MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by entrepy123 | 2025-06-10 02:05:32+00:00
Apple is very smart and very focused.

Apple is ruthlessly focused on extracting maximum current and long-term value from its high-end operating system which appeals to creative professionals, software developers, rich people, regular home users, and both the tech savvy and not very tech savvy.

In order to support its operating system experience, Apple has to make hardwarre.

Yes, Apple has a quite large ecosystem, but they do things slowly, intentionally, and by the book.

You know what's really not cool that the other companies all looked the other way on and are too big to fail on? Massive, massive copyright infringement. I suspect that Apple's legal team made the ethical choice to not do that.

Apple knows that models and inference are a race to the bottom, since the pirated content is broadly available, and since the model building is pretty openly published, and since there are several players already, and the hardware is basically commodity.

Apple can still be the glue that offers that platform on which people develop and make use of AI related technology.

The OP's assertion seems to miss that, for local AI, if one wants to spend under $10K or under $20K on an inference setup, or even under $1000 for that matter, (arguably) by far the the simplest and most efficient tokens per watt or tokens per dollar will come from buying Apple machines.

Apple appears to be simultaneously:

- avoiding truly silly levels of hype train buy-in - letting market go where it wants to - supporting that with AI where it make sense for them (on-device for user privacy and easy to use where applicable; connecting users to interfaces to other companies where that makes sense)

To draw an analogy, Apple could make a Kagi/Google, or a GSheets/Excel, but they're not focused on those kind of things. Engineering stuff is expensive. Apple apparently runs a very tight ship.

Honestly, I think AI has little place in an OS where the user is well acquainted with it and in full control. Many may disagree, and that's fine. But maybe Apple is willing to let those people use another operating system?

* Disclaimer, the above are just my thoughts, I do not have any special knowledge.
by throwanem | 2025-06-10 02:06:08+00:00
> What's the difference between a feudal lord and a government again?

I don't know. Do you? My prior interlocutor cited a state in example of this putative lordlet's theoretically plausible capabilities. I see you claim there is no difference in kind and none significant in degree. But you do actually need to make an argument about that. Just saying it won't do.

It's interesting you mention asymmetrical warfare, the fundamental axiom of which as a concept is that the nonstate or nonpeer force has no chance whatsoever through conventional tactics, which are far more reliable and thus invariably used for practical reasons when practicable. (Americans always get this wrong because of Vietnam. The NVA and the VC were not the same force, dammit!)

To cast the conflict in such terms, with the billionaire in place of the "asymmetrical" belligerent, thus makes my point for me in neater, more concise, and no less accurate terms than I myself expected to ever get away with on this website. You have my genuine thanks for that valuable assistance in clarifying my thinking.
by fc417fc802 | 2025-06-10 02:06:18+00:00
> bureaucracy is far more robust than aristocracy, because power held by aristocracy succeeds by lineage where that by bureaucracy does so by role

You are making an awful lot of assumptions there. There are plenty of real world examples where a single party having control over a process produces significantly better results (and plenty of counterexamples where it doesn't, of course). How do you justify the assumption that preparing the next generation of leadership is one or the other of those?

> ... States are not obligated to allow such access,

Sufficient influence can be used to ensure access until it is no longer necessary. After all the government is little more than the biggest thug in the room at the end of the day.

> Which billionaire has one of those?

Which billionaire has been incentivized to pursue such a goal? It's extremely expensive.

Does the Saudi state count given that it's an absolute monarchy?
by foxglacier | 2025-06-10 02:06:51+00:00
It's hard to blame a TikTok trend for this when it apparently killed only one person and kids have been huffing chemicals since forever. In my day, it was whipped cream. There'll be a warning on the can like "intentional misuse by deliberately inhaling the contents can be fatal." but I suppose you could be forgiven for thinking it's just harmless air.
by tsumnia | 2025-06-10 02:07:39+00:00
Sounds like me 20 years ago learning Java

It's new tech. We're all "giraffes on roller skates" whenever we start something new. Find out where you can use in your life and use it. Where you can't or don't want to, don't. Try to not get deterred by analysis paralysis when there's something that doesn't make sense. In time, you'll get it.
by mrcwinn | 2025-06-10 02:08:09+00:00
My bet is the new iPadOS does nothing to quiet the gripes about the iPad. Window management isn’t the main issue. The main issue is that the iPad doesn’t do enough of what a Mac does when you need it, and so you bring your laptop just in case.

Oh and the Magic Keyboard? Great. Now my thin 13” iPad Pro feels literally as heavy as a MacBook Pro.

Someone tell me what is the point?
by YossarianFrPrez | 2025-06-10 02:08:23+00:00
Ah, interesting. So what (I think) you are saying is that if there is enough of the right type of philanthropic, in-kind donation more people will be able to donate in the future. I will admit the possibility that there may be a clever way of of doing in-kind donations that isn't wide-spread. Sort of akin to ranked-choice-voting but for donor matching.
by simoncion | 2025-06-10 02:10:32+00:00
> ...and letting go of that urge.

What urge? The urge to understand what the software you're about to build upon is doing? If so, uh... no. No thanks.

I've seen some proponents of these code-generation machines say things like "You don't check the output of your optimizing compiler, so why check the output of Claude/Devon/whatever?". The problem with this analogy is that the output from mainstream optimizing compilers is very nearly always correct. It may be notably worse than hand-generated output, but it's nearly never wrong. Not even the most rabid proponent will claim the same of today's output from these code-generation machines.

So, when these machines emit code, I will inevitably have to switch from "designing and implementing my software system" mode into "reading and understanding someone else's code" mode. Some folks may be actually be able to do this context-shuffling quickly and easily. I am not one of those people. The results from those studies from a while back that found that folks take something like a quarter-hour to really get back into the groove when interrupted while doing a technical task suggest that not that many folks are able to do this.

> Think in interfaces...

Like has been said already, you don't tend to get the right interface until you've attempted to use it with a bunch of client code. "Take a good, educated stab at it and refine it as the client implementations reveal problems in your design." is the way you're going to go for all but the most well-known problems. (And if your problem is that well-known, why are you writing more than a handful of lines solving that problem again? Why haven't you bundled up the solution to that problem in a library already?)

> Successive rendering, not one-shot.

Yes, like nearly all problem-solving, most programming is and always has been an iterative process. One rarely gets things right on the first try.
Show HN: An AI tutors that teaches AI
by codingmoh | 2025-06-10 02:11:22+00:00
Hello Hacker News,

I've built a platform that lets anyone create their own voice-based AI tutor. To showcase what the platform can do, I've created a voice-based AI tutor for Stanford's famous CS229 Machine Learning course. I took the course myself and know how challenging it can be, so I built this to make it easier to follow and stick with.

It's free for now (as long as budget lasts) -> https://vivaverbalis.com/ml

The goal of my app is simple: Whether you're a student, teacher, or just curious, you can instantly spin up a conversational AI tutor, and share it, with whoever you want. Instructors can align tutors with their course content and share them with their students. I'm a lecturer myself, and I've used this in my own classroom

Upload any learning material or define your learning goals - and the platform will generate a personalized, voice-based AI tutor that teaches you through real conversation.

Voice and conversation are so essential for thinking and learning. That's why we do rubber duck debugging. That's why pair programming works. Voice has so much latency and bandwidth. When you talk out loud, when you think out loud, you bring ideas to life. You make space for exploration. You surface thoughts you didn't know you had.

Now pair that with a conversational AI that doesn't just answer questions, but guides you. One that helps you arrive at conclusions by yourself. That's where the real magic happens.

I deeply believe this will change how we learn.

Thanks everyone for trying this out! Let me know what you think!

Best,

Mo
by dataflow | 2025-06-10 02:11:57+00:00
> In statistics, we generally separate asymptotic bounds—which usually make guarantees only asymptotically—from finite-decay bounds like Chernoff, which decay exponentially not only in the limit, but also at each particular finite n. The second is much rarer and much more powerful.

I don't know if you're using different terminology than I understand here, but I'm reading "exponential in the limit" to mean "eventually exponential", or in other words "there is some finite n_0 where for n > n_0 the decay becomes exponential"? In which case it basically means that the first n_0 tosses would have to be discarded? It's nice that that's not the case, I guess. Somehow I don't find myself blown away by this, but perhaps I'm misunderstanding what it means to be "exponential but only in the limit but not for finite n".

> in computability theory, it is definitely fair game and very common to "simulate" some computation with something that is either much more memory-intensive or compute-intensive, in either the deterministic or probabilistic case.

"Much" more is one thing, "arbitrarily more if you're unlucky" is another. I'm not an expert in computability theory by any means, but whenever I've heard of simulation in that context, it's been with a hard bound (whether constant, polynomial, or whatever). I've never heard it called simulation in a context where the simulator can take arbitrarily long to simulate step #2. Even if this is normal to those in the field, don't think the average person thinks of it this way -- I very much think most people would want their money back if they were sold a "simulator" that took arbitrarily long to get to step #2.
by southernplaces7 | 2025-06-10 02:12:51+00:00
I think it was a bit tongue in cheek, not so much lazy. Also, considering the kinds of gatekeeping and forced "concerns" I've seen some ethicists push forth just for the sake of showcasing their fixations instead of really looking at costs and benefits, I don't think it's far off the mark on reality to argue that medical ethics is worth considerable scrutiny too, and shouldn't hid behind a mantle of being above criticism.
by msgodel | 2025-06-10 02:13:30+00:00
I've personally come to the conclusion that most of these artificial cybernetics are just really bad with almost no upside.

I listened to part of one of the recent court hearings with Google the other year and their lawyer complained that if they had to get rid of this stuff they'd "just be a directory which isn't what anyone wants." The judge agreed without any thought which I thought was terrible. That's exactly what most people want! Google just doesn't want that because it's easier to make people impressionable with feeds.
by baobun | 2025-06-10 02:14:53+00:00
> > @grok This post from elon is either deleted or never existed, which one is it?

> The post from Elon Musk likely existed and was deleted. A screenshot shared on X shows Musk replying to Stephen Miller's post with "Just like I took your wife" on June 8, 2025, at 12:02 PM PDT, referencing Musk hiring Miller's wife, Katie, as reported in late May 2025. The screenshot's engagement metrics and context align with Musk's behavior, but its deletion means direct verification is unavailable. While a fabricated screenshot is possible, the evidence leans toward the post being real but removed, consistent with Musk's pattern of deleting controversial posts.
by Balgair | 2025-06-10 02:15:25+00:00
Yeah, plagues and famines are really bad at driving solidarity. They tend to do the opposite. I also had high hopes in the beginning too. But I feared that it would be like the Plague of Milan in 1630.

That particular plague is in Il Promisi Sposi ( The Betrothed), the Italian national epic. Really, it's a bit picardesque. But the first hand descriptions of that plague are just so damn similar to what the COVID was like. I remember reading it years before the pandemic and thinking that I was glad we weren't so mideaval anymore. Now it read it again ( it's only a few chapters in the book) and I feel more like one veteran talking to another about their war.

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/45334

Chapter 31 is where the plague part starts, you needn't really read the rest, but it's a good summer book all the same
by xcrunner529 | 2025-06-10 02:15:57+00:00
Sure. I am just using it for my media server which I could “re-acquire” if I really needed too.

What I meant by “bit of backup” was you could actually restore files that were deleted since the last sync since it’s not always live like RAID and requires scheduled syncs to update the parity info. It’s a compromise I make as a home user for my media server.
by footlose_3815 | 2025-06-10 02:16:02+00:00
This is the best point. Creating a city in the middle of a desert that requires you to spend extra resources just for it to exist is an affront to nature. Not-only do we need to destroy nature to exist up until now, but places like Vegas and Qatar are exponentially more expensive for the environment because the earth already naturally abandoned those places.

Our engineering, at every turn destroys nature by default. We have the ability to stop this if we try hard enough.
by sandspar | 2025-06-10 02:16:02+00:00
Lol. If Las Vegas city planners can't single handedly solve climate change then they shouldn't beautify their tourist district.

You seem to dislike the article's framing, which is fine, but then you start on a crusade.

It's ok to plant trees so that hot people will feel slightly less hot. It doesn't need to fix every problem, just the small problem that there's too little shade in their tourist district.

The unstated premise of your post is that you know better than the Las Vegas city planners and that your ideas are purer than theirs. It's just so annoying to see this smugness from online commenters. "Their solution isn't Pure enough [therefore I'm smarter/purer than them]."

Maybe the Las Vegas city planners have good reasons for doing what they did. I mean that's possible right? Could it even be possible that there's more to this story than you understand?
Idea HN: YC should organize a startup soccer tournament
by soccer_idea | 2025-06-10 02:16:24+00:00
I work for a YC-backed startup, and as we're heading into summer, I had a thought that I think could be a fantastic addition to the YC experience: a company-wide soccer tournament. The idea is simple: each YC startup puts forward a team composed entirely of its own employees. It wouldn't have to be a super competitive, high-stakes affair, but rather a fun, organized way for us to all get together.

I can see a ton of benefits:

- Social: It would be a great way to meet and connect with founders and employees from other companies in the batch and the wider YC community in a relaxed, non-work setting. - Team bonding: There's a special kind of camaraderie that comes from playing on a team. I can imagine the inside jokes and shared memories would do wonders for internal team culture. - Company pride: Cheering for your colleagues (even via Zoom!) and representing your startup on the field would be a huge morale booster and a fun way to build a sense of company pride.

YC is already brilliant at fostering a community, and I feel like this would be a natural extension of that.
by Nevermark | 2025-06-10 02:17:35+00:00
> It's often easy to anticipate the criticism to your point.

You can head off a lot of criticism by not making your point competitive with other reasonable points. I.e. additive to understanding, not subtractive.

Otherwise, you are actually creating the competition between points that you wanted to avoid. And creating your own distractions from your own point.
by kcplate | 2025-06-10 02:18:07+00:00
No, that’s not what I said at all. RFKjr’s public prominence rose much higher in 2021 and 2022 because the previous administration publicly lied about the vaccine’s efficacy. He was the most vocal and well known antivax person in the public space so of course when the public detects obvious bullshit from its leaders it will gravitate to the rebel with the loudest voice.

RFKjr’s popularity rose and he tried to capitalize on it by choosing to run for president as a democrat, then an independent, then throws his support behind Trump…who wins. Trump is a master troll who wants to hurt the opposition and who better to do that as Director of HHS than RFKjr?

Without Biden and Fauci creating the environment of people questioning vaccine efficacy, RFKjr doesn’t get the popularity bump. His position is is due to that bump. He is a reaction to bad leadership.
by okanat | 2025-06-10 02:19:10+00:00
Using the Linux filesystem has almost no performance penalty under WSL2 since it is a VM. Docker Desktop automatically mounts the correct filesystem. Crossing the OS boundary for Windows files has some overhead of course but that's not the usecase WSL2 is optimized for.

With WSL2 you get the best of both worlds. A system with perfect driver and application support and a Linux-native environment. Hybrid GPUs, webcams, lap sensors etc. all work without any configuration effort. You get good battery life. You can run Autodesk or Photoshop but at the same time you can run Linux apps with almost no performance loss.
by khendron | 2025-06-10 02:19:15+00:00
When I first tried an LLM agent, I was hoping for an interactive, 2-way, pair collaboration. Instead, what I got was a pairing partner who wanted to do everything themselves. I couldn't even tweak the code they had written, because it would mess up their context.

I want a pairing partner where I can write a little, they write a little, I write a little, they write a little. You know, an actual collaboration.
by weatherfused | 2025-06-10 02:19:16+00:00
Being a solo dev could possibly give me an advantage here because I've been able to design the game with engineering feasibility in mind - compared to larger studios which can have a disconnect between product and engineering. In addition, a big source of bugs can be having a larger engineering team where each team member has a fragmented knowledge of the entire codebase - making a change to one part of the code and causing a bug in a different part.

I designed the game to hopefully be within my abilities to comprehensively test and ship - there are few players on 1 single-threaded server for a world, there's a limited way that they can interact with the world, and the planets are handmade with specific bounds. Nothing is infinite and I can easily test the limits of the game. I'm also not going to launch multiplayer until I'm certain that it's stable and I've hopefully solved every known bug.

With many of the bigger games, it's almost impossible to test all the different ways you can hit their limits, and they have tighter timelines where they launch with many known bugs. They may also apply a business mindset to it e.g. if it's a bug that only affects 0.1% of players, it won't affect revenue much regardless of how gamebreaking the bug is, and they may be willing to just let it be.
by komali2 | 2025-06-10 02:19:33+00:00
This is incorrect. Masks reduce the spread of airbone diseases, by capturing the majority of small particulates emitted from coughing, sneezing, or simply breathing.

The exact amount of effect mask wearing had on the spread of COVID may be interesting to study, but probably the most significant factor is whether people were actually wearing masks (e.g., in America, they weren't, not really, but in Taiwan, we were).
by FabHK | 2025-06-10 02:20:31+00:00
If you haven't heard of the topic of the article before, why do you impugn the article then? From your comment it seems like you can't distinguish what the QF proposal is assuming (and the author is criticizing as unrealistic) from claims of the author.

The author makes no statement about the utility of enjoying the arts vs the utility of saving lives. They're making up hypothetical examples with specific properties that demonstrate problems with QF.
by Aurornis | 2025-06-10 02:20:49+00:00
> Yeah there's functionally no good solution besides occasional stimulant use and staying off them the rest of the time.

This is literally the misunderstanding I was talking about.

The startup euphoric effects are a side effect, not the main ADHD therapeutic function. This is the confusion that leads people off track, especially when they’re prescribed too high of a starting dose.

Taking the stimulant every day and acknowledging that it’s not supposed to be euphoric is the only way to use them for actual ADHD treatment. The attention-enhancing effects largely remain.

This is also where the “stimulant medications affect ADHD people differently” myth comes from. The real reason is that the ADHD patient has taken the med for years and doesn’t get a stimulant rush when taking it. The college student who borrows the fully-titrated dose from their friend is speeding around because they are stimulant naive.

> Direct dopamine regulation is just a crappy target for this. TAAR1 agonism may be a better target.

Amphetamine (Adderall) is a TAAR1 ligand. Guanfacine (non-stimulant ADHD medication) is as well.

> I've heard some sketchy reports that things in the class of bromantane might be good options, as it acts to epigenetically upregulate dopamine synthesis rather than altering clearance,

Bromantane is thought to upregulate expression of some genes related to dopamine, but it also might have some effects on the sigma receptor, act on a potassium channel, and it does have some dopamine reuptake inhibition though the exact amount is up for debate.

Anyway, people often equate ADHD and dopamine, but norepinephrine is actually the common thread among all ADHD medications. Like you said, there’s a lot of “dopamine deficiency” broscience on the internet that doesn’t really match the science.
by bitwize | 2025-06-10 02:21:05+00:00
Aero wasn't trying to look like Aqua. Steve Jobs would have launched a devastating hypercombo of legal action if it were. But it was clearly a response to Aqua: use 3D acceleration to provide fancy effects and shiny widgets. The previous release, Windows XP, still did everything with lines, solid-fill rects, and blitted bitmaps and was starting to look long in the tooth compared to Mac OS X.
by prophesi | 2025-06-10 02:23:42+00:00
I mean it's better than nothing :/ Firefox's mobile mask is only one number, but I haven't seen any better alternatives. I do think I get significantly less spam/scam calls and texts than everyone else I know. But even if you had a unique number per service, I don't think that'll stop them entirely. If you've ever had to get a new number, as you say, it's probably already leaked somewhere whether or not you share it anywhere.