MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by charleslmunger | 2025-06-01 21:32:20+00:00
You can't precisely convert it to c++, because there's no c++ construct that precisely matches Java behavior - namely atomic with relaxed memory order but permitting aliasing and load/store optimizations. The spiritually closest thing would just be a regular variable, which would be a data race that tsan would catch.

You can go the other way, porting that c++ to Java using varhandle and opaque memory order.
by Zak | 2025-06-01 21:32:46+00:00
I imagine the sandboxing and existence of terrible code wouldn't have been especially different from JS. I think the ubiquity would have helped to make people more aware of the advantages of Lisp. We might have substantially more Lisp-derived languages in popular use today.

I'm currently working on a project in Clojurescript, and I'm aware of some of the other options for running Lisp in a browser.
by miki123211 | 2025-06-01 21:33:09+00:00
And a TL;DR, both for the articles themselves as well as the discussions.

I don't think a TL;DR can replace most articles that appear on HN, but it can certainly tell me whether the article is interesting, much better than any headline ever could. Especially so if the TL;DR is written by a neutral AI with no interest in making me click anything, and hence no qualms about surfacing the most important information to the top.

I actually tried to do this, but it was with GPT-3.5, and I didn't exactly like how it worked. I should look at this again, I wouldn't be surprised if the code I used back then could just be ported over to 2.5 Flash and produce much better results.
by antithesizer | 2025-06-01 21:33:15+00:00
To the extent that the value of a university education is in the degree rather than the knowledge, cheating will remain rational. Since the business model of selling undergraduate programs depends on the value of most degrees as prerequisites to certain lucrative/prestigious careers, such programs are fundamentally broken. Don't try to save them by playing whack-a-mole with cheaters who understand the stakes of the game better than you do. That battle cannot be won.
by gapan | 2025-06-01 21:33:35+00:00
There were others too. At least the Olivetti Prodest PC1 [1], which I had, and the Sinclair PC200 [2], which a close friend had. Other friends had the EuroPC, some had the Amstrad 1512 and other different PC compatible boxes.

I remember my PC1 fondly. Well, I still have it. I learned to code in GW-BASIC, Turbo Pascal and C (in that order) with it. I was using it for a long time, until 1997, for serious work (coding and university assignments), when I finally had the money to upgrade to a Pentium PC.

As much as my world was PC-centric, the first time I saw an Atari ST and what it could do, my jaw dropped. I knew of the Amiga from magazines, but the first time I actually saw one was several years later, after I acquired my Pentium PC and I admit it wasn't that impressive then. But still I couldn't help but think: "wow, you had that in 1989?". There was no comparison with the PCs of its time.

[1] https://www.seasip.info/VintagePC/prodestpc1.html

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_PC200
by mdp2021 | 2025-06-01 21:34:16+00:00
Abridgement - made by this poster, not automated - over the transcript:

> This year, Blender is transitioning to Vulkan, which marks one of the biggest performance boosts in its history: weʼre talking about a leap from a cold start time of a minute 52 to opening Blender in 6 seconds. // Vulkan ... simply put, itʼs the industry standard API. [...] Blenderʼs current API is OpenGL, which has some major flaws. OpenGL ... really struggles using multi-core CPUs. // OpenGL ... automatically sets up most low-level features like memory management, synchronization, and hardware interactions. ... But high-level APIs come with a huge trade-off: theyʼre slow. // Writing code that performs better in Vulkan is a difficult task ... OpenGL is like infinitely easier than Vulkan. Vulkan ... is a low-level API. [...] Vulkan can perform up to 18 times better on certain tasks. [...] For tasks that heavily rely on the UI, we will see a much more performant system. [...] Essentially, interactions between the user and the program will be much faster, but the underlying automatic system will not see a direct speed increase from Vulkan. ... While I would love for my final render to be faster, I would much prefer to have a performant viewport thatʼs more stable and faster, which is what weʼll have with Vulkan. But this is not the only thing it brings to the table. Many corporate sponsors have granted money to Blender primarily for a Vulkan integration. AMD is donating $120,000 per year to help fund Blenderʼs transition to Vulkan.
Show HN: Deep Research – Open-Source Customizable Reasoning Framework for Devs
by winzamark12 | 2025-06-01 21:34:46+00:00
The first ever AI peer reviewed research article just got approved. It’s kinda crazy how advanced AI have come to replace researchers.

I've just been using Deep Research on ChatGPT and Perplexity a lot to write and research complex technical reports for my boss. He loves the reports and it has decreased my workload a ton but I still have some frustrations with it. None of them provide an API that gets me the same quality of output you would with the applications.

I wanted something with more control on the LLMs, swappable with the reasoning new models that came out.

Not just prompt → response; I wanted to shape the way the reasoning happened. How prompting was made, the design of the process, how many layers of thinking the models should go through, and what information the LLM should be extracting from the internet.

Essentially I wanted the following things: • Choose which LLM models were used and how they were combined • Adjust how deep or broad the exploration went • Specify the report format: token count, structure, even tone • Expose verified sources that were used throughout the process

But most of the deep research tools I’ve used don't allow that or has some weird edge case. They are mostly closed system/sources or commercial API’s for end-users - NOT developers.

So I built Deep Research - a fully customizable open source deep research framework. It’s designed for devs who want full control over the research process, without building everything from scratch.

It supports: • Multi-model orchestration — Plug in your own LLMs or use the defaults (GPT-4.1 is baked in) • Custom depth and breadth — Tune the research from shallow summaries to multi-layered deep dives • Token-level control — Define how long the output should be • Transparent citations — Everything is traceable back to its source • Built-in web search — Integrates JigsawStack’s web search to combine retrieval with reasoning

It runs on top of Vercel’s AI SDK making it easily configurable!

Here’s a full blog breakdown: https://jigsawstack.com/blog/introducing-jigsawstack-deep-re...

Try it out. Would love to hear feedback from fellow hackers! What’s good, what’s bad, what’s ALARMING.
by bjackman | 2025-06-01 21:34:56+00:00
Usually I just use `nix run .#nixosConfigurations.<my config>.config.system.build.vm`

This boots directly into the kernel with QEMU's '-kernel' option, and it mounts the host Nix store into the guest via Plan 9 FS. So there is some significant difference vs a full system, e.g. it's not possible to nixos-rebuild the VM. But if you're just testing high-level stuff it's totally fine.

Then there's also a .vmWithBootloader variant which behaves a bit more like a physical machine, IIUC it builds a disk image and boots it via Nixos' actual bootloader.
by kwillets | 2025-06-01 21:35:22+00:00
There's a why page in their docs, but basically it's cheaper than a multitasking OS for doing the same thing. The valueprop of Erlang is lightweight threads and message-passing.

My knowledge of microcontrollers is dated, but the frameworks for Arduino etc. seemed limited on their ability to do event or message-based programming; most example apps at least were a polling loop. The classic architecture of setting up interrupt/event handlers and going to sleep was not there.
Show HN: Ramsey – A desktop pet that eats your files and gives you achievements
by spola25 | 2025-06-01 21:35:28+00:00
Hey HN,

I made RAMsey – a chaotic little desktop companion that "eats" your files, spawns cubes, and gives you achievements as you interact with it. It's like Clippy meets Tamagotchi meets digital entropy.

It's built with PyQt6 and supports animated movement, feeding behavior, and file interaction. You can even drag stuff into its mouth and it'll react!

GitHub: https://github.com/Githubuser1122bruh/RAMsey (Demo video and screenshots in the README)

I wanted to make something fun and silly that lives on your desktop and makes you smile — kind of like the weird utilities from the early 2000s. Would love feedback or feature suggestions!

Please leave a star on the github! Thanks
by TeMPOraL | 2025-06-01 21:36:18+00:00
Who knows, but drop the word "vibe" and this is basically the startup culture 15 years ago, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

Well, okay, for better historical accuracy, replace APL with API, and the kernel for arm64 thing with Ruby on Rails on a new Macbook, but the point still stands.
by codeptualize | 2025-06-01 21:36:35+00:00
Love this, definitely rooting for this to get big!

I think the goal is great. My dream language is something "in between Go and Rust", Go but with more expressive types, Rust-light, something along those lines. This seems like it is hitting that sweet spot.

Imo Go gets a lot right when it comes to productivity, but the type system always annoys me a bit. I understand the choice for simplicity, but my preference is different.

Rust is quite enjoyable, especially when it comes to the type system. But, kinda the opposite of go, it's a lot, maybe too much for me, and I frequently don't know what I'm doing haha. I also don't really need Rust level performance, most things I do will run totally fine with GC.

So Go with some extra types, same easy concurrency, compilation and portability sounds like a winner to me.
by sfpotter | 2025-06-01 21:36:49+00:00
Yeah, I'd generally agree with that.

One thing to bear in mind, though: there are numerical algorithms which are stable and unimpeachably useful but which are unstable in interval arithmetic owing to the natural interval inclusion behaving poorly. A great example of this is the Clenshaw recursion for evaluating Chebyshev series. It is the method of choice for evaluating a Chebyshev series at a single point, but the corresponding natural interval inclusion is actually unstable itself (the width tends to blow up exponentially fast in the degree of the series, regardless of the coefficients).

I tend to view "classical numerical methods" and interval arithmetic as somewhat different camps. There's definitely a significant overlap and they can both profit from each other, but you need to put on a different hat when you're doing each. Sometimes interval arithmetic is just too expensive, in which case you need to select a good, stable numerical algorithm. On the other hand, if you're doing interval arithmetic because you must (you need a certified, correct answer), then you will often need to use a completely different set of algorithms and spend some time fussing over what the most appropriate interval inclusion is.

Again, another good example here relates to Chebyshev series. If you want to find all of the roots of an analytic function on an interval, expand it in a Chebyshev series and solve the colleague matrix eigenvalue problem. The result could be subtly wrong due to numerical roundoff, and you'd have a hard time recovering from this position; but this method is undeniably extremely useful. On the other hand, if you want to compute rigorous enclosures of all zeros of that same analytic function, you'd need to develop a suitable interval inclusion for it, and then run some type of interval rootfinding algorithm based on a combination of interval contractors (Krawczyk) and subdivision. Basically, a branch and bound algorithm.
by baduiux | 2025-06-01 21:37:05+00:00
Really cool project!

This brought to my mind to do something similar for digital advertisement, i.e. collecting various ads on the web and (automatically) label them through their metadata. I’m not quite sure yet we’re this could go. I imagine different categories: SaaS ads, video game ads, company ads, e-commerce ads, and so on, all categorized by company, date, site, etc. You could then see how ads changed for a specific tag/category over time or how ads for a single company, say SAP, changed.
by antithesizer | 2025-06-01 21:37:38+00:00
The incentive to cheat is the money paid to participate in the undergraduate program plus the career expected to follow from it. Remove those and you will have no students. But what you describe wouldn't remove the incentive to cheat, just make cheating a different and presumably more difficult process. But as long as it's easier to cheat than not to cheat, rational students will continue to cheat.
by robocat | 2025-06-01 21:38:00+00:00
> Denial of service should be possible

That's sounds like an overcomplicatedengineer solution.

The 10x engineer uses a hammer to deny service.

Aside: I'm an artist-engineer. I like the performance art of using an oversized hammer to solve a problem that isn't obviously solved using a hammer - and I love the discovery process when my aims fail.
by dgfitz | 2025-06-01 21:38:23+00:00
I guess I lost the plot. Same point, either you work or you don’t. I grew up not knowing if I would have dinner that night because we were so poor. I learned I needed to work to eat. I don’t care that rich people are rich, I only care about myself and my family.

Coddling poor people is so severely out of touch with their reality, they most likely resent the hell out of you for it, I know I did.
by johnea | 2025-06-01 21:38:28+00:00
> nanochemicals that alter weather patterns

Those wily legislators in the sportsman's paradise, what will they take on next?

I hope they can prevent the lizard people, from inside the hollow earth, from grooming those children at Hilary Clinton's pizza parlor!

As if there wasn't enough blatant polluting in Louisiana already, and now they're burdened with nanochemicals that alter weather patterns. I'm glad to see they're taking on the most egregious violators first!
by deng | 2025-06-01 21:38:57+00:00
First off, I'm assuming of course we are talking Mac here, because Windows is unusable for MIDI. If you have terrible MIDI timing with a Mac, then yes indeed, you'll need to sync via audio, but there are nice and inexpensive solutions for this, for instance the Midronome.

Look, I'm not trying to convince you to get rid of your Ataris, quite the contrary. I'm just disagreeing that it's impossible to have low jitter nowadays, but I fully agree that things used to be simpler before everything was done via USB.
by Animats | 2025-06-01 21:39:21+00:00
So there's a company which offers "synthetic users" for user testing products.[1] Apparently, social science researchers have been using things like that for their research. It's a low-cost alternative to paying real people to answer surveys. Sort of pretend social science research. That seems to be the real problem.

The paper is about why this is bad from the viewpoint of identity politics. It's probably bad from other viewpoints, too. It's discouraging that anyone thought that asking questions of LLMs was good social science research.

[1] https://www.syntheticusers.com/
by aristofun | 2025-06-01 21:40:55+00:00
1. UI is a hard multidimensional problem

2. It is not (and probably never will be) solved universally.

3. Even if someone comes close to universal solution initially (react, nextjs) they eventually evolve into over complicated shit (partly because of greediness and arrogance of authors - who would not want to rule all and make as much profit, partly because never ending stream of edge cases pushes it to evolve in unpredictable directions).

4. New generations of creators see better new ways and new requirements on the market.

You can only last so far fixing an old car. You eventually would have to get a new one. Even if the main idea (moving you from A to B) stays exactly the same
by TeMPOraL | 2025-06-01 21:41:07+00:00
Probably as long as non-anthropomorphic idiocy can.

No opinion on this submission, but a more general point. I'm not the one to jump into anthropomorphizing computers, but last year or two of LLM and adjacent research is a constant stream of papers and experiments that totally surprise everyone who refuse to even entertain comparisons between LLMs and people, while being entirely expected and completely not surprising to those who do.
by miki123211 | 2025-06-01 21:41:45+00:00
> The protection comes from the contracts and regulations between the shops and the banks.

While the comment is not quite true (see sibling replies), this part is spot on.

This is also why crackpot theories about people walking around with portable card readers and stealing money from contactless cards are false. Yes you can walk around and make those transactions, what comes after (and the setup you had to do before) is the problem. I'm not even sure whether you could get the money out before being caught and shut down. With how many people these days have push notifications for their transactions, I highly doubt that.
by michaelmrose | 2025-06-01 21:41:55+00:00
You don't need to prove a negative. For any trillion combination of sayings which share 4 or more words in common no evidence exists for the connection of one to the other. The words are manifestly different save for using the same idiom about a camel through the eye of a needle.

They are again different in meaning with one being that attachment wealth is a barrier to being saved and the other being through god all things are possible. If you believe a plain interpretation of the text is in accurate the onus is on you to prove why and you haven't.
by tialaramex | 2025-06-01 21:42:20+00:00
I agree that this isn't how it works.

The first thing to understand at an even higher level about payment cards is that they have always had two separate and barely related components, Authorisation and Settlement.

Authorisation is concerned with whether this specific transaction has been approved in some sense by a card issuer. Authorization today is relatively high tech, there's somewhat decent cryptography, tamper resistance, uniqueness = they really care - and that's because when Authorization problems occur the banks might lose money, which they hate.

Settlement is "just" moving the money from one customer to another. $123.45 from Jim Smith to Terrible Goose Inc, done. This is very mid-late-20th century technology, we're not talking pieces of paper and scribbly hand writing, but fixed width ASCII fields on magnetic tape is fine - it's the customer's money so the banks don't care more than legally required.

Settlement replays are how you get "accidents" where a big store's customers all get charged twice for a whole day - the associated Authorizations can't be replayed, that's the banks money at risk - but the settlements aren't protected.

Merchants can, and some do, choose not to care about Authorization. In a huge business it could make sense to eat say 2% of sales as undetected fraud (ie you never receive payment) rather than have any transactions fail. If you operate a food truck using a terminal to take $1000 per day on your iPhone the people who supply your terminal may not let you opt out because that's risk they don't want. But if Jeff Bezos or Doug McMillon makes more without Auth he's turning it off.
by loloquwowndueo | 2025-06-01 21:42:43+00:00
Internally, toxic culture has resulted in large turnaround which is biased to the most experienced people in the company (those smart and valuable enough to realize they don’t have to put up with the crap and can do better elsewhere). It doesn’t matter how brilliant the new hires are, there’s no way to replace the lost institutional knowledge and experience when an old-timer leaves.
by echelon | 2025-06-01 21:43:28+00:00
That's not true at all.

I put an early GenAI side project up, someone convinced me to monetize, and boom - $700k ARR in almost no time.

I'm not sure it's possible now with so little effort given how full the space is, but if you're in the right time and place with the right solution, there are tons of people that will pay you.

Same story as always: create value, solve a problem, make something people want.
by WarOnPrivacy | 2025-06-01 21:43:34+00:00
Google claims that forcing it to license search would put everyone's privacy at risk because it has a vast amount of user data that fuels search. [Judge] Mehta questioned the government lawyers pointedly on the issue of privacy, which he noted was barely addressed in the remedy filings.

I think it is either sad or telling that the DoJ didn't come prepared to address user data.

There are many methods to address this. Some begin with:

Don't collect data that isn't critical to the service and/or Don't allow data outside of the service silo and/or Allow data to flow with the license, when the fully informed user opts-in
by mdp2021 | 2025-06-01 21:44:00+00:00
I submitted the article judging it interesting and informative. I strongly will not call (potential) "divisiveness" an excuse to avoid productive discussion.

From the article, as always, you should harvest the useful points. The expression in the article may be faulty - the data is there for us to know.

And I would not focus on the specific "violation" that triggered the use of the infrastructure to aid the manhunt.
by mathfailure | 2025-06-01 21:44:15+00:00
Yes, with static image CPU consumption goes to ~0%. chrome://gpu says:

Graphics Feature Status

=======================

* Canvas: Hardware accelerated

* Direct Rendering Display Compositor: Disabled

* Compositing: Hardware accelerated

* Multiple Raster Threads: Enabled

* OpenGL: Enabled

* Rasterization: Hardware accelerated on all pages

* Raw Draw: Disabled

* Skia Graphite: Disabled

* Video Decode: Hardware accelerated

* Video Encode: Software only. Hardware acceleration disabled

* Vulkan: Disabled

* WebGL: Hardware accelerated

* WebGL2: Hardware accelerated

* WebGPU: Disabled

* WebNN: Disabled
by collingreen | 2025-06-01 21:44:46+00:00
This thread is a really really good example of why this kind of question sounds good but can lead you astray. So many folks have been generous with their answers here but a huge portion of them have multiple replies with existing solutions that were a simple google away, which means they thought of a neat idea but they definitely were not desperate enough for a solution to even search for one let alone pay for it.

Those kinds of ideas can still become real businesses, especially if you have a great way to get awareness of your solution out to people who aren't actively looking for that, but you're better off trying to find problems where people have tried throwing money at every solution out there and are still yelling for help.

Tl;dr try to sell "pain killers" not "vitamins".
by ryan_glass | 2025-06-01 21:45:23+00:00
You are right that I haven't been rigorous - it's easy to benchmark tokens/second but quality of output is more difficult to nail down. I couldn't find any decent comparisons for Unsloth either. So I just tried a few of their models out, looking for something that was 'good enough' i.e. does all I need: coding, summarizing documents, troubleshooting anything and everything. I would like to see head to head comparisons too - maybe I will invest in more RAM at some stage but so far I have no need for it. I ran some comparisons between the smaller and larger versions of the Unsloth models and interestingly (for me anyway) didn't notice a huge amount of difference in quality between them. But, the smaller models didn't run significantly faster so I settled for the biggest model I could fit in RAM with a decent context. For more complex coding I use Deepseek R1 (again the Unsloth) but since it's a reasoning model it isn't real-time so no use as my daily driver.