MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by kps | 2025-06-30 14:06:01+00:00
~wavy lines~~ I've never used this in anger, but I owned a second-hand Xerox Daybreak for a while to play around with. Later, there was a some freely available project (I've now forgotten) that used Interlisp running on an emulator running on a DEC Alpha, and so I added some minor bits to NetBSD's Ultrix compatibility.
by kidnoodle | 2025-06-30 14:06:06+00:00
I’m playing around with the idea of a location intelligence data union. I work in an adjacent space, and it drives me crazy that there’s all this data about humans moving around that could make a huge positive difference in the world but it doesn’t, because ‘good’ actors won’t touch the shadily data broked data.

I figure the solution is to pay people for their location data, and be up front and transparent about collecting it.
by vevoe | 2025-06-30 14:06:06+00:00
That makes sense to me. There's another post on the front page right now talking about shortening the work week (I haven't read it yet tbf, so I could be wrong about it's content) because of AI. People have been talking about shorter work weeks for a long time now, it just doesn't happen. What does happen is we get more done and the GDP goes even higher.
by fithisux | 2025-06-30 14:06:39+00:00
I think Max's brain was not polluted with terror and showed trust in his tools.

Today many devs (and not prograamers)

are always suspicious, and terrified on the potential of something going wrong because someone will point a finger

even if the error is harmless or improbable.

My experience is that many modern devs are incapable of assigning significance or probabilities, they are usually not creative, fearful of "not using best practices", and do not take into consideration the anthropic aspect of software.

My 2 cents
by jibe | 2025-06-30 14:06:51+00:00
If you are going to call it a collapse of the US, first understand that it is a UK jobs report, and second, the top line number is job growth. Also, why are you waiting for collapse?

year-on-year growth remained positive at +0.49%, marking the third consecutive month of annual improvement and suggesting a slow but steady recovery from the recent market slump.
by rahilb | 2025-06-30 14:06:59+00:00
I just released version 1.4.0 of my app ReminderSync for Obsidian!

https://turquoisehexagon.co.uk/remindersync/

The latest version supports dataview tasks format and multiple reminder lists with Routing Rules.

I think the product is pretty much feature complete now so I’ll probably start doing some marketing and move onto coding something new. Sales until now have all been organic.
by jsolson | 2025-06-30 14:07:17+00:00
In my world, we won't let a system boot with production credentials unless the IOMMU is enabled.

This is enforced by a greatly enriched TPM (and it's willingness to unwrap credentials). We have trust several layers of firmware and OS software, but the same mechanism allows us to ensure that known-bad versions of those aren't part of the stack that booted.

If I wanted secure games (and the market would tolerate it), I'd push for enforcement of something similar in the consumer space.
Last Word: Build as many words as you can before finding the last word
by markkat | 2025-06-30 14:07:23+00:00
Last Word was made by my good friend, Mike, and has become part of my daily puzzle routine.

It's addictive. It stretches your vocab, and there's strategy in the words you choose, but also in the order of your choices so you can keep building with letters that aren't in the last word.

Enjoy.
by reedf1 | 2025-06-30 14:08:10+00:00
4x is a number I pulled out of thin air. I'm not sure I even yet believe there is a net positive effect of using AI on productivity. What I am sure about in my own workflow is that is saves me time writing boilerplate code - it is good at this for me. So I would say it has saved me time in the short-term. Now does not writing this boilerplate slow me down long-term? It's possible, I could forget how to do this myself, some part of my brain could atrophy (as the MIT study suggests). How it affects large teams, systems and the transfer of knowledge is also not clear.
by jerf | 2025-06-30 14:08:17+00:00
One of the things I would say I saw coming from a long ways away is that a lot of effort was put into detecting the "default" voice of LLMs, but people would eventually figure out how to kick them out of it, since it is after literally just a matter of asking. It took some months but word does seem to be finally getting out, I'm seeing the idea emerge in more and more places.

I gave it the prompt "Suppose you are in a job interview for a front-end web position and someone asks you about how you use the React library and the hardest problem you even had to solve with it. How might you react, along with a somewhat amusing anecdote?"[1] and it did pretty well. I think I'd play with it a bit to see if I can still suppress some of the LLM-isms that came out, but a human could edit them out in real-time with just a bit of practice too... it's not like you can just read it to your interviewer, you will need to Drama Class 101 this up a bit anyhow. It'll be easier to improv a bit over this than a bare Wikipedia list.

In other words, as with the question the article title asks, the question isn't about what happens "when" this starts being possible... the capability has run ahead of all but the most fervent AI user's understanding and it is already here. It's just a matter of the word-of-mouth getting around as to how to prompt the AIs to be less obvious. I also anticipate that in the next couple of years, the AI companies will be getting tired of people complaining about the "default LLM voice" and it'll shift to be something less obvious than it is now. Both remote interviews and college writing are really already destroyed, the news just hasn't gotten around to everybody yet.

(In fact I suspect that "default LLM voice" will eventually become a sort of cultural touchstone of 2024-2026 and be deliberately used in future cultural references to set stories in this time period. It's a transient quality of current-day LLMs, easy to get them out of even today, and I expect future LLMs to have much different "default voices".)

[1]: And in keeping with my own philosophy of "there's not a lot of value of just pasting in LLM responses" if you want to see what comes out you are welcome to play with it yourself. No huge surprises though. It did the job.
by pama | 2025-06-30 14:08:22+00:00
Cool. Would it be possible to eliminate that little vocab format conversion requirement for the vocab I see in the test against tiktoken? It would be nice to have a fully compatible drop in replacement without having to think about details. It also would be nice to have examples that work the other way around: initialize tiktoken as you normally would, including any specialized extension of standard tokenizers, and then use that initialized tokenizer to initialize a new tokendagger and test identity of results.
by norbert515 | 2025-06-30 14:08:33+00:00
I'd say it depends on where you are coming from. With Vide, I'm approaching this problem from the code side. In my opinion, any application that is supposed to go into production and scale should be built on a solid code foundation.

My value proposition is to make developers more productive by skipping the boring stuff, while FlutterFlow is more of an "all-in-one" app platform.
by andsoitis | 2025-06-30 14:08:43+00:00
> This raises interesting evolutionary questions. Which came first: colorful signals or the color vision needed to see them?

The question seems to rely on the faulty premise that it is all-or-nothing.

Dawkins explores in Climbing Mount Improbable various examples of complex biological features and shows how they could have evolved step-by-step, with each small change providing some advantage. Examples include the evolution of eyes, the development of flight, spider web construction, and flower patterns.

Eyes have evolved on at least 40 (possibly 65) separate occasions. 96% of animal species have eyes, ranging from simple light-detecting patches to the complex camera eyes of vertebrates and cephalopods.
by tboyd47 | 2025-06-30 14:09:02+00:00
It would lead to people having more free time, which leads to self-determination and independence from corporate power structures, which empowers the middle class, which the owners and controllers of global financialized capital do not want.

Your job will continue to be at least 40 hours, the base pay adjusted for inflation will decrease, the "benefits" that are too complicated to understand and extract yourself from will increase, and you definitely will come back into the office one day. =)
by ttul | 2025-06-30 14:09:59+00:00
I run a mature software company that is being driven for profit (we are out of the fantastic future phase and solidly in the “make money” phase). Even with all the pressure to cut costs and increase automation, the most valuable use of LLMs is to make the software developers work more effectively, producing the feature improvements that customers want so that we can ensure customers will renew and upgrade. And to the extent that we are cutting costs, we are using AI to help us write code that lets us use infrastructure more efficiently (because infrastructure is the bulk of our costs).

But this is a software company. I think out in the “real world,” there are some low hanging fruit wins where AI replaces extremely routine boilerplate jobs that never required a lot of human intelligence in the first place. But even then, I’d say that the general drift is that the humans who were doing those low-level jobs have a chance to step up into jobs requiring higher-level intelligence where humans have a chance to really shine. And companies are competing not by just getting rid of salaries, but by providing much better service by being able to afford to have more higher-tier people on the payroll. And by higher-tier, I don’t necessarily mean more expensive. It can be the same people that were doing the low-level jobs; they just now can spend their human-level intelligence doing more interesting and challenging work.
by jampekka | 2025-06-30 14:10:27+00:00
Colgate Palmolive 1973: https://patents.google.com/patent/US3931398A/en

Merck & Co 1979: https://patents.google.com/patent/US4287173A/en

Lion Corp 1983: https://patents.google.com/patent/US4693888A/en

In all likelihood these just didn't work, but the commercial interest to not have caries immunization is just too juicy not to theorize!
by trinix912 | 2025-06-30 14:10:31+00:00
> To get to the point that Europe is in where even rich people don't want cars or if they have one it is for weekend trips. You need to do a lot better than this.

It's not like that in all of Europe either, the further you go from Western Europe, the worse the public transit gets. The Balkans are probably the worst, you need a car if you live outside a city as rail and even busses are slow, unreliable, or just not an option in your place.
by pxc | 2025-06-30 14:10:38+00:00
Because for capital, shortening the work week is leaving money on the table! Leisure time for the masses does have technological requirements, but actually increasing it across the society is more of a problem of power and politics than of technology. It's been this way for a long, long time.

It was like this when we won the 8-hour day norm that we have now! The 8-hour day may have been enabled by technology in some sense, but it was won with a fight.
by deadbabe | 2025-06-30 14:11:01+00:00
I think a 4-day work week isn’t really ideal.

The problem is you will increase cycle times. There is a sort of time dilation that occurs around weekends. Thursdays will become the new Fridays and on Mondays people will be kind of groggy from being out for 3 days. So basically Tuesdays and Wednesdays become the days to really do hardcore work. That means it takes longer to get big projects done as people naturally schedule things around Tuesdays and Wednesdays.

A better model is to just have people be remote, and do a little bit of work each workday. This keeps people a little more fresh and boils their days down to just getting 1 or 2 important decisions made.
by gruez | 2025-06-30 14:11:08+00:00
"If tractors and fertilizers lets us grow more food with less time - why not shorten the workweek?"

For instance the amount of people employed in agriculture in France dropped from 60% in the 1800s to 3% today, a 95% reduction. Assuming everyone worked 40 hour weeks back in 1800s, that means everyone should only have to work 2 hours a week today, right?

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-the-labor-force-...
by davidsojevic | 2025-06-30 14:11:47+00:00
I've been working on and off on a client-side* SERP rank tracker: https://serpowl.com/

I wanted a simpler alternative to the self-hosted SerpBear tool that I could use and share, so this is the result.

It uses SerpApi (where I work) as the data source for what actually executes the SERP scraping because it's much too complex to have purely client-side, but 100% of the rank tracking portion is client-side.

It's not fully complete and there's definitely rough edges with it, but because of the data source, it supports a large number of search engines right off the bat.
by stego-tech | 2025-06-30 14:11:55+00:00
Asked and answered right here. Also worth providing context:

* When we asked the same question in the 2010s with productivity gains from technology, it was the gays and the immigrants that were the reason we couldn’t

* When we asked the same question in the 2000s with productivity gains from technology, it was the gays and the immigrants and the Iraq War that were the reason we couldn’t (until the housing crisis)

* When asked in the 90s, it was the gays, the immigrants, and budget shortfalls that were the reasons we couldn’t (nevermind continued tax cuts)

* When asked in the 80s, it was the gays, the immigrants, and the Soviets as cause for not shortening workweeks

I can go back for several more decades this way. It’s seemingly always the fault of minority groups that we can’t roll back workweeks and reclaim leisure time, rather than the fault of the monied elite demanding ever more for themselves. Until enough people acknowledge and accept this, I get to spend my time fighting to exist rather than all of us enjoying more community and leisure time together.
by theluketaylor | 2025-06-30 14:12:11+00:00
Carbon fibre is incredibly expensive to manufacture. It requires a lot of manual part manipulation and yields can be poor.

BMW made a big bet that batteries would remain expensive and weight would matter for EVs. i3 and i8 were studies in scaling up structural carbon fibre mass production based on that bet that failed pretty badly.

Structural batteries are already a thing. Carbon fibre won't be the housing without a bunch of innovations.
by monkeyelite | 2025-06-30 14:12:17+00:00
- boomers like classic sports and muscle cars. They feel nostalgia towards them because those are the cars high school and college kids used to actually drive

- people who are looking for affordable cars buy used. That market has evaporated. I remember in the late 90s-2000s the newspaper had a junker section where you could get cars (that started) for $100. Imagine what you could get for $2000

- when inflation goes up you lose savings and don’t necessarily get a corresponding wage increase. So just saying it’s equal according to inflation does not mean it’s equal in terms of work hours or job training requirements
by kube-system | 2025-06-30 14:12:34+00:00
There are a handful of significantly different hybrid designs. Some of the early designs were in fact just electric drivetrains slapped on to existing gasoline drivetrains, and were more complicated than their gasoline counterparts. But most of the designs that are more popular today are not that. Many of them eliminate some of the most problematic parts on gasoline cars and replace them with solid state components.
by ilaksh | 2025-06-30 14:12:41+00:00
AI isn't destroying anything. Don't blame the technology for what humans do with it.

AI should allow every student to have personalized instruction and tutoring. It should be a massive win.

If everyone instead of taking advantage of that refuses to do any work and decided to lie and pass the AIs output off as their own, that is not something the AI did. The students did that.
by jerf | 2025-06-30 14:13:17+00:00
You can make a list of guarantees that concurrency primitives provide. You have to get down into the details, ranging from "memory barriers that guarantee all previous operations have completed", which is really quite a weak guarantee, up through things like "no more than one thing can have this lock at a time", which is the sort of thing that a moderately experienced person might already have considered to be one of the weakest guarantees but there's quite a few "memory barriers" that are significantly weaker, up through things like the channel's guarantee of "if you pass the send operation you are guaranteed that some other goroutine has already picked this up", and finally, proceeding upwards to something like a distributed lock's "you are guaranteed to be the only thing holding this lock across the entire cluster", which is very expensive. And this is still only a very-coarse-grained summary of the sorts of concurrency primitives there are.

The easiest one to see is the distributed versus non-distributed versions of locks as they are so dramatically different and so obviously different in expense, but the principle extends all the way down to even different sorts of memory barriers with different guarantees having different costs.

When each of these are optimized to within an inch of their life, as they typically are, including all the way down to the hardware level, stepping up to a higher guarantee level is never free.
by sergeyfomkin | 2025-06-30 14:13:30+00:00
Absolutely. Take Google or Meta — both have gone through rounds of layoffs while still keeping thousands in roles focused on alignment, planning, or internal coordination. McKinsey and other big consultancies often produce reports with minimal new insight, tailored mostly to justify executive decisions. Even in finance, layers of middle office and compliance roles exist not because they’re strictly needed, but because no one wants to take on institutional risk. These aren’t government jobs — they’re high-paid, private-sector roles that persist because the system values control and optics just as much as output.
by boerseth | 2025-06-30 14:14:05+00:00
It may get resolved on its own. These days people study to get good grades in order to prove to future gatekeepers (like employers, or higher rungs of academia) that they know the material well. Post AGI, however, the gatekeepers may not be so interested in humans anymore, and we might not need grades at all. Studying anything could become something done exclusively for ones own interest, and the only point of a grade would be to give one-self a goal to achieve.

Alternatively, if we still want to cling on to this ritual of measuring the performance of students, you could give each and every one of them oral examinations with AI professors.
by burnt-resistor | 2025-06-30 14:14:27+00:00
GHz/MHz wars and ultra-deep pipelines lead to long pipeline stalls and low efficiency. Clock != (IPS) cycle efficiency. What matters is measured performance. There's little point in buying the most expensive option, it's usually throwing money away.

Sometimes though, option are limited but there are also traditional and alternative channel vendors besides secondary markets. For example, a vendor or the mfgr might be willing to sample a part.
by alephnerd | 2025-06-30 14:14:28+00:00
Not OP, but you can use the BLS's CPI calculator. Their numbers are right [0]

Implying that OP is "Assuming an agenda" appears to break the HN guidelines [1]

[0] - https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=25000&year1=20...

[1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
by username135 | 2025-06-30 14:14:42+00:00
Its been my observation that most moderate to heavy users have similar reactions eventually - myself included. I gave it up for years. Eventually, I found my way back and was determined to get through the anxiety/unpleasantness. What worked for me was starting back slow (2.5 mg of edibles) and working my way up from there.

Some times it was great, sometimes I could feel the anxiety/panic attack coming. In cases where the latter happened, I would really try to focus on why it was happening and what feelings I was having (mentally/physically). At a low dose, it was much easier to sort out the "who, what, when, where, why" of why the experience turned negative. I started recognizing the onset of the negative experience and learned to simply 'ride the wave' past it. And so I learned a big part of that was the expectation that it was going to be bad and everything that came with it. It became self fulfilling. As soon as I made those internal connections, it's been amazing. The only problems I have now are tolerance related :)

Any way, if you enjoyed it in the past, I'd encourage you to try it again at some point, but start with very small doses and work your way up.
by hiAndrewQuinn | 2025-06-30 14:14:49+00:00
I've noticed people who leave comments like this tend not to actually read the links they wish to pass judgment on. If you did you'd know nowhere in my post do I claim quitting was easy.

The linked post implies that most drinkers should continue drinking, and maybe even drink more precisely because they aren't the kinds of drinkers that give alcohol a bad name. If you feel like being edgy, try taking that as your soapbox instead. Much more interesting than saying "the optimal amount of X'ing is nonzero" given a large enough group of people X'ing.
by inkcapmushroom | 2025-06-30 14:14:50+00:00
That's called an ultrasonic scaler, which is quite different to the device in the article. A scaler is for removing tartar and stain while the device in the article is an ultrasound (like the device for viewing babies during pregnancy) which looks under your gums at your tooth roots and bones to see if you have any bone loss or gum disease.

You might not have the dentist or dental hygienist use the probe very often. When they do it's a rounded straight tip device, and they usually call out numbers to an assistant for how deep under the gumline the probe can reach. That's the procedure this device would replace. If nothing else it's an improvement because you don't need an assistant to record the numbers, and if someone has bad gum disease it might hurt them when you poke in there with a probe.
by b112 | 2025-06-30 14:15:17+00:00
LOL, well I certainly can't see it in the future

The future is not now, hence not entirely relevant, especially as there's a lot more future than the past. (hrm.. hopefully)

unless I was very rudely typing this reply during an interview, it isn't happening now

Yes, but "happening now" is an indicator of 1. How is that relevant for this aforementioned 12.5%? You'd need dozens of interviews to even begin to attain certainty. And bear in mind, this was referencing specifically gen z, which are all exceptionally young... just entering the workforce in fact.

So unless all your dozens of sample cases are under 28, with most them being younger, it's apples to oranges.

My point with all of this was, your initial post spoke of interviews of the past, which had no true bearing to "interviews now". After all, this very article says it's different than in the past! And to discredit the percentages discussed, you pointed at the whole 1 in 10 dentists thing, which has no relevance in discrediting this figure. It wasn't even 1 in 10, yes? More like 1 in 8, yes?

And none of my response was rude. It was simply refuting what was data, which isn't really relevant here.

I'd have even welcomed personal data, which said something akin to "I've interviewed 100 people under 28 in the last year, and none of this stuff is true!"

But that's not what you've said. Instead, it seems you have a hunch. That's fair of course, but it was worded as a non-hunch.