MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by FirmwareBurner | 2025-06-19 11:08:31+00:00
I can fake, change or delete my social media. I can't fake, change or delete my biometrics. So it's crazy to me to see people focusing on the least worst violations of their privacy like the government seeing their vacation photos.

>The US government has no right searching through it.

Well they just made it a right. What are rights anyway? Rights are not a natural construct, they're whatever the government decides. So if the government decides one thing, tomorrow it can decide another thing if it wants to.

It's not a US issue, every country you will go to can change their rights willy nilly based on the current boogie man: terrorists, COVID, Russia, Iran, right wing "extremists" etc

In the UK or Germany you can be fined, swatted or arrested for tweets and wrong think. Why? Because government made that a right.
Show HN: mcp-webcam – now supports Streamable HTTP, Sampling and multiple Users
by evalstate | 2025-06-19 11:08:32+00:00
I've updated mcp-webcam project to support Streamable HTTP, added a multi-user mode and made Sampling requests easier to make. Both VSCode v1.101.0 and fast-agent have sampling support built-in - just connect with the MCP Connection URL from the webpage.

If you have uv installed, to connect with fast-agent, set an Anthropic API Key (it uses Haiku as its default model) and run:

`uvx fast-agent-mcp go --url=https://evalstate-mcp-webcam.hf.space/mcp?user=YOUR_USER_ID`

You an also run locally in STDIO mode with `npx @llmindset/mcp-webcam` if you prefer.

The GitHub repo is at evalstate/mcp-webcam. Note this is built for fun, not privacy. If you want to run your own copy, this is hosted on a Hugging Face FreeCPU Space, so you can just duplicate it if you wish!
by ben0x539 | 2025-06-19 11:09:06+00:00
> but why does the website that's sending me HTML and CSS and Javascript need to know?

The website doesn't get told by the browser, but the website is sending you Javascript, and the browser will tell the Javascript when the Javascript politely inquires as to the width and height of the root html element, or some element with text in a funny font in it, and the Javascript is then free to report home.

I think hiding layout information like that from Javascript isn't really within reach without a radically different model that breaks a ton of websites.
by contrarian1234 | 2025-06-19 11:09:17+00:00
The article made me think deeper about what rubs me the wrong way about the whole movement

I think there is some inherent tension btwn being "rational" about things and trying to reason about things from first principle.. And the general absolutist tone of the community. The people involved all seem very... Full of themselves ? They don't really ever show a sense of "hey, I've got a thought, maybe I haven't considered all angles to it, maybe I'm wrong - but here it is". The type of people that would be embarrassed to not have an opinion on a topic or say "I don't know"

In the Pre-AI days this was sort of tolerable, but since then.. The frothing at the mouth convinced of the end of the world.. Just shows a real lack of humility and lack of acknowledgment that maybe we don't have a full grasp of the implications of AI. Maybe it's actually going to be rather benign and more boring than expected
by gcanyon | 2025-06-19 11:09:33+00:00
But you also have a limit on the other side: going extreme to make the point, we haven't managed to build a mile-tall building yet, and a rocket that size would be a nightmare to engineer (while perhaps technically possible -- you might have to scale up another 10x or 20x to make it physically impossible).

So there's some sort of curve, zero at both ends, between overall rocket size and the payload to orbit. The question is where Starship sits on that curve, and to your point it seems likely that it's looking good on that metric alone.

But then you have another curve that I think starts small and increases near-monotonically, which is the complexity/likelihood-to-fail factor to the size of the rocket. It's (relatively) easy to launch a toy rocket, (fairly) simple to build a missile-sized sub-orbital rocket, difficult to build a small-to-medium orbital rocket, and apparently very difficult to build a Saturn/N-1/Starship-sized rocket. More props to the crazy '60s team that pulled it off.
by bell-cot | 2025-06-19 11:10:21+00:00
Does the number actually matter? The richest / most powerful / most ruthless 0.00001% are hot for massive ramp-ups of AI. "Checks and balances" have gone the way of the 8-track tape.

(Yeah, I get that real numbers would really excite the folks whose on-line creds or incomes rely on them denouncing Bad Things. But without any power to change things - it's kinda like a bunch of 3rd-class passengers on the Titanic chanting "slow down, slow down". 100% feel-good, zero lives saved.)
by diggan | 2025-06-19 11:11:07+00:00
> Prompts and LLMs most certainly do not work like that.

It quite literally works like that. The computer is now OS + user-land + LLM runner + ML architecture + weights + system prompt + user prompt.

Taken together, and since you're adding in probabilities (by using ML/LLMs), you're quite literally getting "the computer only does exactly what you tell it to do!", it's just that we have added "but make slight variations to what tokens you select next" (temperature>0.0) sometimes, but it's still the same thing.

Just like when you tell the computer to create encrypted content by using some seed. You're getting exactly what you asked for.
by DuMOHsmol | 2025-06-19 11:11:33+00:00
Slavic languages originally used the very unique Glagolitic script, developed by saints Cyril and Methodius. However, their disciples later created an alternative Greek-based script, which eventually prevailed.

My guess is that the educated people of the time were very familiar with Greek, so it was easier for them to work with Greek letters rather than the newly invented ones. It probably was the same for Latin-based scripts as well.
by user_7832 | 2025-06-19 11:12:55+00:00
> People report being sensitive to all kinds of things that end up repeatedly failing to reproduce empirically when it's put to the test (e.g. WiFi and MSG), so that there's a PWM sensitivity subreddit is not the evidence that TFA thinks it is.

I know you’re looking for large sample size data, but PWM sensitivity absolutely exists, and I wish it didn’t. The way my eyes hurt in less than a minute while looking at an OLED phone (when I can handle an LCD phone for hours just fine) is too “obvious”. This occurs even on screens I didn’t know were OLED till I got a headache, btw.

(I’m also insanely sensitive to noticing flicker and strobe lights - I say a light flickers, everyone disagrees, I pull out the 240fps mode on my phone… and I’ve never been proven wrong till now.)
by jve | 2025-06-19 11:13:22+00:00
I love this quote from Gwynne Shotwell when asked how they achieved that no government has: "The first is that we're kind of standing on the shoulders of giants."

Source: https://youtu.be/Dar8P3r7GYA?si=RHZ8lWFYKrd7qQhy&t=321
Ask HN: I'm seeking investors who are interested in Open Source and AI products
by mrholek | 2025-06-19 11:14:18+00:00
At CoreUI (https://coreui.io), we are developing open-source UI component libraries for Angular, Bootstrap, React.js, and Vue.js. Now we're entering the AI world and want to create a tool that enables the creation of well-designed applications for any framework using our components.
by redrove | 2025-06-19 11:15:55+00:00
>And please please use "forever auth" with passkeys or something, what is up with that auth email that just takes ages for a quick glance?! It always takes me 3 attempts to find what address I used at sign-up...

As a person with the simple but brilliant technology of a freaking password manager, I LOATHE email to login/no-password websites. They are dreadful, we've somehow managed to come up with something worse in UX rather than move forward.

If you're working on a product that does this, or wants to do this, please please PLEASE reconsider, it's such a PITA for technical users and normies alike.
by lproven | 2025-06-19 11:16:02+00:00
> Very few things are dropping support for X11 right now

GNOME 49 will drop X11 sessions completely. That in turn means that the default editions of Ubuntu 25.10 and Fedora 43 drop X11 session support.

https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/12/ubuntu_2510_to_drop_x...

Arch will presumably pick up GNOME 49 as soon as it's released, and so GNOME on Arch will also drop X11 session support this (northern hemisphere) autumn.

I know that most Ubuntu users run LTS versions, but still, those are probably the 3 most widely-used Linux distros in the Western world, and as such, I think the statement that "very few" things is false where it applies to Linux distros.
by bgwalter | 2025-06-19 11:17:58+00:00
I think you should not turn things around here. Up to 2021 we had a vibrant software environment that obviously had zero "AI" input. It has made companies and some developers filthy rich.

Since "AI" became a religion, it is used as an excuse for layoffs while no serious software is written by "AI". The "AI" people are making the claims. Since they invading a functioning software environment, it is their responsibility to back up their claims.
by lsaferite | 2025-06-19 11:19:57+00:00
Clearly they need to try explaining it it easy terms. The number of people that cannot or will not understand the protocol is mind boggling.

I'm with you on an Agent -> LLM industry standard spec need. The APIs are all over the place and it's frustrating. If there was a spec for that, then agent development becomes simply focused on the business logic and the LLM and the Tools/Resource are just standardized components you plug together like Lego. I've basically done that for our internal agent development. I have a Universal LLM API that everything uses. It's helped a lot.
by diggan | 2025-06-19 11:20:29+00:00
> Can you point to any significant open source software that has any kind of significant AI contributions?

No, but I haven't looked. Can you?

As an actual open source developer too, I do get some value from replacing search engine usage with LLMs that can do the searching and collation for me, as long as they have references I can use for diving deeper, they certainly accelerate my own workflow. But I don't do "vibe-coding" or use any LLM-connected editors, just my own written software that is mostly various CLIs and chat-like UIs.
by mjrbrennan | 2025-06-19 11:20:32+00:00
Yes, I’ve only just started trying out Claude Code and I do not mesh well with this method of asking AI to do something, then having to wait a few minutes and come back and check its work.

I find this leads so easily to distraction and I find this workflow very boring. If I’m going to use AI I want to use it in a more integrated way, or in a more limited way like just querying ChatGPT.

Will still try Claude more but I’m really not a fan so far.
by kavouras | 2025-06-19 11:20:33+00:00
I'm not sure what your argument is. I'm not trying to talk about the semantics of the word right. Yeah every human rule is a social construct, I'm just saying this is bad, and it's only the beginning.

I'm guessing you're a US citizen, because this isn't about the US. Many countries in the world are more or less puppies of the US government, it's not like we're living in an isolated world where the decisions of the US government don't apply to others because they're not US citizens. This is showing a general trend, which doesn't concern just visa applications.
by inglor_cz | 2025-06-19 11:21:20+00:00
I don't think so. For starters, they test a lot in SpaceX. N1 had ablative engines, which could not be test-fired on Earth. They could only test them by launching the entire stack and hoping that it would go into the orbit.

The current wave of problems is likely caused by optimizations in the v2 of the rocket. Starship v1 was very conservatively built and mostly worked. They are trying to squeeze extra 25 per cent of payload capacity from v2 (from 80 to 100 tons on LEO), and they are running into the edges of multiple envelopes.

Raptor v2 BTW seems fine, the main issues are around the plumbing that feeds propellant into the engines.
by jdsleppy | 2025-06-19 11:22:00+00:00
I've been very happy doing this:

DOCKER_HOST=“ssh://user@remotehost” docker-compose up -d

It works with plain docker, too. Another user is getting at the same idea when they mention docker contexts, which is just a different way to set the variable.

Did you know about this approach? In the snippet above, the image will be built on the remote machine and then run. The context (files) are sent over the wire as needed. Subsequent runs will use the remote machine's docker cache. It's slightly different than your approach of building locally, but much simpler.
by Avicebron | 2025-06-19 11:22:22+00:00
Yeah the "rational" part always seemed a smokescreen for the ability to produce and ingest their own and their associates methane gases.

I get it, I enjoyed being told I'm a super genius always right quantum physicist mathematician by the girls at Stanford too. But holy hell man, have some class, maybe consider there's more good to be done in rural Indiana getting some dirt under those nails..
by lproven | 2025-06-19 11:22:36+00:00
> That is a odd statement since the people that designed Wayland are, by and large, the same people that maintained Xorg.

I keep reading this -- sometimes, verbatim. I don't know if you are just posting the same stuff everywhere you can, or it's in the database of some LLM bot, but it wasn't true the first time I saw it a week ago, and subsequently incorporated my response into my article here:

https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/12/ubuntu_2510_to_drop_x...

It's still not true.

The same mostly Red Hatters who maintain X.org on Linux are the same people designing Wayland, but there is a lot more to X11 than X.org.

As I replied to someone -- you? -- last time:

« There's a crucial but often overlooked distinction here. Yes, X.org develops the reference implementation of X11, but it's not the only implementation, and it never was. X.org was forked from XFree86 around 2004, and although development is dormant, XFree86 still exists.

There are or have been multiple active forks of X.org. OpenBSD uses Xenocara, developed independently. The FreeBSD X11 server and NetBSD X11 servers are their own forks, too. Although it's very different, the X11 server for Apple macOS, XQuartz, is also still around – even if it's not bundled any more.

The proprietary UNIX variants that are still in maintenance also have their own ports. Solaris 10 offered a choice of three but Solaris 11 has only its own version of Xorg. AIX has AIXwindows with its own X server. HP-UX offers two [PDF], one for HP Visualize graphics cards and another based on XFree86 for other GPUs. Before XFree86 was mature, there were a number of proprietary commercial X11 servers for Linux, such as Metro-X and Xi Accelerated-X.

Windows has its own GUI, of course, but it's been possible to run UNIX binaries on Windows NT ever since the first version, Windows NT 3.1 in 1993 – and since X11 runs over the network, the machine running an X11 app (the "client") can be a different computer to the one displaying the app (the "server"). As such there are multiple X11 servers for Windows, both for local and remote apps. Some are proprietary commercial servers, such as OpenText Exceed, X-Win32, Netsarang Xmanager, MobaXterm, and X410, among others. There are also multiple FOSS X servers for Windows, including VCXsrv, Xming [note, HTTP site], and Cygwin/X.

Many of these use code from X.org, but that's the whole point of FOSS. They aren't written by or maintained by X.org, and even if it and all Red Hat staff stop work on X11 completely, that doesn't mean these downstream projects will suddenly cease to exist. »
by diggan | 2025-06-19 11:23:50+00:00
Microsoft (famously developing somewhat popular office-like software) seems to be going in the direction of almost forcing developers to use LLMs to assist with coding, at least going by what people are willing to admit publicly and seeing some GitHub activity.

Google (made a small browser or something) also develops their own models, I don't think it's far fetched to imagine there is at least one developer on the Chrome/Chromium team that is trying to dogfood that stuff.

As for Autodesk, I have no idea what they're up to, but corporate IT seems hellbent on killing themselves, not sure Autodesk would do anything differently so they're probably also trying to jam LLMs down their employees throats.
by timr | 2025-06-19 11:24:24+00:00
> Accusing a nation of something bad is precisely what their definition of anti-semitism includes.

They literally say the opposite, right in the paragraph I quoted at the top.

Yes, they give examples of criticizing Israel. But the point of the examples is that you a) can't apply standards unique to Israel, and b) if you do criticize the country, it's not fair game to extend it to an entire people.
Ask HN: Are early-stage startups looking for affordable vetted developer support
by nawoda | 2025-06-19 11:24:56+00:00
I'm exploring a model where startups can get access to reliable developers (contract/fractional) without the complexity of traditional outsourcing. Curious if this would be helpful to other founders here.

Have you struggled with hiring devs quickly? What matters most to you—cost, skill, timezone alignment, or trust?

Would love to hear thoughts or connect with anyone facing this.
by t_mann | 2025-06-19 11:25:16+00:00
> “You’re [X]?! The quantum physicist who’s always getting into arguments on the Internet, and who’s essentially always right, but who sustains an unreasonable amount of psychic damage in the process?”

> “Yes,” I replied, not bothering to correct the “physicist” part.

Didn't read much beyond that part. He'll fit right in with the rationalist crowd...
by felipeerias | 2025-06-19 11:26:00+00:00
The problem with trying to reason everything from first principles is that most things didn’t actually came about that way.

Both our biology and other complex human affairs like societies and cultures evolved organically over long periods of time, responding to their environments and their competitors, building bit by bit, sometimes with an explicit goal but often without one.

One can learn a lot from unicellular organisms, but won’t probably be able to reason from them all the way to an elephant. At best, if we are lucky, we can reason back from the elephant.
by speed_spread | 2025-06-19 11:26:19+00:00
Not sure about the corporate advertising tone of the article, but I love OpenAPI. Having to work with various third party HTTP/JSON APIs all the time, I know I would rather deal with imperfect rigid generated client code than half-assed specs and shoddy examples. As a bonus, you can also generate your own server emulation for local testing, which is worth gold when dealing with real hardware.
by inglor_cz | 2025-06-19 11:27:25+00:00
This is true, but also a bit trivial to observe. Even the Primitive Technology channel, which usually starts with mud and clay, builds on knowledge of other people.

The value added is interesting. For example, both the Merlin and the Raptor family of engines. These are some fine engines, and they are remarkably cheap and reusable.
by teekert | 2025-06-19 11:27:51+00:00
Yeah, it's the reason I eventually tuned out of Slack too (obviously I don't use it day to day). I used it for some things, some community stuff, every now and then.

So when I open it up on a new machine or after months, you have to go through that magic link bs multiple times! For all your accounts/channels! I did that 2 or 3 times and then I just stopped using it.

I don't even remember what I signed up for over the years, I know some of it was nice (like an LoRa IOT channel, an "AWS professionals" channel, I set something up for the LoRaWan network in the previous city I lived in... All just tuned out because of the login bs.
by scheeseman486 | 2025-06-19 11:28:06+00:00
The health stuff seems more like woo to me, but subjectively speaking for a while I had OnePlus phone with linear dimming it was easily the most pleasant to read at it's lowest brightness setting, while simultaneously being able to go even dimmer compared to any other phone I've ever used.

The gamma curves got a bit messed up, but when it's that dim it's not like I expect stellar color accuracy anyway.
by arsenii9 | 2025-06-19 11:29:01+00:00
I reported a critical vulnerability that could permanently deny access to any corporate email on Certifix's platform.

After ignoring the report, Certifix acknowledged it privately — then downplayed it publicly as “similar to self-XSS.”

No fix was announced. No credit given.

This post details the exploit (business-logic DoS), provides screenshots of all correspondence, and highlights a broader industry issue: when PR interests override user security.

The article ends with a documented case of a quietly patched bug, suppressed disclosures — and a Hall of Fame that speaks for itself.

Note: The full writeup is originally published on Medium. This Telegra.ph page serves as a relay link.
by amarcheschi | 2025-06-19 11:29:37+00:00
Yes, that they're not "rational".

If you take a look at the biodiversity survey here https://reflectivealtruism.com/2024/12/27/human-biodiversity...

1/3 of the users at acx actually support flawed scientific theories that would explain iq on a scientific basis. The Lynn study on iq is also quite flawed https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations

If you want to read about human biodiversity, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Biodiversity_Institute

As I said, it's not very rational of them to support such theories. And of course as you scratch the surface, it's the old 20th century racist theories, and of course those theories are supported by (mostly white men, if I had to guess) people claiming to be rational
by diggan | 2025-06-19 11:30:01+00:00
Well, they're demonstrating it somewhat, it's more of a prototype today. First tell is the low limit, I think the longest task for me been 15 minutes before it gives up. Second tell is still using a chat UI which is simple to implement, easy to implement and familiar, but also kind of lazy. There should be a better UX, especially with the new variations they just added. From the top of my head, some graph-like UX might have been better.
by Seanambers | 2025-06-19 11:30:47+00:00
Seems to me that this is just another level of throwing compute at the problem.

Same way programs was way more efficient before and now they are "bloated" with packages, abstractions, slow implementations of algos and scaffolding.

The concept of what is good software development might be changing as well.

LLMs might not write the best code, but they sure can write a lot of it.
by diggan | 2025-06-19 11:31:32+00:00
I don't know exactly how Claude works, but the way I work around this with my own stuff is prompting it to not display full outputs ever, and instead temporary redirect the output somewhere then grep from the log-file what it's looking for. So a test run outputting 10K lines of test output and one failure is easily found without polluting the context with 10K lines.
by ineedaj0b | 2025-06-19 11:31:35+00:00
rationalism got pretty lame the last 2-3 years. imo the peak was trying to convince me to donate a kidney.

post-rationalism is where all the cool kids are and where the best ideas are at right now. the post rationalists consistently have better predictions and the 'rationalists' are stuck arguing whether chickens suffer more getting factory farmed or chickens cause more suffering eating bugs outside.

they also let SF get run into the ground until their detractors decided to take over.