MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Bender | 2025-06-17 12:04:40+00:00
To attempt to make sense of all my after action reports? kidding

Maybe one potential use could be to drink from the firehose of data and then try to create summary bullet-point reports for the higher ups instead of relying on data filtering up the chain of command in the old game of telephone. At least that is what I would use if for. Getting that data in nearly real-time in an accurate presentation would be priceless.

I do not have the slightest idea how they will secure all this data if going to a 3rd party like OpenAI unless they have their own self hosted version of it on their own mainframes. If that data is going to live in a 3rd party they need to secure their systems in a magical way systems has never been secured. They would have to cast some seriously powerful protection spells.
by SideburnsOfDoom | 2025-06-17 12:04:49+00:00
> People have no idea how much cars benefited the lower and created the middle class.

Yes, and with reference to London, one of the cities discussed, cars are now literally poisoning us.

> The most economically disadvantaged are often those worst affected by air pollution, particularly because they often live in less desirable locations, such as near busy roads. But they are conversely least likely to own a car or use them as much and therefore emit the least pollution.

https://trustforlondon.org.uk/news/london-inequalities-infec...

https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/bame-and-po...

If cars are so great all around, ever think why "near busy roads" are "less desirable locations" ?
by hi_hi | 2025-06-17 12:05:31+00:00
This backfires on me, almost every time.

I reply in kind with "hello".

There can then be many hours to sometimes days.

Either they then reply AGAIN with "hello" (arghhh), or even worse, there is no reply, and I break asking what they want, and _maybe_ get a reply of "never mind, got it sorted" so I NEVER KNOW.
by gchamonlive | 2025-06-17 12:05:55+00:00
Thanks for the thought out response, I think I can let my guard down. We were both arrogant and there's nothing wrong with it.

I'm coming from a personal point. I don't care about space travel or these enormous projects. I'm a simple guy with simple needs, and I like people and serving people. I am grateful there are people out there like you that spend time on this so I can focus on alienating myself with things I find interesting, like drawing and philosophy of consciousness.

It's just that not everything has to be a data point or a general abstraction on a larger scale. You can meet people in their own grounds so you can find common ground without imposing yourself.

And about drugs, I reflected on what you said and I think I could have expressed myself better, because I don't actually think there's a universal imposition of having to learn philosophy to take drugs, even though I agree with Simone Weil when she says philosophy is the required work so we can become vessels of God (hope this doesn't trigger your acid-like thinking detector). I only think drugs are tools we have the option to use and have the control over how we are going to direct them.
by pigbearpig | 2025-06-17 12:06:22+00:00
I am in no way qualified on this, but my assumption was that this comes from cultures that consider getting straight to business rude.

So while I do find it annoying, I also try to be polite back and I certainly won't be putting some "No Hello" link.

If it is a cultural thing and coming from a place of politeness, then I'll engage in a quick round of pleasantries. Once people are familiar, I've noticed this stops.
by FirmwareBurner | 2025-06-17 12:07:04+00:00
>It's not bad faith when it's a legitimate request, which depends on the assertion.

No offence, but comparing asking for proof of corruption with proof of sky being blue of petrochemicals is a biased bad faith argument.

Asking for sources on corruption is more like asking for proof that the earth is round, which is definitely not a legitimate request, but more trolling masquerading like an innocent request and dodge scrutiny ("It's just a question bro, why r u mad lol").

Nothing wrong with asking such a question per-se, but that's something you can also google yourself due to countless occurrences from legitimate sources, hence why it's in bad faith to ask such a thing from others, and should be more strictly moderated as many here abuse this "sauce or gtfo" attitude in bad faith to discredit a pov without providing any arguments.
by nkrisc | 2025-06-17 12:07:09+00:00
> If I do post sources, then what? Do you just suddenly change your mind and accept that stuff documented by the press it does exist?

Then I can read them, find similar sources, judge how much I trust them, and get a better idea of how much corruption and waste you are claiming exists.

While I am sure corruption and waste occurs, if it’s such a serious problem, there ought to be some evidence of it, direct or indirect.

What’s the alternative, I just accept your claim as fact? Or I “google” it until.. what? I find sources that support your claims?

Why should I believe you?
by muzani | 2025-06-17 12:07:13+00:00
The problem with linking censorship with truthfulness is that you can effectively label something untrue to censor it. It's similar to linking intelligence with voting rights - just label some group as not-intelligent to exclude them.

I do agree some ideas should not be spread eagerly. My bad, I thought downvotes would autoflag, but apparently some people will downvote and flag as well, which leads to the effect.

But flagging is effectively deletion and thus censorship. There are vouch buttons, but I do not find them effective - the window is too narrow. Bad submissions should be made invisible, that's fine, the site is about boring news. But I think flags get abused on comments a lot.
by rootnod3 | 2025-06-17 12:07:20+00:00
I might be an outlier, but I much prefer reading the documentation myself. One of the reasons I love using FreeBSD and OpenBSD as daily drivers. The documentation is just so damn good. Is it a pain in the ass at the beginning? Maybe. But I require way less documentation lookups over time and do not have to rely on AI for that.

Don't get me wrong, I tried. But even when pasting the documentation in, the amount of times it just hallucinated parameters and arguments that were not even there were such a huge waste of time, I don't see the value in it.
by nunorbatista | 2025-06-17 12:07:43+00:00
This is not the first time I see this here and to be honest, I was in total agreement a few years ago. In principle, I still am.

Then I became a manager, I had to start dealing with more people, to navigate the enterprise environment and I understood that one of my strengths is to be understand people and to accommodate their ways of working. In this context, being hard with people that just say hello just doesn't make much sense to me anymore. People have busy schedules, they start conversations and are interrupted, they receive hundreds of notifications and have other meetings going on.

If the worst they do to me is to say hello and never talk to me again, I'm ok with accommodating this in my daily workflow.
by vannevar | 2025-06-17 12:07:46+00:00
I think the point is that while people have indeed groused about government waste since the dawn of government, when people actually study it, they find that the rate of fraud and waste is comparable to the private sector. See, e.g., https://www.epsu.org/sites/default/files/article/files/EN_EF... for web.pdf and https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=8997844....

It's not that there's any more fraud or waste in government than in private business, it's that it's less tolerated. I think the main reason for this misperception is that in the private sector, people pay a la carte for particular goods and services, while in the public sector, people pay for shared infrastructure even if they rarely use it themselves. So they are left with the feeling that they aren't getting their money's worth. But of course everyone benefits economically and socially from a stable and prosperous society, even if they can't put their finger on discrete services they use. The reality is that it simply costs a lot of money to maintain a large, modern society. Indeed, it actually costs more than we are paying here in the US, as evidenced by a growing debt that has been a bipartisan creation.

Believing in the mantra of waste, fraud and abuse is comforting, because it implies we could be getting all the same benefits for less money. But there really is no such thing as a free lunch.
by ZeroGravitas | 2025-06-17 12:08:25+00:00
This has stiff competition from standard lithium or sodium batteries combined with giant industrial high temp heat pumps and distributed low temp heat pumps.

I can't quite see the niche that's left, and from their talk about possibly generating electricity from the stored heat, it seems they can't either.

Maybe as a buffer for continual industrial processes that are above heat pump reachable temps (which means above 200C these days)?
by krisoft | 2025-06-17 12:08:27+00:00
> It opens a synchronous channel, setting social expectations for somewhat realtime responses.

But do you see how that is your choice? You can just type "hello", or a longer form of the same, and then go back to work. You can then check back in about an hour to see if they managed to describe what they are looking for.

You can always change yourself, while it is so much harder to change others that it is almost futile. The true source of your distress is not them saying hello, but your understanding of that social expectation of realtime responses.
by lm28469 | 2025-06-17 12:09:08+00:00
It benefited business owners more than anything... wasting hours of your life in a fucking cage you probably pay a loan and interests on because without it you wouldn't even be honoured to slave your life away isn't anywhere close to "benefiting the lower class". Car is freedom, war is peace... people can't even tell how brainwashed they are by the car industry.
by K0balt | 2025-06-17 12:09:08+00:00
The video is based on AIS data, and shows ships in fictitious positions when GPS manipulation is being used in the area.

The sequence of the collision shows the ship’s courses as they collide, and appears to be a reflection of the ground truth.

If GPS manipulation played a part in the collision, wouldn’t the AIS, which reflects the self -reported position of the ship, based on its internal GPS tracking system, have shown a non-collision course which actually resulted in a collision IRL?

The video presenter seems to be unaware of this apparent contradiction of the “gps spoofing theory” that he is proposing?

Is it just me, or are giant clown shoes now standard attire?
by msgodel | 2025-06-17 12:09:23+00:00
Good morning can be nice for that but if you actually have something to say make it the first part of the same message as the content.

Saying Hello or good morning and then spending multiple minutes composing your actual message while I'm attending you is extremely annoying.

Quite frankly though I don't think it makes sense to do any of that outside a group chat. Just say what you want to say and get out.
by gregoriol | 2025-06-17 12:10:47+00:00
It's always nice to have a (very) little intro, but both of these have a bad subscript.

The first one says I know it won't take you long, but that assumes you know the time it'll take me to handle whatever you are going to say, but the reality is that you likely don't know, and even if the conversation itself lasts less than a minute, the person will likely been cut of what they were doing for more than this.

The second one is even worse as you imply that you know are bothering me, so don't bother me! (even if it is a polite phrase, it's not nice)

In other words, just ask. It's more efficient and doesn't make any assumption: we'll figure out how long it takes and if that bothers me.
by kenjackson | 2025-06-17 12:11:48+00:00
You definitely can. For example I know x86. I can read it and understand it quite well. But if you asked me to write even a basic program in it, it would take me a considerable amount of time.

The same goes with shell scripting.

But more importantly you don’t have to understand code to the same degree and depth. When I read code I understand what the code is doing and if it looks correct. I’m not going over other design decisions or implementation strategies (unless they’re obvious). If I did that then I’d agree. Id also stop doing code reviews and just write everything myself.
by DonHopkins | 2025-06-17 12:12:42+00:00
That's like the UBIKAM in LLOOOOMM:

https://youtu.be/Sn057QrCUm8?t=470

Ubikam is a semantic camera that records two channels: a markup presentation channel, and a semantic "YAML Jazz" channel that describes the semantic content and characters' state of mind.
by mc32 | 2025-06-17 12:12:51+00:00
Is that not the history of just about every country of consequence? They were conquered and vanquished multiple times with wealth extracted by foreign powers throughout history? Africa, Asia, Europe, Asia Minor, etc? No continent was free from this history. Have you read the history of Asia before the age of exploration or the history of Europe before the age of exploration or the history of the middle east of the Caucasus before the age of exploration? Every one of them experienced things similar to what you mention. Subjugation, atrocities, imposition of culture, etc. and lest you think Europe is free of this behavior I would reference our modern day Balkan region.
by wheybags | 2025-06-17 12:12:58+00:00
I've lived in the EU my entire life, in three different countries. I have visited and have friends in many more countries. Literally everybody I know has either a visa or mastercard debit card. Yes, people dont use credit cards specifically, they use debit cards, but it literally does not matter, the infrastructure is the same. Seeing ignorant Americans talk about Europe online like it's some backwater that doesn't even have card payment, is frankly offensive.
by mmh0000 | 2025-06-17 12:14:06+00:00
The creators understand it well. The math is pretty a lot, but, you can literally do it with pen and paper. There are plenty of blog[1] posts showing the process.

Anyone claiming AI is a black box no one understands is a marketing-level drone trying to sell something that THEY don't understand.

[1] https://explainextended.com/2023/12/31/happy-new-year-15/
by chha | 2025-06-17 12:14:54+00:00
Translated story: https://www-nrk-no.translate.goog/norge/dnb-navnet-misbrukt-...

One of the biggest Norwegian banks were used as a cover for a scam in Portugal, involving 2500 ad posters distributed by advertising company JCDecaux, with QR-codes linking to scam sites. The ad campaign cost around 5M NOK ($~0.5 USD), and the victims were tricked into signing up for various loans and investment programs, with lots of extra fees added on top.
by somenameforme | 2025-06-17 12:15:30+00:00
I am implying that consciousness, so far as we can prove, does not exist. The only reason I know it exists is because I am conscious. And I take an extremely pragmatic view of the simulation hypothesis. If such were possible, it would be an absolutely perfect tool for everything from education to entertainment to punitive reform. This subsequently encourages me to behave in a pseudo-religious fashion with regards to morals and ethics, in that this life could very well simply be a test, a game, or even a program of reform.

As for natural explanations - what I am saying is that the natural explanations for 'why' seem, currently, to be far weaker than other explanations. And in fact the natural explanations rely on various ad-hoc constructions (like inflation theory) that are completely unnatural. A simulation hypothesis is, to me, the only hypothesis that doesn't seem to have glaring holes in it and/or rely on defacto magic.

And obviously I understand that magic of one millennia is the mundane tech of another. But we do not live in that other era, and there's no guarantee that such an understanding will ever come to pass. Assuming otherwise requires having faith that such discoveries will come to pass in the future, and essentially assuming your own conclusion, instead of looking at the evidence as available. And that's why I referred to natural explanations as religion for an atheist.
by stereolambda | 2025-06-17 12:15:31+00:00
People can choose not to be polarized by figures, especially where the controversies are firmly offtopic.

That being said I do find the tone of this guide somewhat annoying and condescending at times. It could use some editing to make it more impersonal and to the point. Justifications and explanations could be attached separately and most people won't read them anyway. When people ask poor questions, it's often precisely because they don't read longform text for some reason.
by codeulike | 2025-06-17 12:15:35+00:00
I was a Londoner for 20 years and Thameslink (north to south through running discussed in the article) always felt special but I'd never looked into its history. To be able to get on a 'proper train' in Brixton and then run right through to Kentish Town or Luton was kindof amazing. And it was very fast, I'd try and incorporate it into journeys where possible. Like, if you were going somewhere and realised you could do it via Thameslink it felt like a bonus.

Crossrail (aka Elizabeth line) was being talked about or built the whole two decades I lived there but opened after I left.
by gortok | 2025-06-17 12:15:41+00:00
How about ascii art of a male penis every time you opened your IDE?

The point isn’t what you (MyPasswordSucks) would find objectionable, the point is what the median would find objectionable in a professional setting. Luckily we’ve gotten away from the locker room behavior being the median and now the median is approaching good-manners behavior. This is one of the situations where the Overton window shifting makes us better as a species instead of worse.
by hombre_fatal | 2025-06-17 12:15:49+00:00
By one-shot in my original post, I mean that it comes up with a decent, working implementation that I can then refine.

As opposed to getting there through incremental revisions where I must dictate the directions the LLM takes -- I don't necessary know the directions it should take because I might be agnostic about it.

I find success in breaking the problem down into tokenize and parse just like I do when writing parsers myself.

tokenize(string) -> Token[] parse(Token[]) -> Node[]

And definitely get it to generate tests every step of the way. The insane part is when the LLM can run tests itself and can iterate on code until all tests pass.

Or you extend it with a feature just by writing some failing tests and it does the rest.
by voidmain0001 | 2025-06-17 12:15:56+00:00
Uh, Yes Hello. My technique is to send an initial 'hello' message when I need to get a quick response or when I don't frequently communicate with the other party. After sending the 'hello' message I immediately plough on by sending my next message(s) which are probably questions or wants. With so many people exhibiting ADD symptoms, myself included, a series of notifications on their device encourages them to respond to me. The cat's out of the bag now for why I do this.

I also like to inject civility and cordiality into messaging because I find it's treated with barbarism by some that send a message like a stone through a window.
by cwoolfe | 2025-06-17 12:15:58+00:00
I have found AI generated code to be overly verbose and complex. It usually generates 100 lines and I take a few of them and adapt them to what I want. The best cases I've found for using it are asking specific technical questions, helping me learn a new code language, having it generate ideas on how to solve a problem for brainstorming. It also does well with bounded algorithmic problems that are well specified i.e. write a function that takes inputs and produces outputs according to xyz. I've found it's usually sorely lacking in domain knowledge (i.e. it is not an expert on the iOS SDK APIs, not an expert in my industry, etc.)
by Bender | 2025-06-17 12:16:30+00:00
Similar thing in the US. I was in a company that merged with a company in Texas and several of the executives would use the F-word in every other sentence. HR asked if we were offended in California and I said that I personally don't care but would be nice if they would stop doing this on customer calls customers that pay millions of dollars per quarter and are professionals. Our new CEO showed up late to a meeting with a big customer wearing his biker outfit and he too swore a lot. In the end we lost a lot of customers from this. The CEO did not care, he was a Chicago mobster and expected everyone to kiss his butt.
by nkrisc | 2025-06-17 12:17:08+00:00
> They probably need handholding to go through the issue and aren't good at putting into words explicitly what their issue is.

I expect that from students and children, sure. But professionals?

> Especially nontechnical and nonprogrammer people have problems around structuring and breaking down an issue into explicit parts, with a clearly formulated goal and required inputs and expected outputs etc.

Ah, they were failed by their school system. I remember being taught to think this way in my math and writing classes as a child.
by Propelloni | 2025-06-17 12:18:01+00:00
I agree it is a non-issue. But the non-issue is a social one and thus the solution is not technology but giving feedback. A simple "Hi Greg, I noticed you opened our conversation with salutations and only send the salient topic after I replied. In the future, please send me the topic in the first message, too. I won't be offended. Thank you. Bob" usually suffices.
by chii | 2025-06-17 12:18:12+00:00
the grammar of a programming language is just as well defined. And the defined-ness of the "game" isn't required for my argument.

Your concept of thinking is the classic retoric - as soon as some "ai" manages to achieve something which previously wasn't capable, it's no longer AI and is just xyz process. It happened with chess engines, with alphago, and with LLMs. The implication being that human "thinking" is somehow unique and only the AI that replicate it can be considered to have "thinking".
by strogonoff | 2025-06-17 12:18:15+00:00
It is not even about YouTube data rates but about display media limitations. There is not going to be any sort of realistic scene data going over the wire just because of that. 99% of it has to be discarded because it cannot be displayed. It cannot be discarded automatically, because what should be discarded is a creative decision. Even if you could compress 5+ gigabit per second into 20 megabit per second losslessly, it is a pure waste of CPU.

Also, noise is desirable. Even if you magically can discern on the fly at 30 or 60 fps, and at 5 gigabit/second, what is noise and what is fine details and texture in a real scene, which is technically impossible (remember, it is a creative task because you cannot automatically determine even neutral grey), eliminating noise would result in a fake-ish washed look.