MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by fuoqi | 2025-06-24 01:04:05+00:00
>Why is the problem the cheap source of supply rather than the market rules and incentives that made everything act the way it did?

I explicitly mentioned this line of argument in the GP. The problem is that renewables only sometimes cheap and plentiful and often not when we want it. Even without accounting for the politically-driven preferential treatment covered in the sibling comment, from the purely technical point of view intermittency above certain threshold wreaks havoc in the traditional grid architecture designed for the traditional easily controlled "rotating" generation. It becomes really hard to manage the grid with existing tools when you have too much of intermittent highly distributed generation and in the extreme it leads to collapses like this.

As I wrote, yes, you could upgrade the grid, increase transmission redundancy, add battery/pumped/flywheel storage, introduce "smart" tools to manage the grid, and do a plethora of other things to accommodate renewables. Hell, you could even migrate the grid to DC!

But the cost of doing it is substantial. It's effectively a form of externalities of renewable generation, which are not accounted for in naive "cheap" $/kW metrics. Properly accounting for those externalities and adding them to the cost of renewable generation is possible, but politically unappealing.

>Your comment suggests move back to good ol' expensive fossil generation instead of looking at how to bring the market rules up to date with evolving technologies.

No, I believe we should remove the politically motivated shoehorning of renewables at the cost of grid stability. There should be a limit on how much intermittent generation we can have depending on the preparedness of the grid and we should pay less for power from such sources, not guarantee purchase from them!

As you say, we should have proper incentives structure which accounts for various externalities (including CO2 emissions!). We need to remove the existing subsudies on renewables which made sense in the early days, but not now. Let the generation sources play at the even field.
by Eddy_Viscosity2 | 2025-06-24 01:04:20+00:00
The purpose of a system is what it does. In the US, 'the system' makes money for some at the expense of others. If rational thinking supported this system, it would be rewarded more. The fact that conspiratorial and supernatural thinking is on the rise suggest that it better aligns with the purpose of 'the system' - i.e. the transfer of money from the many to the few.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...
by eitchugo | 2025-06-24 01:05:08+00:00
It's really sad that this good consumer oriented campaign got so much affected by one person creating drama and misinformation. I don't live in Europe but I was really hoping that at least something would be debated about this... There were some good games that I bought in the past that I don't have access anymore and this would be a good step to this not happening again.

I still hope this final push would result in something :) Thanks Ross and others for pushing it until you can.
by CamperBob2 | 2025-06-24 01:05:22+00:00
I'd be amazed if that were still possible, in fact. Real-world FPGA designs lean heavily on the vendor's proprietary IP, which won't port straight across to ASICs any more than the LUT-based FPGA fabric will.

Anyone who claims to turn a modern FPGA design into an ASIC "automatically" is selling snake oil.
by lvl155 | 2025-06-24 01:06:10+00:00
AI is still not there yet. For example, I constantly have to deal with mis-referenced documents and specifications. I think part of the problem is that it was trained on outdated materials and is unable to actively update on the fly. I can get around this problem but…

The problem with today’s LLM and GI solutions is that they try to solve all n steps when solving the first i steps would be infinitely more useful for human consumption. I’ve yet to see a fully modular solution (though MCPs partly solves it), where I can just say, “Hey, using my specific coding style based on my github, solve problem x, based on resources a, b, and c and only a, b, and c.” I would also like to see a more verbose/interactive coding AI, where it will ask incremental questions as it traverses a problem tree.
by gbacon | 2025-06-24 01:07:02+00:00
Which industry and in what role and context? From someone I’ve hired to design a CRUD or mobile app, I’m not all that interested in a proof that a particular two-symbol Turing machine happens to do the job. It may be an interesting result from a research perspective, but it’s not what I’m paying for or on the hook to deliver. Instead, it looks like procrastivity that makes my job more difficult.
by phatskat | 2025-06-24 01:07:05+00:00
Nice! I’ll be honest, it’s not worth it. I’m just at the point of “if I can’t do it more easily with the remote, I’ll settle with doing it frustratingly with the remote”. I could probably get my Bluetooth keyboard paired up to the tv, but how often am I going to use it compared to how often it’s sitting in the living room unused?

It’s really more that I’m frustrated with the poor UX choices that will never go away, or at least don’t appear to be going anywhere.
by GrantMoyer | 2025-06-24 01:07:46+00:00
My phone is not the only device I use my ear buds with. Having to contantly attach and remove a usb-c adapter would be a complete pain in the ass. It's not just a matter of plugging it in — which would already be bad enough. I'd also need somewhere to store it, and I'd need to pack and unpack it each time. All that, or I could just buy a phone with a standard headphone port.
by freejazz | 2025-06-24 01:07:53+00:00
Well, the magistrate's job is to apply precedent, to which I have no idea why you are of the belief that this is not a routine application of 3rd party doctrine. So that's no reason to hold against the magistrate, even if you disagree with the law.

Second, what colorable argument? There is no colorable argument that entitles you to "discover everything everyone types into the Internet" so there's no need to pretend there is for the purpose of this conversation. Feel free to posit one. You didn't, because none exist. Discovery is limited and narrow. Here, what the court is demanding from OpenAI is limited and narrow, unlike the ridiculous scenario you offered.
by api | 2025-06-24 01:08:33+00:00
There's a very loud minority of people who think anything with a female or LGBTQ character in it is "woke-washed" or whatever, and apparently have tons of time to complain about it on social media. There's apparently entire subreddits dedicated to slagging on apparently "woke" media that has a GiIIiRRlllLL in it (eEEEeeeWWW!). People need a life.
by freejazz | 2025-06-24 01:10:02+00:00
Method of interrogation? I'm not a mind reader. If you don't want to make yourself clear, that's fine. If you want to be petty, that's fine as well.

>Or, perhaps, that's not something known by most. I didn't struggle to understand that, I simply didn't know it.

Sorry you struggled to not understand your own concept that you put forward that because a lawyer isn't required (not true, but granting you this for the sake of this conversation), we shouldn't hold lawyers up to the standard of a lawyer anyway? That's facially silly.
by 1659447091 | 2025-06-24 01:11:27+00:00
> It's not clear what the limiting principle there would be -- could they order Microsoft to retain any of the data on everyone's PC that isn't in the cloud, because their system updater gives them arbitrary code execution on every Windows machine?

My understanding is it's closer to something like: They cannot order a company to create new tools, but can tell them to not destroy the data they already have. So, in the question of MS having the ability to create a tool that extracts your data is not the same as MS already having that tool functioning and collecting all of your data that they store and are then told to simply not destroy. Similarly, VPNs that are not set-up to create logs can't keep or hand over what they don't have.

Laws can be made to require the collection and storage of all user data by every online company, but we're not there -- yet. Many companies already do it on their own, and the user then decides if that's acceptable or not to continue using that service.

If the company created their service to not have the data in the first place, this probably never would have found its way to a judge. Their service would cost more, be slower, and probably be difficult to iterate on as it's easier to hack things together in a fast moving space then build privacy/security first solutions.
by plorg | 2025-06-24 01:11:30+00:00
It's unfounded conspiracy to bang on about how "they are clearly hiding something".

Read the report. Power systems are complicated and not as easy as just "build another nuclear plant". It was (by regulation) conventional units that were required to provide voltage support, and it was in part their failure to operate according to their requirements that lead to the voltage excursions that caused the system collapse. The renewable systems that were capable of providing voltage stability were not allowed to do so.
by bee_rider | 2025-06-24 01:12:12+00:00
Well, you almost certainly know more than me about it, since you are working in the area. From a layman’s point of view it seems like knowing that things are very carbon producing has not provoked mass behavior changes. I’d have more faith in moves that add a measurable cost. But maybe knowing how much LLMs produce could be part of motivating us to include an actual cost.
by _kb | 2025-06-24 01:13:13+00:00
From what I’ve had exposure to conjunction, disjunction, and negation symbols are common if you’re discussing logic [1].

Boolean algebra then use product, sum, and complement [2].

Both can express the same thing. In this case `*` is easier to type than `·`.

[1]: https://simple.industries/notes/propositions.html

[2]: https://simple.industries/notes/boolean-algebra.html
by duskwuff | 2025-06-24 01:13:25+00:00
Oh, these programs were always in-house. The offering was essentially "if you pay an up-front fee and give us your FPGA design, we'll sell you some chips that run that design for cheaper than the FPGAs". If there was ever any custom silicon involved - which there may have been for Altera, but probably not for Xilinx - the design files for it were never made available to the customer.
by da_chicken | 2025-06-24 01:14:22+00:00
Yeah it turns out when Europe is a giant crater and the rest of world hasn't figured out electricity quite yet that your massive industrial capacity can be a bit of a boon. Especially when you loan out a bunch of money to Europe so they can buy all your stuff! Wow! Having over 50% of the world's industrial capacity when the world just spent 7 years on fire and everyone needs new everything means it's a bit of a seller's market!
by crazygringo | 2025-06-24 01:14:30+00:00
> Theoretically, credit should be used for one thing: to make more money.

I disagree.

You use credit to buy a car or buy a house when you don't have the cash to buy them up-front.

It's not so you can use them to make money, it's so you can use them to enjoy life.

> At some point, you run out of hours available and the house of cards collapses.

Only if you go too far. The point is to buy things knowing what they'll cost monthly and for how long, and to budget those as part of your monthly expenses. As long as you can always handle those, you will never run out of hours available and it's not a house of cards. Nothing collapses. You pay off your car; you pay off your mortgage.

You seem to be treating this as something black-and-white when it's not. It's an incredibly useful tool when used with budgeting. Not "to make more money" but to have a better life for you and your family for when it matters the most. Nobody wants to wait until the kids have graduated from college to be able to buy their first house.

And even with credit cards -- yes you generally want to be paying them off in full monthly. But if you want to take a vacation a couple months before you could otherwise fully pay for it, it's really nice to have that convenience too. Not to mention covering some expenses for a few months if you lose your job. They're a tool to be used responsibly.
by ch4s3 | 2025-06-24 01:14:44+00:00
Maybe, the cycle has happened before and maybe come back around again. Dynamic typing is really nice when most of your data looks like bags of strings. Compilers and tools just don’t add a lot when you’re passing around glorified blobs of stringy json-like stuff. Type gymnastics can eat a lot of time where you could otherwise be shipping something useful.
by em-bee | 2025-06-24 01:15:08+00:00
That stalking thing also happens in personal peer networks

i am not saying it can't happen, but that the smaller the group the easier it is to assess the risk and the consequences. and for that reason i prefer smaller groups.

in austria and germany hiring students for part time sysadmin work is very common. i did those jobs and on the other hand stories from staff stalking that cute student they saw one day do exist.

But bickering about who's trustworthy is pointless

agreed. it all comes down to personal experience and preference.

when there's trustless architectures for those situations already

the problem is that the choice is not made in a vacuum. what good is a system if my friends don't want to use it. for almost my contacts i had to follow the choices of the others. very rarely someone followed my choice. and when they do i have to consider their technical capacity and tolerance to difficulties.
by drjolly | 2025-06-24 01:15:10+00:00
I think this is pretty consistent with the old school 1950s views of the current administration. Companies can prioritize profits over people again. Yeah, dump in the rivers, dump in the woods, just drive around in circles dumping in an empty lot. You don’t need masks- give everyone cancer and blow some shit up, maybe get some acid burns. Super-fund sites? When was the last one we had anyway- we need more of ‘em- lots more! Let’s let the kids eat the lead paint and complain of the smells wafting into their cars from the chemical, paper, etc. plants on road trips, just like the olden days!
by kumarvvr | 2025-06-24 01:15:24+00:00
It is highly surprising that the narrative in the US has morphed the expenses on public institutions of enormous importance, into wastage, something that has to be cut or eliminated.

Why is it that no one is pointing out the contribution of these institutions to the US and the world?

The US, has a society, has grown so materialistic, that they fail to see anything beyond money.

Somethings cannot be measured by money. In fact, when it comes to public governance, money is the least useful thing.
by pbhjpbhj | 2025-06-24 01:15:34+00:00
Well that's not my position.

Islam, ie the Koran, recognises the banu Israel (forgive my spelling/transliteration) from c.2500 years ago. Apparent muslims say "Israel has only existed for 50 years" (or words to that effect). The inference made is that they then have no rights to the land.

It seems the basis for the 'lack of rights of Israel to exist' is fundamentally opposed to the origin story of Islam itself.

Personally I find the concept of nationhood a bit ridiculous; but I'm not sure how practical it would be to organise a World without statehood.
by ocdtrekkie | 2025-06-24 01:16:24+00:00
I think my understanding has come to the fact that loans and interest can smooth out your financial situation: When I was single especially I had a lot of savings building, I was making interest and making money. Then when I had a kid, I end up paying that interest back, because expenses for a kid are way above what I can healthily operate in this economy, and I needed more financial products to cover that. But that's also not forever: As soon as a kid's in school and you aren't sending an entire paycheck a month to the daycare, you can establish a upward financial pattern again.

It'd be nice if kids were an affordable choice for anyone expect Elon Musk, but you know, here we are. \o/
by ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 | 2025-06-24 01:17:04+00:00
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Chemical_Safety_Board

> The Senate legislative history states: "The principal role of the new chemical safety board is to investigate accidents to determine the conditions and circumstances which led up to the event and to identify the cause or causes so that similar events might be prevented." Congress gave the CSB a unique statutory mission and provided in law that no other agency or executive branch official may direct the activities of the board.
by ajsnigrutin | 2025-06-24 01:17:17+00:00
This is all true if you have enough for the basics and are looking above the minimum survival costs.

Just to make the money you are making now, you need some stuff, be it a phone or a car, home AC, oven or even a washing machine at home (you can't go to work hungry in dirty clothes).

If you don't have the money to pay with cash, you'll be buying that oven/stove with whatever delayed/monthly payment option is available.

Yes, if you're buying franchises you can do the "make more money" calculations, but if your kids are going to be hungry soon, you often have no choice.
by rybosworld | 2025-06-24 01:17:37+00:00
You can't compare those things very easily.

If you're only talking about the GPU's used for inference, then that's a different story. Not nearly as much hardware is required for inference.

But the number of GPU's needed to train models is in the tens of thousands, and there are rumors that some shops (Meta) are already using 100k+ GPU's, just for training.

Those are likely all/mostly H100s, running at least 60% of the time. Consider that OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Meta, Tesla, X.com, etc. are all within an order of magnitude of each other in terms of compute.

For arguments sake, that's 6 companies approaching 100K H100's worth of compute for their next gen models.

Now consider that GPT4 used roughly 100x more compute to train, compared to GPT3. And GPT5 is rumored to follow this trend, using 100x more compute than GPT4. Extrapolating, GPT6 might also use 100x more compute than GPT5.

Even if the next generation of AI GPU's are 10x as powerful as the H100 for the same amount of electricity, the next generation of models would need 10x as many GPU's (and thus, 10x as much electric demand).

Extrapolate that to GPT7, 8, 9 etc. And you can see why people are worried about the power usage.

This isn't even theoretical. As mentioned in this thread already, these companies are signing deals to buy all the capacity of power plants in some areas.
by anitil | 2025-06-24 01:17:52+00:00
Please bring this to Australia.

The Sydney to Melbourne air corridor is one of the busiest in the world [0], and yet anyone who has taken the train journey has told me to never, ever take it due to how horrible it is. Complaints include lack of ammenities, comfort, aggressive passengers (fights and yelling etc). I'm tempted to try it just to experience it.

Surely, surely we can do better than that. I'd love to hop on at Central at 8pm, have a hot dinner, relax and wake up at Melbourne around 6am with a hot shower and breakfast.

[0] I'm sure there's better sources but I could only find https://www.smh.com.au/traveller/travel-news/the-world-s-bus...
by heavyset_go | 2025-06-24 01:18:03+00:00
The author of the project made the decision to drop the project after Nintendo went after Yuzu/Citra, the latter was in JELOS by default. I assume they felt like distributing Citra put a target on their back and I don't blame them. Not everyone has millions of dollars to give Nintendo.

Neither Ubuntu or Fedora distribute Yuzu/Citra by default and neither platforms exist exclusively for the emulation of Nintendo's systems using what are apparently radioactive emulators. Neither Ubuntu or Fedora advertised that they include Citra, and neither featured screenshots of it prominently along with detailed wiki pages on how to use it.
by paulddraper | 2025-06-24 01:18:44+00:00
> There's no reasonable expectation of privacy in the records

There is a reasonable expectation that deleted and anonymous chats would not be indefinitely retained.

> The court is just requiring OpenAI to maintain records it already maintains and segregate them.

Incorrect. The court is requiring OpenAI to maintain records it would have not maintained otherwise.

That is the crux of this entire thing.
by idonotknowwhy | 2025-06-24 01:19:34+00:00
Nowhere near as good as Firefox on Android. That said you can get a clunky version with Brave. It's got a block and You can use use picture in picture to throw the video in the background. It sometimes pauses if you lock the screen but if you play around, there's a kind of race condition where you hit play again at the right time and it'll work.

There's also uYouPlus if you have a way to load apps without going through the store.
by AliceHe2003 | 2025-06-24 01:19:42+00:00
This summer, I set out to write a web-based image editor in C++ using WASM. (You can read more about it in my last post!)

One of the biggest performance bottlenecks? Merging layers.

The intuitive algorithm: process the final image layer by layer, iterating through each pixel position (x,y).

My friend proposed an alternative algorithm, that in theory sounded much better…

A tempting alternative (that didn’t work): process the final image pixel by pixel, evaluating all layers at once.

This approach initially seemed like a great idea - in the worst case, both of these algorithms process every single pixel in every single layer. In the average case, the second algorithm can skip over entire regions of pixels on lower layers.

But in practice, the performance was worse. When I was iterating layer by layer, there was no significant processing time that was noticeable by the human eye. Using the pixel by pixel algorithm, the image took more than 30 seconds to appear. Same worst-case time complexity, but way worse performance in practice.

Why? CPU cache misses.

The first method processes entire layers at a time. This means that it uses sequential memory access, leading to more cache hits, and so an overall better runtime.

The second method jumps between layers for each pixel. This causes random memory access, creating more cache misses, and so a significant delay to access data.

What I learned In theory, both layer-wise and pixel-wise merging have the same worst-case complexity. But in practice, memory access patterns make all the difference. By aligning your algorithm with how the CPU cache works—favouring sequential over random access—you can unlock massive speedups. Sometimes, the "intuitive" way just fits the hardware better.

https://github.com/alicehe2003/ImageEditor
by jcalvinowens | 2025-06-24 01:20:05+00:00
> You'd be surprised

I doubt it. I've experimented with most of them extensively, and worked with people who use them. The atrocious results speak for themselves.

> They can already do this. If you have any specific code examples in mind

Sure. The bluetooth drivers in the Linux kernel contain an enormous amount of shoddy duplicated code that has amalgamated over the past decade with little oversight: https://code.wbinvd.org/cgit/linux/tree/drivers/bluetooth

An LLM which was capable of refactoring all the duplicated logic into the common core and restructuring all the drivers to be simpler would be very very useful for me. It ought to be able to remove a few thousand lines of code there.

It needs to do it iteratively, in a sting of small patches that I can review and prove to myself are correct. If it spits out a giant single patch, that's worse than nothing, because I do systems work that actually has to be 100% correct, and I can't trust it.

Show me what you can make it do :)