MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Thank HN: For no pagination and persistent collapsed comments
by soneca | 2025-06-04 17:08:37+00:00
I don't know if it was announced, but I noticed that there is finally (after a long time of dang promising it) no pagination anymore for posts with tons of comments. All loading quickly in one page.

Also, I noticed the feature of collapsing comment threads is more reliable and persistent in my account through different browsers.

These two improvements are very useful features now that I am looking for a job in the latest "Who is hiring". I can organize myself very easily going through each post and collapsing job posts that are not for me, all in one page.

I remember last time (about 4 year ago), it was a nightmare to keep track of the Who is hiring. Now it's a breeze. Thanks HN team!
by gavmor | 2025-06-04 17:08:54+00:00
Have you put any thought into accommodating self-supporting design to optimize for printing?

Or parametric structural optimization / topology optimization with parametric constraints?

Or, rather, if these are out of scope for your tool, then I'm wondering, like the other comment, how you'll slot into existing pipelines that do facilitate these techniques.

I'm not in the industry, I'm just curious.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF | 2025-06-04 17:09:30+00:00
That is a good reason to think they did not but it doesn't necessarily override reasons for them to do so. Perhaps it's dubious that the subset of data they could not legally get their hands on is an advantage for training but I really don't know, and maybe nobody does. Given that, Google's execs may have been in favor of similar operations as Facebook's and their lawyers may have been willing to approve them with similar justifications.
by layer8 | 2025-06-04 17:09:48+00:00
That’s one of the first explanations that was considered. It can’t be dust or gas, because those would be backlit by the stars behind them and thus be visible. Larger objects are called MACHO [0] and have been ruled out by observational studies as well. As explained in [1], baryonic dark matter is also contradicted by CMB anisotropy analysis and nucleosynthesis theory.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_compact_halo_object

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter#Baryonic_matter
by genewitch | 2025-06-04 17:10:01+00:00
I wonder if it will end up being a game-like loop where it processes everything that's come in since the last delta. Here's, you know, 4x200samples of audio, 2 frames of video, and here's all the mems sensor data during the delta, etc

Then you just work on getting the delta as small as possible, I assumed 5ms for audio, e.g.
by wyldberry | 2025-06-04 17:10:03+00:00
The more well compensated someone is, the less likely they are going to be to speak out. The employees are more than comfortable.

Also, the incentive structure for reward (stock price etc) is predicated by squeezing every last bit of monetization out. They already know ahead of time how much money a new feature could bring in, and the potential litigation cost before hand. If revenue > litigation/fine expense, they are going to do it.
Ask HN: A $1.5B company ignores a critical RCE for 9 months?
by dsekz | 2025-06-04 17:10:05+00:00
Last year, I disclosed a one-click Remote Code Execution vulnerability in a very popular software (20+ million users). The exploit is triggered by opening a single specially crafted link in any web browser–no further input necessary. The exploit can be executed in any domain where we can run javascript and open a websocket connection. Once clicked, code execution occurs via the installed client, completely silently. (In case you’re wondering: It does not trigger protocol handler confirmation dialog either – aka. no “Open Program” prompt is presented.)

Despite repeated follow-ups over several months, the exploit remains unpatched. It’s now been over 9 months and the vulnerability is still present in the production client. Initial responses were inconsistent or dismissive, and at some point, all communication stopped entirely. I’ve gone through all official channels (first email and later HackerOne).

At what point does “responsible disclosure” allow for going public, even in a limited, non-technical way, for the sake of transparency and user safety? I would love to hear how others have handled situations where companies refuse to act. Thanks in advance.
by guestbest | 2025-06-04 17:10:07+00:00
There are already several books about Surveillance capital. It’s not just VC money but public money, too. People pay taxes to get monitored by the government then go to work at a job where further monitoring takes place. Maybe one day houses will come with a build in no tech safe room free from surveillance and it won’t just be the bathroom as Bill Gates joked about in 2007 with his interview alongside Steve Jobs
by hwillis | 2025-06-04 17:10:19+00:00
Death statistics are not a good measure in this case. The large majority of prostate cancer is very slow growing and occurs late in life. The goal of treatment is not to cure- just to slow it down. Many of those deaths are nearly at the age they would have died anyway and had a full life because of the less-aggressive treatment. Most people will live another 15+ years.

That stands in stark contrast to lung cancer, which has a median survival time of ~15 months. Pancreatic cancer usually kills you in less than a year. Colon cancer is better, but still only ~6 years. Leukemia and Lymphoma can occur in middle age or even in early childhood, and rob an entire lifetime.
by xxpor | 2025-06-04 17:10:49+00:00
+1 on reading.

I hardly consider myself an expert ARM ASM programmer (or even an amateur...), but a baseline level of how to read it even if you have to look up a bunch of instructions every time can be super useful for performance work, especially if you have the abstract computer engineering know how to back it up.

For example, it turns out that gcc 7.3 (for arm64) doesn't optimize

foo() ? bar() : baz();

the same as

if (foo()) { bar(); } else { baz(); }

!

The former was compiled into a branchless set of instructions, while the latter had a branch!
by boricj | 2025-06-04 17:11:00+00:00
Machine code isn't scary, but its nature is severely misunderstood.

Skipping over the bundling of instructions into code blocks, the next logical construct are functions. These have references to code and data in memory; if you want to relocate functions around in memory you introduce the concept of relocations to annotate these references and of a linker to fix them to a particular location.

But once the linker has done its job, the function is no longer relocatable, you can't move it around... or that is what someone sane might say.

If you can undo the work of the linker, you can extract relocatable functions from executables. These functions can then be reused into new executables, without decompiling them first; after all, if what you've extracted is equivalent to the original relocatable function, you can do the same things than it.

Repeat this process over the entire executable and you're stripped it for parts, ready to be put back together with the linker. Change some parts and you have the ability to modify it as if you're replacing object files, instead of binary patching it in place with all the constraints that comes with it.

Machine code is like Lego bricks, it just takes a rather unconventional point of view (and quite a bit of time to perfect the art of delinking) to realize it.
by lenerdenator | 2025-06-04 17:11:36+00:00
It wouldn't be their fault if the economic class that they were a part of weren't actively opposed to changing those social systems.

I wouldn't care nearly as much about AI were there a stronger social safety net in the US. However, that's not going to happen anytime soon, because that requires taxes to pay for, and the very wealthy do not like paying those because it reduces their wealth.
by Const-me | 2025-06-04 17:11:38+00:00
I think writing assembly indeed offers no benefit for most developers. However, being able to read and understand assembly is generally useful.

Enables debugging binaries and crash dumps without complete source codes, like DLLs shipped with Windows or third-party DLLs. Allows to understand what compilers (both traditional and JIT) did to your source codes, this is useful when doing performance optimizations.
by cogman10 | 2025-06-04 17:12:03+00:00
> I was having a hard time with the idea that some goober in tan pants would dig up a bone fragment in Africa and know it was his own (great X 1,000) grandmother.

...

> But personally, I’m cautious about any theory that keeps the same conclusion regardless of how many times the evidence for it changes. There was a time when the seemingly straight line of fossil evidence was the primary foundation for the theory. Now it seems that that straight line was like Little Billy from Family Circus finding his way home from the playground

This where he's simply wrong and misunderstands what paleontologists and biology experts have always said.

No serious expert in the field has dug up an australopithecus specimen and said "See, here is my great grandmother!". It's absurd to think that. Adams has likely seen the march of progress and thought "Oh, this is what the experts think happened". But that's simply not true and never has been.

Evolution simply posits gradual change over generations. A result of that is a messy family tree with a lot of dead "branches".

But further, the concept of "species" has always been a messy one. A prime example of this is the fact that Neanderthals breed with the Denisovans and some of their offspring have survived to today. 2 different species closely related enough that they could have viable offspring. That makes for a messy tree.

This is an obvious fact to any biologist and isn't the least bit outside of what the theory of evolution predicts. Again, the only real prediction of evolution is that speciation happens gradually as a result of changes in generations. It doesn't predict "straight lines" like Adams asserts, it never has. Nor does it exclude the possibility for the same features to evolve multiple times. It never has.

So, when he goes out of his way to write an article "fossils are bullshit" what exactly do you think he's trying to communicate? He doesn't outright deny evolution is a thing, but he does explicitly voice doubts about evolution being a solid theory.

Now, that doesn't mean that we aren't constantly learning new things from new fossils. That's the nature of science. Adams being concerned that new data updates a theory is a severe misunderstanding of exactly how scientific research works.
by Kon-Peki | 2025-06-04 17:12:05+00:00
Toyota had announced a 3-row EV to begin production this year, in Kentucky. Who knows if it will be delayed or cancelled. If you go read the CEO section of the earnings call transcripts from last year, you’ll get an idea of what near(ish) future EVs from Ford are going to look like - to be built in Tennessee and Michigan.

Which is all to say that what you want is much more likely to come from Toyota or Ford or Hyundai or Kia than it is from Tesla.
by ggerules | 2025-06-04 17:12:08+00:00
I'm also a regular user.

Q1: To my knowledge for the merlin app, no. Just local storage to your phone as a WAV file.

Q2: If you've started down the path of using Merlin, there is a companion app from the Cornell group called ebird. It used GPS to list birding Hotspot near your location. You can keep track of what you've seen. If you want to get extra verification on your sightings you can upload pictures and audio files at a later time on the ebird website. Real live humans, volunteer birding experts, will verify your sightings. I've gotten to meet some very knowledgeable birders through this process. All of this data goes into scientific research. On the ebird website the have specific protocols on what make for a good observation. It is my understanding that submitted and vetted photos and audio files will make it into the NN models used by the Merlin app.

Happy birding to everyone!
by porridgeraisin | 2025-06-04 17:13:15+00:00
Depending on the data you collect, targeting by user - unfortunately - works. If the granularity is not one user, it will be a hundred. If not, a thousand, and so on. I've seen apps run ads targeting a total of 5 cohorts(together holding a hundred million users), and I've seen companies run ads targeting 100s of cohorts with the same number of users. They all work better than no targeting at all.

However what you're saying isn't completely wrong. I've also seen user targeting become a self-fulfilling prophecy. What happens is that it's championed by a high level executive as the panacea for improving revenue, implemented, and seen to not work. Now, as we all now, the C*O is Always Correct, so everything else around it is modified until the user-level targeting A/B test shows positive results. Usually this ends up in the product being tortured into an unusable mess.
by gleenn | 2025-06-04 17:13:20+00:00
Why is this de-facto the case for so many things? Is it a matter of finding a lawyer? Do these enforcement agencies just not care or don't have enough resources to battle Meta? It's exhausting that this gets repeated so often but for no apparent reason. I understand that the fine might not be large enough to stop them but it feels like all these things just get swept under the rug and gross violations of privacy which are against the law never get actioned. (Edit: forgot a word)
by gertd | 2025-06-04 17:13:31+00:00
Learn Rust or something else if you do not like or cannot stand golang!

This generates high-calorie syntactic sugar just to satisfy an itch.

Run the generated code through the golang-ci linter, which will barf on what is getting created, for example:

``` // Eliminates any 'unused variable' errors _, _, _, _ = err, fileContent, fileContentStrVersion, trimmedLines ```

golang is a procedural language. If you cannot deal with it, don't use it, but please stop polluting the ecosystem.
by tedivm | 2025-06-04 17:13:39+00:00
This was actually the approach that Vicarious AI took while I was there, and even $250m in VC funding wasn't enough to prove it out, although that may have been a problem of having too much money and not enough focus.

I think the problem (if it can be called that) is that LLMs are useful today, while we still haven't solved the embodiment problem. There's a lot more research before that'll work well, while LLMs have uses today. So the money goes to the LLMs. While it's pretty obvious that solving the problem would change society, it's also not clear how close we are to doing it. That makes it much harder to get the capital as it is a much larger risk.
by lenerdenator | 2025-06-04 17:13:52+00:00
> If OpenAI shut theirs down tomorrow and Sam Altman became a travelling monk preaching against the development of AI, do you really believe it would stop the momentum?

Oh, I know it wouldn't, but I know he won't, because there's too much financial incentive to do so, and Altman and his ilk think that all human endeavors can be judged as a net good or net bad by whether or not they make number go bigger.
by mjamesaustin | 2025-06-04 17:14:06+00:00
The politics is a symptom of a greater problem with Musk's companies, which is that they ultimately only care about his bottom line.

As a current owner, I wouldn't buy again because of the abysmal customer service and repair experience. This car is a huge computer, and has plenty of glitches appearing now that it's out of warranty.

The main benefit of a Tesla vs other electric cars was the supercharging network, but with the adoption of NACS across most manufacturers, that advantage is gone.

There are plenty of high quality reasonably priced electric vehicles people can buy – they're just not Teslas.
by vessenes | 2025-06-04 17:14:14+00:00
Agreed that policy changes whipsaw markets and that causes disinterest in the dollar, and agreed that could be real bad (TM) for America.

The rest of this essay just reads like griping and cherry picking though. Complaining about the name of the bill "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" is just dumb. Senators and Reps name bills all sorts of funny things aiming to be catchy or what have you, it's part of our process.

And, it seems much more likely that whipsawing serves the purpose of someone than that people in the whitehouse are "unserious". I'd rather see Mr. Krugman's estimable mind devoted to figuring out who is benefiting, how long they will benefit, and what that will do to others than to read him complaining about the name of a bill.
by tejohnso | 2025-06-04 17:14:15+00:00
Yet Tesla market cap is four times that of Toyota's.

Unbelievable.

I had to stay out of TSLA after the first year or so because the valuation made no sense to me. Other than a FOMO / YOLO play like BTC.

I'm shocked that the valuation continues to remain so high after so many lies and mediocre results. Was the Cybertruck a success? There definitely are not a million Tesla robotaxis on the road as Elon suggested there would be by 2020.
by mlry | 2025-06-04 17:14:24+00:00
Every once in a while I think about using PayPal ... then I do some research and am utterly astonished why people would agree to such T&C. I would never use Google or Apple for payments. So I am desperately looking for a viable alternative. I used giropay until they cancelled service to the end of 2024 and I have to wait for Wero or an alternative. Yes, I do have serious concerns and I do absolutely not trust any American services. Especially not in these times. And I have less security concerns but rather privacy and data protection concerns in this matter. But I do have no illusions. European politicians see digital services as means to surveillance and control. Citizen's concerns, rights or best interests are certainly not on their agenda. This was clearly demonstrated recently when the EU commission refused to publish the names of the stakeholders and institutions working towards even more surveillance and permissions for governmental organizations.
by hintymad | 2025-06-04 17:14:49+00:00
I have a hard time imagining how the current large model could possibly replace all the jobs, given that the models simply retrieve and re-organize human-generated knowledge, and perform limited interpolation when it comes to code generation. We software engineers open source all kinds of cool code to replace ourselves to a certain degree, but without us, who's going to generate new knowledge to feed the models?
by bionhoward | 2025-06-04 17:15:32+00:00
When has Apple’s strategy ever been to be first to follow on the latest bandwagon? I thought it was more about making great products which integrate design and technology. They have a launch cadence and they take their time, is that really the same thing as “failing?”

There are plenty of places you can find rushed AI projects. Perhaps being slower and smoother is itself a differentiator?
by gruez | 2025-06-04 17:15:46+00:00
>I assume autoexec is referring to the plethora of WebRTC vulnerabilities which have affected browsers, messengers, and any other software which implements WebRTC for client use. Its full implementation is seemingly difficult to get right.

Like what? I did a quick search and most seem to be stuff like ip leaks and fingerprinting, which isn't relevant in ffmpeg.
by myrmidon | 2025-06-04 17:15:47+00:00
Hm... I'm still not really buying the "turn datacenter off during peak electricity demand" scenario at all, because the ratios just don't seem credible to me:

Assuming ~$10M of capex (to buy the datacenter) per MW of electrical power (required by the datacenter), and hardware that is obsolete after 5 years (or even 10!), turning that datacenter off for an hour just to save like ~50$/MWh (or whatever spot price is) seems extremely counterproductive, because your hardware running for that additional hour is worth multiple times that (you spent like >$100 per operating hour on the hardware alone assuming 10 year lifetime).

It seems much more attractive (and credible) to just install more batteries (or even a gas turbine), instead of chasing demand-side-regulation pretensions.

edit: thx for the link though, that is a very interesting study/data even if I disagree with that conclusion!
by mschuster91 | 2025-06-04 17:15:54+00:00
> Hopefully this doesn't make it more dangerous to keep ffmpeg on our systems.

ffmpeg has had so many issues in the past [1], it's best practice anyway to keep it well contained when dealing with user input. Create a docker image with nothing but ffmpeg and its dependencies installed and do a "docker run" for every transcode job you got. Or maybe add ClamAV, OpenOffice and ImageMagick in the image as well if you also need to deal with creating thumbnails of images and document.

And personally, I'd go a step further and keep the servers that deal with user-generated files in more than accepting and serving them in their own, heavily locked down VLAN (or Security Group if you're on AWS).

That's not a dumbass criticism of any of these projects mentioned by the way. Security is hard, especially when dealing with binary formats that have inherited a lot of sometimes questionably reverse engineered garbage. It's wise to recognize this before getting fucked over like 4chan was.

[1] https://ffmpeg.org/security.html
by flohofwoe | 2025-06-04 17:16:02+00:00
Out-of-order execution is an internal optimization, from the outside results are still guaranteed to be available in order - e.g. the instruction stream appears to be executed in order when observing the CPU from the outside.

For instance you don't need to be afraid that an instruction uses garbage inputs just because a previous instruction hadn't finished computing an input value to the instruction. At worst you'll get a pipeline stall if the CPU can't fill the gap with out-of-order executed instructions.

On some CPUs it does get tricky once memory is involved though (on ARM, but not on x86).
by rcarmo | 2025-06-04 17:16:11+00:00
Spoiler: Lowest I could go is €1399, which is still three times as much as I would consider paying (especially considering I have the OG).

Without getting into the weeds, the value I see anyone getting from an OP-1 (of any generation) is still the all-in-one musical notepad angle, and I just don't see that being anywhere above the price of an iPad (which trounces the OP-1 in terms of music features if you install AUM and the Audiokit Pro synths - no DAWs involved).
by a4isms | 2025-06-04 17:16:21+00:00
> everyone should want

Leaving everything else you've written aside... Really‽ You believe that it's possible to make a single kind of car with minimal variation in styles and capabilities that will appeal to the entire world, at every price point, every demographic?

I suggest you are over-extrapolating your own confirmation bias. I drive a Volvo, it is not possible for Tesla to sell me a vehicle with a single flat screen to replace my buttons, screen, digital gauge cluster, and heads-up display. It is not possible to sell me a Model Y or Model X to replace my wagon. I am obviously not Tesla's market for Tesla's current product lineup, period.

My neighbour has a cottage and owns a truck they use for all sorts of hauling things around. I have spoken with them, it is not possible to sell them a CyberTruck, they are interested in the F150 Lightning, a vehicle designed for truck owners who want to electrify. My neighbour is not Tesla's market either.

Tesla is not into broad market segmentation. Tesla is into having a well-defined market and offering a handful of models to that market. You're in that market and you're happy with your Tesla. Ok. But come on, do you understand that the rest of the 7 billion people on this planet make up a wide variety of humans with a wide variety of wants and needs where a vehicle is concerned?

And that literally ZERO manufacturers can make a handful of cars that everyone will want?