MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by toomuchtodo | 2025-06-16 13:51:21+00:00
How hard is it to permanently sabotage their supply pipelines from Russia if the carrot doesn't work? Serious question. Not sanctioning it, just observing there are multiple paths to the desired outcome.

https://energyandcleanair.org/publication/the-last-mile-phas...

> Yet in 2024, Hungary and Slovakia remained 87% dependent on Russian crude transported through a single pipeline—the Druzhba, which transits a war zone and experienced two significant outages in 12 months. As CREA and CSD’s report demonstrates, no technical or infrastructural barriers prevent these countries from breaking free of their reliance on Russian crude. The Adria pipeline remains underutilised. What’s missing is political will.

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

https://www.gem.wiki/Druzhba_Oil_Pipeline
by wffurr | 2025-06-16 13:51:21+00:00
The 13th amendment specifically allows slavery of prisoners.

Edit: I don’t mean to imply the author isn’t paid fairly by Turso. A few posts down, the CEO of Turso asserts that they do pay fairly. The OP in this thread might reasonably wonder about this because several states do in fact use prisoners as unpaid slave labor.
by simonw | 2025-06-16 13:51:57+00:00
Thanks, I was wrong to say seatbelt had been deprecated, it's just sandbox-exec

This stuff is so frustrating though! If your sandboxing mechanism requires you to be "an expert in macOS internals" it's not going to get used often, and the people who DO use it are liable to make mistakes.

Clear documentation and a great developer experience are, in my opinion, essential for sandboxing mechanisms - and most of them don't have that.
by southernplaces7 | 2025-06-16 13:52:33+00:00
Really? Just America? I know of no country, having lived in more than a couple of them, where people don't do what they can to make money or increase the value of what they have for personal economic benefit.

Americans are no less or more human than anyone else, and this idiotic posturing about some inherent difference that makes one group of people or country somehow stupider, more wicked or more avaricious than others is a bad habit no matter what direction it flows in or who its pointed at..
by t-sato | 2025-06-16 13:52:42+00:00
recently, as opportunities to utilize LLM in services have increased, traditional infrastructure metrics have become insufficient for measuring service quality. We, as SREs, need to update our approach. In this article, we will introduce all the procedures ranging from selecting essential metrics for evaluating the reliability of LLM services to specific measurement and evaluation methods. We will also include a demo using the DeepEval library.
by ubermonkey | 2025-06-16 13:53:26+00:00
The Cristal is the front-runner in my brain for "most iconic consumer product of the 20th century."

That said, it's weird how they've completely vanished from my personal landscape. The opaque white Biros are more common now. But I think I'll go seek out a Cristal later today, just for nostalgia's sake.
by Nasrudith | 2025-06-16 13:54:37+00:00
It seemed to me to always have been a goalpost relocation. The talking point wasn't even a fringe view beforehand and if anything would be taken as an obvious diversion from those who are big-oil aligned. Instead it was first seen when electrification of transit was achieved by capitalism.

The watermelons simply couldn't accept that, it went against their article of faith that capitalism is responsible for all of the world's problems and could not provide any solutions. IF there is one thing that makes them the most angry it is solving problems without going to their preferred political alignment. So they all downloaded their latest talking points and reprogrammed themselves and declared that electric car's only purpose is to save the auto industry in spite of 48% of global transport carbon emissions coming from cars and vans.
by Swizec | 2025-06-16 13:55:13+00:00
The difference is that a therapist works with you for years, takes notes, and builds an actual working model of your psyche. They may start with generics but build towards an actual understanding. A lot like an engineer building a domain model of the business they’re working in.

A horoscope or personality test can’t do that because they’re not even personalized. They explicitly have to fit the thousands of people reading that same text.

ChatGPT (or any LLM) might eventually be able to do this. But from what I’ve seen it isn’t there yet.
by NetRunnerSu | 2025-06-16 13:55:44+00:00
Reminds me of this rabbit hole I went down recently. A short story about digital consciousness where death is literally a "prediction failure." The system's attempt to handle the end of biological input is terrifying.

It's framed as a leaked document from the future. Worth a read if you're into this kind of existential sci-fi.

https://dmf-archive.github.io/docs/story/facing-the-abyss/
by ekr____ | 2025-06-16 13:56:05+00:00
FWIW, these aren't actually in TLS 1.0.

Extensions (including SNI) are in later spec but introduces in RFC 3546 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3546). Session tickets are in RFC 4507.

What TLS 1.0 did was to leave the door open for extensions by allowing the ClientHello to be longer than what was specified. See https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2246.html#section-7.4.1.2 (scroll to "Forward Compatibility Note")
by Workaccount2 | 2025-06-16 13:56:05+00:00
I think a huge reason why LLMs are so far ahead in programming is because programming exists entirely in a known and totally severed digital environment outside our own. To become a master programmer all you need is a laptop and an internet connection. The nature of it existing entirely in a parallel digital universe just lends itself perfectly to training.

All of that is to say that I don't think the classic engineering fields have some kind of knowledge or intuition that is truly inaccessible to LLMs, I just think that it is in a form that is too difficult right now to train on. However if you could train a model on them, I strongly suspect they would get to the same level they are at today with software.
by tomn | 2025-06-16 13:56:06+00:00
looking around a bit, it's used as an example in the documentation:

https://github.com/haiku/haiku/blob/7d07c4bc739dbf90159a5c02...

This is actually a great reason to keep it around; it's as simple as possible, and nothing uses it so it's easy to find the relevant bits of code.
by mr_toad | 2025-06-16 13:56:10+00:00
In England all the Roman artefacts from 1500 years ago are ruins, while many from only ~500 years later, like the Tower of London are well preserved. Just a few centuries or so of raiding and depredations seperate the two periods of English history.

In some cases Roman architecture was literally dismantled to make something new - the cathedral at St Albans is mostly made from stone taken from Roman buildings.

Things can easily endure that long if well protected, but it’s a long time if they are allowed to fall into ruin (or destroyed).
by TeMPOraL | 2025-06-16 13:56:10+00:00
You never bit on your pen? Especially back in the school days?

Ballpoint pens are the OG stress relief / concentration / "fidget spinner" toys. Except the BIC ones, those would easily shatter; suddenly finding your mouth to be full of sharp, orange or translucent shards of plastic, is the opposite of calm and focus.
by ben_w | 2025-06-16 13:56:30+00:00
> When I read the Gemma 3 paper (https://arxiv.org/html/2503.19786v1) and saw an entire section dedicated to measuring and reducing the memorization rate I was annoyed. How does this benefit end users at all?

It benefits users because memorisation is a waste of parameters that would be more useful if they were instead learning rules and generalisations.

For short snippets, common idioms and quotations that people recognise, exact quotes can be worth memorising; but the longer the quotations get, the less often it is important to be word-for-word exact — even for just a few paragraphs, I think most people only ever do oaths, anthems, songs they really like, and possibly a few hobbies.

If you want an exact quote, use (or tell the AI to use) a search engine.
by phendrenad2 | 2025-06-16 13:57:42+00:00
RISC-V has become very entrenched in the embedded space. We're probably going to see an ARM/RISC-V duopoly in embedded, long-term. I can see it becoming somewhat popular in the server/AI space also. But, really I don't see a future for RISC-V on desktop/mobile. Nobody can really compete with Apple/Samsung/Google, and smaller players can't really afford to be even slightly incompatible. Sure, we get more powerful RISC-V SBCs every year, but SBCs have always been for people who want to do embedded with style, or hobbyists. And sure, we get things like the Framework/Deepcomputing laptop mainboard, but again, that's for hobbyists.
by zamadatix | 2025-06-16 13:57:45+00:00
It's progressive because you're progressing the permissions and features the website can access beyond those of a normal page. It has nothing to do with progressing the web to 90s style app installation and the update mechanism is nothing like that either, it functions as a locally cached webpage not as something you need an SCCM push to load a new binary or something. PWAs do not have to be accessed through desktop icons either - just launch them through the browser's interface as you seem to prefer. If you've ever seen a machine with a default Chrome install then it had about a half dozen PWAs installed without any such desktop shortcuts.

The best uses I've gotten out of PWAs are on my Linux machine where there either isn't a native app or I wouldn't trust installing one from the manufacturer if there was. At the same time I don't want random websites to have access to the permissions these apps would need so I load the PWA version of the website and now I've got the ideal island of something served as a website but with the elevated permissions it needs.
by malfist | 2025-06-16 13:57:51+00:00
Sure, you absolutely can do it. But material science quickly becomes a major limit.

For something 15% efficient like a high quality PV cell, for every 100 watts you want to be usable on the receiving side, the receiver has to bleed off 566 watts of heat. And that's 566 watts of waste heat that is highly concentrated.

Consider a single residental power circuit. 12A maximum, 120v, that's 1440 watts at delivery. For PV power delivery via laser, that PV would need to dissipate 8 kilowatts of waste heat. One a very small surface
by CyberDildonics | 2025-06-16 13:58:17+00:00
being done a disservice by continuing to battle a language that hates you

I think you should learn basic modern C++ before making judgements like this.

While you are upset about it the rest of the world is just using basic data structures, looping through them, never dealing with garbage collection and enjoying fast and light software that can run on any hardware.

A lot of people could get by with $100 computers if all software was written like sumatraPDF.
by rfrey | 2025-06-16 13:58:50+00:00
I contend that you are slipping in the words "respectful" and "professional" and assuming the benefit of their positive connotations without an argument that simply omitting the occasional well-placed curse is indeed "professional".

I think so-called "professional" speech - which I'd call bland and often ineffective speech - is professional in the same way that a suit and tie is professional. It's a uniform to ensure nobody stands out, and the corporation can absorb everybody's personality, like flour incorporated into bread dough. White bread, no seeds.
by troelsSteegin | 2025-06-16 13:59:05+00:00
I enjoyed a fast read of this and will re-read it. Following from the idea of making system-scoped information available to individual agents, I think a general model needs to include some sense of information processing capacity of agents - like an attention or analysis budget. That includes ability to recognize higher order signal as first order relevant. Information asymmetries are not so much about information but interpretation.
by eddieroger | 2025-06-16 14:00:25+00:00
From your link:

> The defendant, Preston Thorpe, appeals his conviction for possession of a controlled drug with intent to sell

He may have done other things, but his conviction was for possession with intent, and that seems to be why he's locked up. It doesn't make anything else he's done acceptable, but in America he's innocent until proven guilty, and it doesn't seem he was found guilty of assault.
by salomon812 | 2025-06-16 14:01:55+00:00
I know this puzzle as "Star Battle" where I play it here: https://www.puzzle-star-battle.com where my favorite difficulty for a nice medium difficulty is "Normal 10x10 2 stars"

The LinkedIn Queens seems to be a much easier version of this puzzle.

You can see the Cracking the Cryptic folks (of Miracle Sudoku fame) take on the puzzle here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KGraaDXP_0
by vidarh | 2025-06-16 14:01:59+00:00
"LinkedIn Queens" is different from the classic n-queens problem, in that the queens do not threaten each other diagonally other than immediately adjacent, and secondly each board is split into not just rows and columns, but also colors and only 1 queen can be placed on each row, column, and color.

And these colored regions can be of any size.
by TeMPOraL | 2025-06-16 14:02:02+00:00
> We will be fine.

No, we won't. Other people might be.

The new positions and jobs are for the new people. For those automated away half-way through their careers, there's at best competing for entry-level salaries with a much younger cohort freshly out of school.

It's something I see people consistently missing in the whole labor automation discussion space. Luddites didn't rise up because they hated the future either. They rose up because contemporary developments threatened to throw them specifically, and their families and children, into poverty, starvation and death.

Long-term social impact != immediate-term personal impact.
by immibis | 2025-06-16 14:02:21+00:00
Another reason Java applets ultimately failed was the never-ending stream of sandbox escapes, which is inherent to their design of running trusted and untrusted code in the same VM and trying to keep track of which is which. It turns out it's much more straightforward to sandbox the whole VM.

A representative vulnerability is "trusted method chaining". You (the attacker) construct a chain of standard library objects that call each other in unexpected ways. You can make use of the fact that you can subclass a standard library class and implement a standard library interface, in order to implement the interface methods with the base class's implementations, to construct more unusual pathways. Then you get some standard library entry point to call the first method in the chain. Since your code doesn't appear on the call stack at any point (it's just the standard library calling the standard library) whatever is at the bottom of the call stack, at the end of the chain, infers a trusted context and can access files or whatever. Of course, finding a method chain that's possible to construct and does something malicious is non-trivial.
by XorNot | 2025-06-16 14:02:22+00:00
"the market can remain irrational longer then you can remain solvent" applies in other circumstances too.

But the wider point is generally that just because something is less effective doesn't make it useless, and just because something is effective doesn't make it dominating.

If an enemy has an artillery advantage, then shelling obvious decoys is still taking decoys off the field, which you now need to replace. But worse, their existence is giving away the fact you're active in the area, and their placement is giving away your operational range - i.e. how far can a person move on foot over rough terrain? How far in a vehicle? etc. What's the effective range of their normal infantry weapons - if you know there's a decoy then the trap has a specific radius if it is a trap.

All on the bet that they will in fact run out of shells - or in the case of drones, they won't even run out since a drone can much more easily be re-targeted.
by potatolicious | 2025-06-16 14:02:22+00:00
Not to mention even just this article exposed a just-for-fun API that ended up having a negative effect and had to be removed:

`isUserAGoat` ended up allowing any caller to determine if a specific app is installed on the system, which is a privacy violation and allows fingerprinting against the user's consent.

I get the desire to make the job more fun than just implementing a spec, but many of the things we work on are very important and very complex, with oodles of real-world consequences. That unfortunately means everything we do has to be well-considered and not off-the-cuff.
by AI314159 | 2025-06-16 14:02:33+00:00
Hi again people! I would just like to clarify something if your new to the thread: this is not currently meant to replace actual systems, or to even be something that is used. I didn't really expect this thread to get so popular, or to even take this project seriously. For me, at least, it wasn't a serious project. I might begin turning it into one, and all of you have given me great feedback -- thank you!

However, I, and as you've made it clear, you all as well, think that this project is not ready. It's 0.1.0-alpha.1! I will continue to improve and build upon it, and there are many issues I'll fix. In the meantime, I'll add a thing on the README that says this.
by mspool | 2025-06-16 14:03:14+00:00
This isn't just an issue for software engineers and I don't believe it's an issue just in tech, but is more widespread, although I don't have direct evidence of that. What I do know is that I've been on the job market for 16 months and while I've had many interviews and made it through several rounds for multiple positions, that final offer hasn't come yet. The cynic in me says it's because I'm older, white, male and straight. The optimist in me says someone better got the position. Who knows which is true, certainly not me.
by helloplanets | 2025-06-16 14:03:32+00:00
It would be completely disrespectful to call it Miyazaki's. It's absolutely not. If you sample a Stevie Wonder song, you can't call yourself Stevie Wonder. Everyone knows who Stevie Wonder is, and the same goes for Miyazaki.

The AI generated Ghibli crap definitely makes a point, but not your point imo. The AI generated Ghibli stuff that was trending some time ago was a meme rather than anything anyone would expect to take as actual art. Like people ordering portraits from Fiverr in a specific style.

> Was this meant as a counterpoint to what I said or a corroboration?

The point I was making is that an actually talented artist with an actual story to tell, could make a movie that they would've not been capable of getting out without the help of AI or other modern tools. Which is the opposite of the Disney process. Meaning, modern tools empower solo and indie artists, be it Blender or generative AI.

If a person is not able to tell when something is not visually good they're probably not a talented artist, when we're talking about an inherently visual medium. I don't think tooling changes this. People who are talented in using samples when in comes to music can wade through hundreds of possible options to find the perfect thing to sample, and combine several very short snippets of audio into a whole. Why wouldn't the same apply here?

The disagreement here is: I think you're making a straw man argument, where the example usage of generative AI for art is one where people were making a meme. If someone actually thought they should be taken for a serious artist after generating a Ghibli meme image, I agree that would be mad. Let alone comparable to Miyazaki. That would be comical. Creating meaningful art was not the point of the Ghibli AI slop memes, which makes it a bad example in this context.

I think Vanilla Ice is a good example in that people definitely did not think he was a great artist or made emotionally meaningful music, even at the time. I'm pretty sure his value was in being entertaining and maybe catchy. But we do agree on the fact that it is still possible to make good music using samples, without having to actually play each of the instruments and record them.
by TheGrumpyBrit | 2025-06-16 14:03:52+00:00
You can make the exact same argument about employers paying different rates depending on the country the employee is based in, and for all the same reasons.

Is there a good reason why a developer in Thailand or India should be paid less than their colleague who works on the same team, but is based in the US? Many companies believe so - there's a significant difference in the cost of living between those two employees, and employers believe it is fair to adjust the salary to provide a similar quality of life to both.

Equally, a person incarcerated in New York City doesn't have the same living costs as a person who has to live in New York City, so you could reasonably argue that any "Cost of living premium" that a company offers to NYC based employees doesn't need to apply to a person who doesn't experience those higher costs.
by Arcorann | 2025-06-16 14:04:28+00:00
Having come across the connection from somewhere else entirely, I found it a very curious rabbit hole. I saw recently a website that attempts to summarise the whole thing (not quite complete) [1], with a section on St. Bride's.

Then there's the oral history someone posted on Something Awful some years ago [2] -- from someone who may have accidentally indirectly derailed the entire movement.

[1] https://aristasia.guide [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20230817170434/https://forums.so...
by jxjnskkzxxhx | 2025-06-16 14:04:57+00:00
Suppose for simplicity that every sentence in the book is 50 tokens or shorter.

According to the stated methodology, I could give the LLM sentence 1 and have 42% chance of getting sentence 2 recalled. Then I could give it sentence 2 and have 42% chance of getting sentence 3. Therefore, the LLM contains 42% of the book in some sense.

I disagree this is "not really very much". If a person could do this you would undoubtedly conclude that the person read the book.

In fact the number 42% even understates the severity of the matter. Superficially it makes it sound that the LLM only contains less than half of the book. In reality the process I described applies to 100% of the sentences. Additionally I'm guessing that the 58% times where the 50 tokens arent recalled correctly, the outputted token probably have the same meaning as the correct one.
by ben_w | 2025-06-16 14:05:36+00:00
> I keep waiting for the day when software stops being compared to a human person (a being with agency, free will, consciousness, and human rights of its own) for the purposes of justifying IP law circumvention.

I mean, "agency" is a goal of some AI; "free will" is incoherent*; the word "consciousness" has about 40 different definitions, some of which are so broad they include thermostats and others so narrow that it's provably impossible for anything (including humans) to have it; and "human rights" are a purely legal concept.

> What’s even worse, is that imaginably they train (or would train) the models to specifically not output those things verbatim specifically to thwart attempts to detect the presence of said works in training dataset (which would naturally reveal the model and its output being a derivative work).

Some of the makers certainly do as you say; but also, the more verbatim quotations a model can produce, the more computational effort that model needs to spend to get the far more useful general purpose results.

* I'm not a fan of Aleister Crowley, but I think he was right to say that there's only one thing you can actually do that's truly your own will and not merely you allowing others to influence you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_Will