywhere. So, all you really need to remember if you're really trying to configure things by IP address is this is whatever-is-my-prefix::2000.

But honestly, just start using DNS. Ignore IP addresses for most things. We already pretty much ignore MAC addresses and rely on other technologies to automatically map IP to MAC for us. Its pretty simple to get a halfway competent DNS setup going on, so many home routers will have things going by default, and its just way easier to do things in general. I don't want to have to remember my printer is at 192.168.20.132 or 2600:1700:63c9:a421::a210 I just want to go to http://brother or ipp://brother.home.arpa and have it work.
by rambambram | 2025-06-05 17:04:02+00:00
Cool, thanks for letting me know! ;) I see some traffic from HN now.

For some of my websites I block traffic from certain timezones and/or browser languages, I just double-checked but Hey Homepage doesn't block anything. May I ask from what country you're visiting? I myself experience long loading times for websites from Japan for example (I am visiting from western Europe).
by norir | 2025-06-05 17:04:41+00:00
It's a bit of a shame that Forth has become almost synonymous with indirect threading implemented in assembly. This is true and somewhat interesting of most implementations, but obfuscates the deeper philosophy of Forth. For me, this is about self-reliance and building your own tools that are suited for the specific task at hand.

I don't care for a lot of the standard forth-isms, such as the way branching and recursion are handled. But I make extensive use of the threaded execution model. One quickly notices that anything that can be pipelined naturally fits into this model. Programming in forth style is often similar to programming with unix pipes except you aren't restricted to string input and output and you do not need to fork subprocesses (though you certainly can!).

Learning how to program in forth, which as so many have pointed out is best done by implementing your own, will fundamentally change the way you program in all languages. Chaining method calls in data pipelining is somewhat forth-like.

As far as implementing a forth, the main interpreter can be written in 14 lines of lua (using lua varargs as the parameter stack):

local thread thread = function(first, next, ...) if first then if next then local cont = thread(next, ...) return function(...) return cont(first(...)) end else return first end else error "require at least one task" end end

Here is how to use it:

local push = function(value) return function(...) return value, ... end end local print = function(msg, ...) print(msg) return ... end local hello_world = thread(push "Hello, world!", print) hello_world()

And for fun, here is dup:

local dup = function(top, ...) return top, top, ... end

The value of these constructs may not be immediately obvious, but I have built a nice compiler in lua on top of it. (I copied the thread definition above directly from my compiler source code).
by vouaobrasil | 2025-06-05 17:05:34+00:00
> the model could be created with ethically, legally, voluntarily sourced training data

There is no such thing as ethical AI, because "voluntary" usually means voluntary without the participants really understanding what they are making, which is just another tool in the arms race of increasingly sophisticated AI models – which will largely be needed just to "one up" the other guy.

"Ethical" AI is like forced pit-fighting where we ask if we can find willing volunteers to fight for the death for a chance for their freedom. It's sickening.
by sokoloff | 2025-06-05 17:05:42+00:00
> Doesn't work that way.

If we take 100 embryos and we both predict their heights and IQs at 18, you with only biological sex and me additionally with the heights and IQs of the parents, I will wager a large sum that my predictions will be better than yours.

Are you interested in taking the other side of that bet for even money? I’ll even give you +110 odds to ensure you have a sportsbook-sized edge if there’s no predictive value.
by MentatOnMelange | 2025-06-05 17:05:48+00:00
My understanding is that a lot of air pollution California still has comes from other places. For an analogous example, when the Fukishima nuclear plant melted down, there was radioactive drift wood on the west coast. That doesn't mean the environmental regulations aren't working. My area has had increased air issues because of Canadian wildfires. Thats not a failure of my areas fight against pollution, because there would be immensely more pollution without them.

California has wildfires from the interior and the north, plus trade winds blowing pollution from factories across the pacific. Its easy to take for granted how green the state is but if anything, its impressive how well they handle it. This is an outsider perspective though.

I agree with you 100% about the political problem of population centers being too concentrated. Don't discount all the problems facing some city-dwellers though. I imagine it very much feels like the system is rigged when you were stuck in a shitty school system and a quick drive downtown you find super rich finance bros who aren't inherently smarter or harder workin (or worse, clearly less ambitious or curious).

Racism is a real problem too as a part of every day life creating friction for achieving things. There is still social moblility and opportunities but its an exception to the rule. Its easy to say "why isn't this person taking advantage of this?" without considering this. There's an aspect of learned hopelessness at play.

Growing up in D.C as a smart white kid, I learned a ton of stuff in places I was welcomed whereas some other students had to jump through hoops of security theater literally getting through the front door. Then once through the front door, they're at a disadvantage for networking if people's first impression of them was seeing them get treated suspiciously.

I feel like I've gotten off on a tangent, but for the most part I agree with you. I'm looking at colleges as an adult student and my biggest criteria besides cost is "how many opportunities will I have to spontaneously brainstorm/exchange ideas while getting lunch or hanging out"
by bigyabai | 2025-06-05 17:06:00+00:00
I think MacOS is simply a terrible UNIX environment, period. The BSD bones are good, but the XNU kernel itself is a disaster and the way Apple handles user isolation, package management and runtime idempotency borders on outright neglect. Kernel extensions are depreciated and no DKMS equivalent exists, 32-bit support gets axed overnight and even simple drivers can't be ported from other UNIX-likes to MacOS. No wonder Linux is considered a more serious standard, all the UNIXes are trying to fucking murder each other instead of progressing the POSIX standard!

It really does not "just work", unless you're treating the Mac like an iPad. 20 years ago the Mac compiled software just as good as anything else, today it can't install Vulkan headers because third-party software scares Apple. Simply holding Apple to the standards of their contemporaries reveals that they're paranoid and do not trust their users.
by philipkglass | 2025-06-05 17:06:17+00:00
I downvoted it because only a couple of small modular reactors have been constructed so far, and neither of them use spent fuel rods from older reactors as fuel:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTR-PM

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akademik_Lomonosov

If you were referring to a theoretical SMR design, I will believe it after a demonstration unit is built and operating. Most reactor designs never enter industrial use, just like most designs for new kinds of batteries or solar cells.
by cjbgkagh | 2025-06-05 17:07:06+00:00
Humanity is getting better at combating pathogens to the point we wouldn't have to rely on genetic diversity for resilience, additionally such treatments could be given to those already born.

It's not like human variability would be lost forever, we can make and keep copies.

Gattaca's core message is that there is no gene for the human spirit, but in reality there probably is, behavior is highly genetic. Also consider that Vincent could have had a heart attack during the mission, that would put his actions into a rather selfish light.

My optimistic view is that an improved understanding of the mechanisms would lead to direct medical interventions, in such a world Vincent would have been able to have his heart properly treated.

I have ME/CFS from a genetic condition and I treat it by suppressing IL-1B cytokines with diet and medication. I was lucky enough to be able to figure this out and I would like more people to have this knowledge.
by sottol | 2025-06-05 17:07:12+00:00
Does 82.2 correspond to the "Percent correct" of the other models?

Not sure if OpenAI has updated O3, but it looks like "pure" o3 (high) has a score of 79.6% in the linked table, "o3 (high) + gpt-4.1" combo has a the highest score of 82.7%.

The previous Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 05-06 (yea, not current 06-05!) was at 76.9%.

That looks like a pretty nice bump!

But either way, these Aider benchmarks seem to be most useful/trustworthy benchmarks currently and really the only ones I'm paying attention to.
by energy123 | 2025-06-05 17:07:20+00:00
I believe it's intentionally nerfed if you use it through the app. Once you use Gemini for a long time you realize they have a number of dark patterns to deter heavy users but maintain the experience for light users. These dark patterns are:

- "Something went wrong error" after too many prompts in a day. This was an undocumented rate limit because it never occurs earlier in the day and will immediately disappear if you subscribe for and use a new paid account, but it won't disappear if you make a new free account, and the error going away is strictly tied to how long you wait. Users complained about this for over a year. Of course they lied about the real reasons for this error, and it was never fixed until a few days ago when they rug pulled paying users by introducing actual documented tight rate limits.

- "You've been signed out" error if the model has exceeded its output token budget (or runtime duration) for a single inference, so you can't do things like what Anthropic recommends where you coax the model to think longer.

- I have less definitive evidence for this but I would not be surprised if they programmatically nerf the reasoning effort parameter for multiturn conversations. I have no other explanation for why the chain of thought fails to generate for small context multiturn chats but will consistently generate for ultra long context singleturn chats.
by nine_k | 2025-06-05 17:07:24+00:00
Putin was sold (by some) to the West as a long-term planner, not beholden to the need to be re-elected, and with rather solid levels of economic growth and popular support. Moldbug's original point, typical for many monarchists, is that a good king cares to leave a country in a good shape to his progeny. This proved wrong many times; "apres moi, la deluge" could be made the slogan of monarchy (aka "authoritarianism") as institution.
by vouaobrasil | 2025-06-05 17:08:09+00:00
> victory will belong to the savvy blackhat hacker who uses AI to generate code at scale

This is just it: AI, while providing some efficiency gains for the average user, will become simply too powerful. Imagine a superpower that allows you to move objects with your mind. That could be a very nice thing to have for many to have, because you could probably help people with it. That's the attitude many hacker-types take. The problem is, it allows people to also kill instantly, which means that telekinesis would just be too powerful to juxtapose against our animal instincts.

AI is just too powerful – and if more people took a serious stand against it, it might actually be shut down.
by modernerd | 2025-06-05 17:08:14+00:00
He's right: Markdown was built for web editing in an era where physical keyboards outnumbered virtual ones. It doesn't really make sense for Notes outside of export.

There's little benefit to it as an input system on iOS/iPadOS (likely the dominant platforms for Notes) where formatting menus are just as close as `#` and `_` characters.

Several Markdown rules wouldn't make sense in the context of Notes. e.g. "end a line with two or more spaces then press return to create a <br>", which was designed to accommodate manually hard-wrapped text that Notes users likely don't want. Apple would have to follow something like CommonMark (feels unlikely) or implement their own Apple-flavoured Markdown, leaving you to learn what's supported and discover the quirks — kind of like its partial implementation of vim input in Xcode.

Popular Markdown apps seem to have converged on 'edit on line focus, preview on line blur', which is surely what the Notes app would do, because modal editing with preview and edit modes feels un-Appleish. 'Preview on line blur' _is_ nicer than a separate preview mode if you're a Markdown power user, but it still leaves many quirks you have to learn. (Just today I wrote, '# Thoughts on C#' in Obsidian, which reads ok with the cursor on that line until I pressed enter and the preview became, 'Thoughts on C'. Leaving me to learn I was supposed to know to write '#Thoughts on C\#' in the edit mode.)
by the_mitsuhiko | 2025-06-05 17:08:25+00:00
> I find this workflow makes my life extremely tedious, because reviewing and fixing whatever the machine produces is a slog for me

I don't actually mind the code review process, it's what I'm used to with open source contributions. Not infrequently did I look at a PR that people left me and decide to rewrite it entirely anyways because I did not quite appreciate the method they chose. That however did not mean the PR was useless, it might have provided the necessary input that made me go down that path ultimately.

I also think that what can make code review enjoyable is not necessarily because the person on the other side learns something from it. I actually tend to think that this something that does not necessarily happen in PR review, but in 1:1 conversations in person or though more synchronous collaboration.

So really my answer is that I do not mind code review. That said there is an important part here:

> How do you reconcile this with your own work? Maybe you just skim the output? Or do you run it and test that way?

What makes agentic workflows work is good tooling and fast iteration cyclces. That is also exactly what a human needs for a PR review to be actually thorough. I cannot accept a change when I do not know that it exhibits the intended behavior, and to validate that behavior I usually need a test case. Do I need to run the test case myself? Not necessarily because the agent / CI already does for me. However I do sometimes run it with verbose output to also see the intermediate outputs that might otherwise be hidden from me to give me more confidence.

It really is hard to describe, but when you put the necessary effort in to make an agentic workflow work, it's really enjoyable. But it does require some upfront investment for it to work.

> Please don't tell me you just trust the AI to write automated tests or something...

I do in fact trust the AI a lot to write tests. They have become incredibly good at taking certain requirements definitions and derive something that can be mostly trusted. It does not always work, but you get a pretty good feeling for if it will or not. At the end of the day many of the tasks we do are basic CRUD or data transformation tasks.
by sodapopcan | 2025-06-05 17:08:55+00:00
> I guess I mean "beam for everything" is a fad.

There is no such fad. The vast majority of seasoned BEAMists will tell you that it is not for everything. There are enthusiasts bringing some surprising stuff to it which is great as it mostly falls into the category of "useful for things users are already outsourcing to other languages." But there is a whole host of things it will just never be able to do and no is pretending that it will.
by solarwindy | 2025-06-05 17:09:02+00:00
Granted.

Although, setting aside the question of sentience, there’s a more serious point I’d make about the dissimilarity between the always-on nature of human cognition, versus the episodic activation of an LLM in next-token prediction—namely, I suspect these current model architectures lack a fundamental element of what makes us generally intelligent, that we are constantly building mental models of how the world works, which we refine and probe through our actions (and indeed, we integrate the outcomes of those actions into our models as we sleep).

Whether a toddler discovering kinematics through throwing their toys around, or adolescents grasping social dynamics through testing and breaking of boundaries, this learning loop is fundamental to how we even have concepts that we can signify with language in the first place.

LLMs operate in the domain of signifiers that we humans have created, with no experiential or operational ground truth in what was signified, and a corresponding lack of grounding in the world models behind those concepts.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the inability of coding agents to adhere to a coherent model of computation in what they produce; never mind a model of the complex human-computer interactions in the resulting software systems.
by Vox_Leone | 2025-06-05 17:09:03+00:00
>>Just wait until these things can move through space with physical/gyro sensors on their own,

and better guidance software. Yeah, there's a lot of room for improvement

"Traditional waypoint navigation assumes movement through a series of Cartesian positions. But in pursuit dynamics, for example, what matters is directional alignment over time"

https://github.com/VoxleOne/SpinStep/blob/main/docs/01-ratio...
by zacfire | 2025-06-05 17:09:42+00:00
With the US effectively ending 'de minimis' for Chinese goods, how are e-commerce giants Temu & Shein fundamentally overhauling their business models? This analysis dives into their divergent strategies (market pivots vs. platformization) and the ripple effects on global retail. Worth a read for anyone interested in e-commerce resilience and US-China trade dynamics.
by logicchains | 2025-06-05 17:09:45+00:00
Humanity doesn't have anywhere near a rigorous enough understanding of biology to engage in large scale human genetic engineering without risk. It's quite possible the society that dives in headlong will end up making some mistake that renders a large proportion of its population sick or infertile in later life. Population IQ will also matter much less in 5-10 years as AI becomes capable of doing the majority of intellectual labour.
by pirateships | 2025-06-05 17:09:48+00:00
as long as I can continue to pirate android apps. one thing I hate about apple is that I have to pay for everything. annoying. information needs to be free as in no payment. the great thing about android is that it's so easy to find the APKs for any app, and unlock paid purchases and what not.

luckily for me and other others who are sailing is that you cannot keep sideloading without enabling pirating as well.

the rich techies can downvotes if they want but I and others in India don't have money to pay for your silly todo apps. ha ha.
by Scarblac | 2025-06-05 17:09:52+00:00
> A lot of the apps I work with have front-ends developed by one team, and those rely on back-ends developed by one or more teams

I hope that one effect of AI assistance will be that we can go back to full stack teams again. It should be easier to know enough about both sides to be productive in them with AI help.

Then things like backend templates + HTMX would maybe work great for 90% of apps and be vastly simpler than the huge pile of technology we've been using in the frontend.
by londons_explore | 2025-06-05 17:09:54+00:00
If the service provider (ie. the X.com servers) are evil, then the API can return false data and the client has no way to know.

However, with a merkle tree, the root hash is embedded into the app, and the servers return the data together with info chaining to the merkle root (typically a few kilobytes, even if the whole tree is hundreds of gigabytes).

With that info, the app can verify the chain to the root and be sure that the servers aren't returning false data.