MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by addaon | 2025-06-11 15:33:35+00:00
> At a certain point you won’t have to read and understand every line of code it writes, you can trust that a “module” you ask it to build works exactly like you’d think it would, with a clearly defined interface to the rest of your handwritten code.

"A certain point" is bearing a lot of load in this sentence... you're speculating about super-human capabilities (given that even human code can't be trusted, and we have code review processes, and other processes, to partially mitigate that risk). My impression was that the post you were replying to was discussing the current state of the art, not some dimly-sensed future.
by username223 | 2025-06-11 15:33:35+00:00
> Putting "exact phrases" in quotes no longer seems to work. Then they added insult to injury by forcing you to +mandate a term otherwise they might just ignore it. Now that no longer works either.

I don't understand why they got rid of these escape hatches. Sometimes I want the "top" pages containing precisely the text I enter -- no stemming, synonyms, etc. Maybe it shouldn't be the default, but why make it impossible?

In my ideal search world, there would also be an option to eliminate any page with a display ad or affiliate link. Sometimes I only want the pages that aren't trying to make money off of me.
by disgruntledphd2 | 2025-06-11 15:34:08+00:00
If there hadn't been such transfer pricing shenanigans, then the laws would have been written on profit. Because there's little to no profit shown in many entities in the EU, the laws were written on revenue.

More generally, the whole point of getting absurdly large (and such to be covered by DMA etc) is precisely to extract more monopoly profits.

GDPR is different, in that one can easily imagine a low margin company getting hurt by this, but in that case they should invest in compliance, rather like these (mostly US) companies do for US laws.
by Groxx | 2025-06-11 15:34:14+00:00
Yeah, honestly I still like some things about it better than other OSes. And the web/native fusion was much better than anything similar that iOS or Android have tried (though not perfect either).

Though I am very unhappy to see that its bounce-and-stretch animation at the end of scrolling is appearing everywhere :/ It was uncomfortable and weird looking then, and it still is now.
by NoTranslationL | 2025-06-11 15:34:24+00:00
What I mean by valid is that, without knowing all the information, skepticism is a good thing. Too many companies take a mile when you give an inch and take advantage of ambiguity.

The SDK simply doesn’t exist as a product any more and so doesn’t make sense to keep on our website as an offering. So I’m glad you brought that to my attention.

If there are any specifics about the privacy of Reflect you’d like me to elucidate, I’m happy to do that.
by addaon | 2025-06-11 15:35:14+00:00
> if you work on a team most code you see isn’t yours.. ai code review is really no different than reviewing a pr… except you can edit the output easier and maybe get the author to fix it immediately

And you can't ask "why" about a decision you don't understand (or at least, not with the expectation that the answer holds any particular causal relationship with the actual reason)... so it's like reviewing a PR with no trust possible, no opportunity to learn or to teach, and no possibility for insight that will lead to a better code base in the future. So, the exact opposite of reviewing a PR.
by raxxorraxor | 2025-06-11 15:35:20+00:00
It is just that I expect applications to behave well. I am not a fan of mobile OS because they have a bad security model in my opinion. It sets wrong incentives with trying to mitigate badly behaving apps. That other forms of software environments are possible is empirically proved but another topic.

If an app does everything it "legally" could, it would have become malware long before. The principle of that argument is quite similar to that of poor mobile ecosystems we sadly are subjected to. Of course other factors were as important to create these "security" models.

I also think that this plainly isn't or wasn't legal in any jurisdiction because Twitter lacked informed consent if this particular case ever got in front of a judge.

That Twitter isn't the only guilty party is true, like we know from the article.
by ookdatnog | 2025-06-11 15:35:36+00:00
I don't think it's simply a stylistic matter: it seems reasonable to assume that text in books tends to have higher information density, and contains longer and more complicated arguments (when compared to text obtained from social media posts, blogs, shorter articles, etc). If you want models that appear more intelligent, I think you need them to train on this kind of high-quality content.

The fact that these tend to be written in an older writing style is to me incidental. You could rewrite all your college text books in contemporary social media slang and I would still consider them high-quality texts.
by codingdave | 2025-06-11 15:35:42+00:00
While the core point is correct, and I am not arguing against it in the slightest... the concept of "secure-by-default" seems implausible because different systems have different requirements for what needs to be secure in the first place. I'm sure you could put in a scan that gives a warning that tells people if there is exposed PII, but beyond that basic level, how would a tool know the intent of any data access?

The goalpost should probably be set closer to automated communication of what data is accessible to what users and roles, which lets the users decide whether or not the observable results of a security scan do or do not match their intent.
by charcircuit | 2025-06-11 15:35:44+00:00
>Should you have the ability to run what you want on your phone

Sure, but that doesn't require root to do. The OS can expose capabilities that apps want instead of requiring security to be entirely bypassed with root.

>and copy the data from the app that you installed, after accepting the risks?

No, because that violates Android's security model. If an app wants to have a authentication token live on a single device then being able to copy it violates that and can result in multiple different devices sharing the same token.

>Google/Main vendors is making it less and less possible

It's app developers doing this.
by roywashere | 2025-06-11 15:35:56+00:00
It’s a balance. I guess they needed to target low end because they were 4 years too late. If they did this around the time of Android 1.5 or even 4, those phones were not so expensive and they could have targeted that or similar hardware.

I guess around 2012 I bought a Firefox OS phone from a Spanish company for I believe 150 euros, which was quite reasonable. FirefoxOS was unusable though. Plus it lacked WhatsApp so I could not use it as a daily driver. In 2025 I would also need to have a banking app on mobile so it’s impossible to use an “alternative” phone OS for me
by riskable | 2025-06-11 15:36:09+00:00
Let me rephrase that: The machines are coming for bullshit jobs. They're so good at generating bullshit that anyone who generates bullshit for a living needs to be worried.

Only problem is that some huge percentage of white collar work is bullshit. It's no secret. We all know it and accept it.

How many of us have spent weeks or months (or years!) of our lives generating documents that end up going into a black hole (e.g. Sharepoint), never to be read by anyone ever? How many of us have generated presentations that only exist to explain to management what they're supposed to already know? How many of us put together spreadsheets, dashboards, or similar in order to visualize data that doesn't need to be visualized?

We spend our days reading and writing emails that ultimately end up being inconsequential. We waste endless amounts of our time in meetings. Days and weeks and months go by where we "did stuff" that ultimately didn't end up being practical for any purpose.

The people that actually get things done are paid the least and looked down upon. Yet they're the ones that are most likely to survive with their jobs after this "AI revolution."
by Herring | 2025-06-11 15:36:10+00:00
Lots of people don't care about "progress" in an absolute sense, eg longer healthier lifespans for all. They only care about it in a relative sense, eg if cop violence against minorities goes down, they feel anxiety and resentment. They really really want to be the biggest fish in the little pond. That's how a caste system works, it "makes a captive of everyone within it". Equality feels like a demotion [1].

That's why we have a whole thing about immigration going on. It's the one issue that the president is not underwater on right now [2]. You can't get much of a labor movement like this.

[1] https://www.texasobserver.org/white-people-rural-arkansas-re...

[2] https://www.natesilver.net/p/trump-approval-ratings-nate-sil...
by dwoodsemn | 2025-06-11 15:36:33+00:00
RPA has worked out a lot of the plumbing for orchestration such as data-sharing, administrative control, access control, integration, reporting, and compliance. It seems a shorter trip to put agents inside RPA than to replace RPA with agents. This observation mostly applies to lots of orchestration at scale in an enteprise. How would vertical AI be monitored, controlled, and managed at scale without building the same sort of stuff that RPA has created?
by NoTranslationL | 2025-06-11 15:36:41+00:00
Reflect started as a passion project for myself and my partner with no intention to make a product out of it. By the time we thought to do so, we’d already put so much into just iOS that doing an Android version as well was its own huge project.

We still plan to implement Android, we have a roadmap where we track this: https://changemap.co/ntl/reflect/task/9239-android-version-o...
by footy | 2025-06-11 15:37:00+00:00
you don't even need to actually seek an abortion, and it's been going on for years. There are many reports, e.g. in the BBC[1], this personal story on CNN [2], this woman who had a miscarriage while using drugs and got four years [3], this PBS article about how the risk of miscarriage being criminalized is increasing [4]... etc.

As a person outside the United States, America appears to me like a very dangerous place to be pregnant in, and what's even wilder is that people (men?) appear largely unaware of it. Regardless of whether you think it's right to convict an addict for a miscarriage or to convict a woman for seeking an abortion or for having a spontaneous one, these are all examples of the environment in which having menstrual data fall into the wrong hands could bring about significant harm. Your proposed defence reads wildly naive and woefully inadequate to me given all this.

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59214544 [2] https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/23/health/south-carolina-abortio... [3] https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/577876-okl... [4] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/the-increasing-risk-of-cri...
by argomo | 2025-06-11 15:37:34+00:00
Not just location, but all privacy sensitive API's. The OS should have built in support for segregating location, contacts, calendars, storage, etc. (GrapheneOS does this quite well with storage scopes). As part of this segregation you should be able to redirect the API to a custom implementation.

Thus, my transit app would have access to my real location while Amazon thinks I'm still at home and Pokemon Go thinks I'm on an around-the-works trip to collect location specific items.
by sgent | 2025-06-11 15:37:41+00:00
The case is LTL LED LLC v. Google LLC (D. Minn.); see pp. 104 of this PDF onwards for the amended complaint. The lawsuit was filed in March in Minnesota trial court, but was just removed to federal court. The plaintiffs are the business and four of its officers, all of whom were also mentioned by name in some Google AI Overviews (assuming the exhibits attached to the Complaint are correct).

The Complaint claims that none of the sites linked to by the report actually reported that Wolf River had ever faced a Minnesota AG lawsuit, or was guilty of the other misconduct. According to the Complaint,

Google cited numerous sources in support of its false assertions; however, none of the referenced materials in fact contained the information Google claimed they did.

The Complaint also alleges specific lost business:
by Shalomboy | 2025-06-11 15:38:22+00:00
> The problem with targeting high end first is sales / production risk. A phone based on a new OS is a risky purchase, and it's hard to convince someone to spend $500 on a high end phone without much software available. A $100 low end phone without much software available is an easier sale.

I mean, skate to where the puck is going, right? It sounds like Firefox OS started development as mobile component prices started to fall in price dramatically. By the time B2G was ready to go to market, the baseline for hardware would be dramatically higher than when they started.
by tedsanders | 2025-06-11 15:38:31+00:00
o3 pro is based on o3 and its style and outputs will be quite similar to o3.

As an analogy, think of it like this:

o3-low ~ Ford Mustang with the accelerator gently pressed

o3-medium ~ Ford Mustang with the accelerator pressed

o3-high ~ Ford Mustang with the accelerator heavily pressed

o3 pro ~ Ford Mustang GT

Even though a Mustang GT is a different car than a Mustang, you don’t give it a totally different name (eg Palomino). The similarity in name signals it has a lot of the same characteristics but a souped up engine. Same for o3 pro.

Fun fact: before GPT-4, we had a unified naming scheme for models that went {modality}-{size}-{version}, which resulted in names like text-davinci-002. We considered launching GPT-4 as something like text-earhart-001, but since everyone was calling it GPT-4 anyway, we abandoned that system to use the name GPT-4 that everyone had already latched onto. Kind of funny how our original unified naming scheme made room for 999 versions, but we didn't make it past 3.

Edit: When I say the Mustang GT is a different car than a Mustang - I mean it literally. If you bought a Mustang GT and someone delivered a Mustang with a different trim, you wouldn't say "great, this is just what I ordered, with the same features/behavior/value." That we call it a different trim is a linguistic choice to signal to consumers that it's very similar, and built on the same production line, but comes with a different engine or different features. Similar to o3 pro.
by diggan | 2025-06-11 15:38:45+00:00
> type in a magic phrase to get it to write code that follows basic professional practice

The thing is, there is no agreed upon "basic professional practice" that could be encoded. Ask 10 programmers what "basic professional practice" is and you're gonna get 10 different answers.

For me, simplicity, avoiding over-engineering and being deliberately slow are the best ways to program. But lots of people disagree with this, especially the last part, so why have a different model for every preference, when you can use system prompts to have one model that could follow all of it?
by Groxx | 2025-06-11 15:39:37+00:00
There's also fuzzy datatype mapping in general, where they're like 90%+ identical but the remaining fields need minor special handling.

Building a generator capable of handling all variations you might need is extremely hard[1], and it still won't be good enough. An LLM will both get it almost perfect almost every time, and likely reuses your existing utility funcs. It can save you from typing out hundreds of lines, and it's pretty easy to verify and fix the things it got wrong. It's the exact sort of slightly-custom-pattern-detecting-and-following that they're good at.

1: Probably impossible, for practical purposes. It almost certainly makes an API larger than the Moon, which you won't be able to fully know or quickly figure out what you need to use due to the sheer size.
by NoTranslationL | 2025-06-11 15:40:05+00:00
Yeah, there is no support for “multi-dimensional” metrics. So systolic and diastolic would each have to be their own metric. Food tracking in Reflect could use some work, but if you link with Apple Health, Reflect can pull data from Cronometer or MyFitnessPal for example.

Any particular place you thought the premium was very aggressive? I’m open to changing that, it’s not the kind of feedback we normally get. Thanks for saying so
by rvz | 2025-06-11 15:40:14+00:00
"cRYptO Has nO usE cASe"

- Stripe using stablecoins and acquiring crypto companies [0] to add stablecoins into their products.

- PayPal using stablecoins and more rails as well. [1]

- Circle (CRCL) (the one that issues it's USDC stablecoin) IPOs and lists on the NYSE [2]

Another crypto company that made it to IPO and not only its IPO was oversubscribed but it immediately 2x'ed from its IPO price in less than 3 days.

[0] https://stripe.com/gb/newsroom/news/stripe-completes-bridge-...

[1] https://uk.investing.com/news/company-news/paypal-plans-to-e...

[2] https://www.investopedia.com/circle-internet-group-stock-rem...
by kenrick95 | 2025-06-11 15:40:18+00:00
Thank you for trying them and providing such a detailed feedback!

- On Trip Sharing, hmm that seems weird. While I understand that there's no 'loading' indicator yet, one should be able to do so if one is the 'owner' of the trip

- Expense split: because that feature isn't there yet

- Thanks I'll consider it

- The map I chose on MapTiler is OpenStreetMap, but I limit it to Point-of-interest only, maybe I need to expand it to match more kind of objects

- Aha, for that case, I find that it's so troublesome that I have to split the activity into two different elements for display in the timetable, so I disabled the case for now. Thanks for a great use case!

- Hmm strange, the activites should reflect live. Maybe the 'back-end' is a bit slow

Anyway, the 'back-end' is InstantDB ( https://www.instantdb.com ) and it's opening a WebSocket connection, that's why you don't see network calls when doing operations

P.S. I don't think I'll monetise this ever. If someone forks it and monetise it, as long as it doesn't affect me, I think I'm fine with it. If I run out of my 'free usage' quota, I'll probably limit the users to only handful of people
by gertrunde | 2025-06-11 15:40:28+00:00
For some reason this reminds me of :

https://www.thefenlandblackoakproject.co.uk/our-story

In particular - the section on drying - air drying would have been too rapid/harmful to the wood - so they put it into a purpose-built dehumidifying kiln for 9 months.

(It was briefly discussed here a few years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36912861 )
by freejazz | 2025-06-11 15:40:46+00:00
> Obviously nobody's being investigated for routine miscarriages.

Sorry, how does a third party know the miscarriage was "routine?" What is a non-routine miscarriage? Why would it be criminal, it's still a miscarriage? What's the suspicion?

The article you refer to, the investigation happened, not because there was a miscarriage, but because a body was seen being dumped...

Maybe it was the mistake of the other poster for sharing that link, but I do not see what it has to do with your point at all. Either miscarriages are illegal or not... you said they should be investigated when they are "mysterious circumstances" and I am repeatedly asking you to explain when a miscarriage is a mysterious circumstance? Even more so, when is it such that it has any relevancy to this discussion about the state tracking a woman's pregnancy through digital data.

>Oh, check out the links that started this discussion. tldr- A woman was seen disposing of a baby's body in a dumpster, prompting an investigation. She was ultimately cleared as it was indeed a miscarriage.

What about all the other incidents in the other article besides the one you decided to talk about because you are not willing to state whether or not you think a miscarriage is a "mysterious circumstance?" Which seems like a very straightforward question and I do not understand your unwillingness to provide a response when your previous posts make it very unclear as to whether or not you think a miscarriage is a normal occurrence.
Ask HN: How do you compose your long LLM prompts?
by emgeee | 2025-06-11 15:40:49+00:00
Usually, I just write mine directly in the tool I'm using (chatGPT, claude, etc). However, I've found this workflow lacking when writing a long prompt that describes a product/engineer spec as the built-in text boxes are small and I often hit "enter" before I'm ready.

I've tried using a separate text editor or google docs sheet to compose these long prompts which works but still feels clunky and inefficient.

I'm curious to hear what people's workflows look like.
by bitpush | 2025-06-11 15:40:59+00:00
Short answer - nobody knows.

ChatGPT daily active users is 122.58 million, while Google Search's daily active users is known, but lets conservatively assume it is 2 billion.

You know the difference between 122.58 million and 2billion? About 2 billion. That is to say, Google Search is at a different league than ChatGPT.

This is before you consider how widely unprofitable ChatGPT is in its current form. There's no way they can scale using $20/mo (or $200/mo plans). Nobody in India is going to pay $$ to search for things.

My guess it ChatGPT will become mainstream like Netflix, where everybody knows its name but people will subscribe when they need to, and then cancel.
by bytehamster | 2025-06-11 15:41:10+00:00
Many modern perfect hash functions are super close to the space lower bound, often having just between 3% and 50% overhead. So your claim that the space consumption "twice as low" is information theoretically impossible. With gperf, the space consumption is in the machine code instead of a data structure, but it's definitely not "for free". In fact, I'm pretty sure that the size of the machine code generated by gperf is very far from optimal. The only exception are tiny input sets with just a couple of hundred keys, where gperf probably wins due to lower constant overheads.
by unshavedyak | 2025-06-11 15:41:15+00:00
> I just don't like reading other people's code lol.

I agree entirely and generally avoided LLMs because they couldn't be trusted. However a few days ago i said screw it and purchased Claude Max just to try and learn how i can use LLMs to my advantage.

So far i avoid it for things where they're vague, complex, etc. The effort i have to go through to explain it exceeds my own in writing it.

However for a bunch of things that are small, stupid, wastes of time - i find it has been very helpful. Old projects that need to migrate API versions, helper tools i've wanted but have been too lazy to write, etc. Low risk things that i'm too tired to do at the end of the day.

I have also found it a nice way to get movement on projects where i'm too tired to progress on after work. Eg mostly decision fatigue, but blank spaces seem to be the most difficult for me when i'm already tired. Planning through the work with the LLM has been a pretty interesting way to work around my mental blocks, even if i don't let it do the work.

This planning model is something i had already done with other LLMs, but Claude Code specifically has helped a lot in making it easier to just talk about my code, rather than having to supply details to the LLM/etc.

It's been far from perfect of course, but i'm using this mostly to learn the bounds and try to find ways to have it be useful. Tricks and tools especially, eg for Claude adding the right "memory" adjustments to my preferred style, behaviors (testing, formatting, etc) has helped a lot.

I'm a skeptic here, but so far i've been quite happy. Though i'm mostly going through low level fruit atm, i'm curious if 20 days from now i'll still want to renew the $100/m subscription.
by giraffe_lady | 2025-06-11 15:41:34+00:00
A great deal more like for example a private cause of action bounty program and a clear & established commitment to using technological surveillance to pursue and punish people who have had abortions?

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

https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/crime/te...