MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by brabel | 2025-06-29 08:50:03+00:00
That only works for the MCPs your app knows about, which is not that great. The usefulness of a plugin system like MCP is that an app can automatically use it. But MCPs are literally just a function, with some metadata about what it does and how to invoke it. The only thing generic enough to figure out how to use a function given only this metadata seems to be an LLM. And not even all of them, only some support “toll calling “.
by wkat4242 | 2025-06-29 08:50:37+00:00
They're even pushing their customers. Microsoft always pushes "adoption". They don't understand some users just have no need for or don't like certain features.

I work a lot with Microsoft consultants and that constant adoption evangelism is exhausting. It's not like their tools are even very good anyway. But they're as pushy as Jehovah's Witnesses.

They also see themselves too much as a 'partner', with the associated air of wanting to tell us what to do. They're a vendor, nothing more.
by ponector | 2025-06-29 08:50:43+00:00
> actors, or grocery store baggers, or taxi drivers, or whatever, can't make a living

Until they are dying on the streets, they are actually make a living.

If they cannot make a decent living with their low income - UBI wouldn't help. UBI is a safety net, a minimal salary payment. You are never going to have a decent life on minimal salary.
by the_third_wave | 2025-06-29 08:50:56+00:00
You don't need GrapheneOS or any other specific AOSP derivative for that, any of them will do. Just don't install any Google-specific bits on the device - use microG if you need to have something resembling Google services - and you're there. Even on stock devices with Google services you can get partly there by disabling anything you don't need, only enabling it when you happen upon some app which absolutely won't run without them but first check if you can replace that app with another or - better still - a web app which can replace it. How to disable Google services you asked? Why, using a script of course, launched from a Termux widget. Here's one way to do this, using a disable/enable script (one script, two hardlinked names) on a rooted device running some stock distribution. If you try this and your phone breaks you get to keep both pieces without extra cost - in other words this works for me but might not work for you:

~ $ cat .shortcuts/Google_Services\:enable #!/data/data/com.termux/files/usr/bin/bash PACKAGE="com.google.android.gms com.google.android.gms.policy_sidecar_aps com.google.android.gsf com.android.vending" PATH="/data/data/com.termux/files/usr/bin:$PATH" command=$(echo "$0"|cut -d: -f2) pman () { action=$1 shift for package in $@; do sudo pm $action $package done } case $command in disable|enable) pman $command $PACKAGE ;; *) echo "command '$command' not supported" ;; esac exit 0
by fxtentacle | 2025-06-29 08:51:00+00:00
In the end, I acquired an EMI probe. The DC +48V cable from power supply to spindle was emitting lots of interference. I had not really considered it because usually EMI is generated by changing voltage and in theory that line should remain at the same voltage. But it seems like tiny sparks in the spindle (or something like that) will momentarily drag down the power supply line, thereby causing HF emissions.
by weatherlite | 2025-06-29 08:51:29+00:00
I totally agree. There's the inequality side of things were many working people are still in a precarious position. Then there's also the burnout / job conditions side of things where people can't persist in their roles without slowly losing their mental health. Think about nurses, police officers, teachers etc. It can be solvable by making their work weeks shorter and/or by increasing the numbers of staff per student and many other things we can do - that are deemed too expensive now but can become realistic if we distribute the wealth in a more equal way.
by beshrkayali | 2025-06-29 08:52:38+00:00
I think the author is overselling the benefits of communities a bit. Sure, groups can boost motivation through approval-seeking and availability bias, but they can also trap you in groupthink or misaligned priorities. I’d say the Brawl Stars grind example (despite author disliking the game) isn’t really a win.

Communities can hijack your goals, pulling you toward their agenda instead of yours. Overreliance on them risks eroding self-discipline when the group fades.

Instead, define your goals clearly and use communities sparingly, for knowledge exchange, not validation. Relying on communities too much can leave you stuck in an echo chamber, chasing approval over purpose.
by gchadwick | 2025-06-29 08:52:41+00:00
> It has two layers

Where did you get that from? Pretty sure it's a single planar set of transistors. Those transistors are manufactured using multiple layers of mask.

FinFET transistors are described as 3D or non-planar but crucially this isn't allowing transistor on transistor stacking you've just got the gate structure of the FinFET poking out above the plane of the rest of the transistors.

Silicon on silicon die stacking is a possibility but limits your power and GPUs run very hot so it's not an option for them.
by defrost | 2025-06-29 08:52:49+00:00
> have you got a source thats not a nearly 2 decades old

Such as the Lockheed Martin 2024 contract I linked?

Sure.. try that link, it's from last year and talks about grown up big boy weather sat costs in 2024..

Your $30m SmallSat is not in the same league as a full featured $300m sat .. I'll leave you to work out the differences.

Moreover the launch costs for those $30m sats is under $8m each launch, again refuting an upstream claim about launch costs being higher than sat build costs.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_Lab_Electron

The starting price for delivering payloads to orbit is about US$7.5 million per launch, or US$25,000 per kg, which offers the only dedicated service at this price point.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-06-29 08:53:24+00:00
> Both of the cases you mentioned have an important need for IP law.

Do they?

BSD licensed software exists even though it waives pretty much all of the IP rights. If that was so important then how does it exist without it?

There is a huge industry of people integrating various business systems together. It's a huge industry because of the combinatorial explosion of interactions between different systems, which means that every integration is different, which in turn means that the whole question of copying is moot because each one is only useful to that specific company. You can't copy it, you have to do another one because the next customer has different requirements. What does it matter whether the law prohibits copying something nobody was going to copy anyway?
by Lio | 2025-06-29 08:54:23+00:00
I can't speak about the American experience but as someone English I would say don't worry about erasing your accent.

If an accent is too strong, yes it can be a hinderance but English is a very flexible language and native speakers are very quick to adapt to variations because we grow up with large regional variations. We expect it.

In most cases having some varience in accent is charming.

I've been lucky enough to work with people from all over the world in my personal experience I may occationally ask you to repeat something but I'll lock in soon enough.

We used to have a TV show in the UK called "Rab C. Nesbitt"[1] about a guy from Glasgow with a seemingly impenitrable accent. Here's the thing though, you'd watch the first 5 minutes and not understand a word ...and then sunddenly you get it. If it works for him it will work for you.

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbhhE4i8V2c
by tecleandor | 2025-06-29 08:56:13+00:00
Ha! I go to Japan every now and then, as I have friends there, and I've though a couple times about doing the Japanese driving license thing, that looked super easy back at the time (translate your current driving license, book a meeting in the exam center, do a short exam, and you're almost good to go). I was thinking about doing it in my next trip in two weeks, but seems like they've raised the difficulty several levels :)

(Spaniard here too...)
by weatherlite | 2025-06-29 08:57:18+00:00
> And why do you care about inequality, and not eg the absolute livings standards of the least well off?

The two are connected. You can either transfer more wealth to the poorer people without taxing the rich (lets say by helicopter money), or transfer it from the rich to the poor. In both cases the rich become less rich in relative terms. It should also make intuitive sense - if the rich (lets say top 5%) hold 95% of wealth it means there is less for everyone else - less wealth that is because the resources like land, apartments and good education are finite and not abundant.
by fxtentacle | 2025-06-29 08:57:35+00:00
I agree, it's about liquidity. But isn't building a company from the ground up always a pretty illiquid process? Until the company starts generating profits, your shares in a new start-up will always be hard to sell.

But then, how can anyone finance a start-up that takes a bit longer to build than the usual web mitm or web advertising play?
by noelwelsh | 2025-06-29 08:57:40+00:00
1. Any research of any note will get criticism. (E.g. see responses to Picketty.)

2. From Wikipedia it appears they responded to all the substantial criticism. It also mentions an independent study largely agreeing with the results.

3. This is one book amongst a mountain of research, and there are problems with inequality that go beyond those the book mentions.
by TeMPOraL | 2025-06-29 08:58:03+00:00
Indeed, the frontend itself is usually the problem. If not for data lock in, we wouldn't need that many frontends in the first place - most of the web would be better operated through a few standardized widgets and a spreadsheet and database interfaces - and non-tech people would be using it and be more empowered for it.

(And we know that because there was a brief period in time where basics of spreadsheets and databases were part of curriculum in the West and people had no problem with that.)
by aspenmayer | 2025-06-29 08:58:07+00:00
A man after my own heart.

[Ed.⁰ This is a colloquialism¹; 1 Samuel 13:14,Acts 13:22:

Colloquialisms were the original shibboleths, tbh, but no sexism or other -*isms intended or defended by the aforementioned, admittedly sexist, canonical quotation]

⁰ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editor%27s_note

¹ https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible_(King_James)/1_Samuel#C...
by TeMPOraL | 2025-06-29 08:59:17+00:00
Minor point but arguably both are Yahoo Pipes-type glue provider, which itself is basic no-code glue thing. The difference is that IFTTT erred on the side of dumbing the product down too much, and Zapier erred on the side of being too much B2B-focused - so they both missed the mark on becoming the universal glue.
by surgical_fire | 2025-06-29 09:00:53+00:00
No it wouldn't. Inflation would skyrocket and baseline prices would be at least 10x higher. And that's not how UBI works, no one is some multiplier richer because it exists.

The top 1% getting 1000x richer is a problem, because trickle down economics is bullshit. Money that exists as part of a pile of gold in a dragon's den does not move the economy.
by Digit-Al | 2025-06-29 09:01:41+00:00
> On top of that, salaries for basic jobs would need to get much higher to incentivize people to work.

Not true. The 'B' in UBI means 'Basic'. UBI wil pay your rent, utilities, and food, but not much else. Now, there are some people that are willing to just exist on only the bare minimum, but that's a significant minority. The vast majority of people want more. There will be plenty of people willing to do minimum wage jobs to top-up their UBI so they can afford extras like holidays, nicer phones, meals out, etc...

The main difference would be that the security of UBI would give them more power to distch a job if they were being abused in some way, rather than being so desperate that even if their employer is abusing them they are forced to take it because they need the job to survive.

I feel like too much discussion on UBI is poisoned by the idea that the vast majority of people are bone idle and are willing to just sit at home doing nothing and just existing with the bare minumum required to live. It's just not true
by scarmig | 2025-06-29 09:03:20+00:00
We don't need theoretical market socialism; we had actual existing Yugoslavia.

Although it functioned better than centrally planned socialism, it still had lots of issues related to prices, particularly of capital. Who provides capital for enterprise? In practice, the state. And this ran into the same political economy issues with centrally planned economies. What happens when a company is about to go under? Unemployment is bad, so the worker-owned company gets a bail out. Who can start a firm? Well, better make sure your company satisfies the objectives of your local government.
by JimDabell | 2025-06-29 09:03:48+00:00
This is a ridiculous article. There is a setting that lets Gemini learn from your data. This is not a setting to control whether Gemini can access your messages at all. Switching that setting off is not saying no to letting it control your messages and calls. It’s saying no to letting it learn from them. There is another setting you can use to disable access entirely.
by pbhjpbhj | 2025-06-29 09:04:54+00:00
I too have enjoyed a game of *Passport Application* by proxy.

One of the interesting rules the OP doesn't appear to mention is the 'mutable history' rule. Herein, the facts contained in a single document can alter over even short periods of time requiring that a document, already scanned into the Examiners system of fact recording, can be required to be returned for subsequent scans. Verifying documents have not altered in their facts is, some say, tacit acknowledgement by the Examiner breed that a multiverse exists.

The communication channel between the "NPC" telephone agents and the Examiners appears to be somewhat akin to prayer, only vague inferences can truly be received.

Aside, I suspect the OP maybe be a Mornington Crescent aficianado; a game seemingly similar in rule-topology to the aforementioned Passport Application.
by mrweasel | 2025-06-29 09:05:34+00:00
For the desktop, I could probably just use Linux, but you're right, in terms of eco-system, where would I go?

Phones are even worse. You basically stuck on iOS and Android and I honestly see no situation where picking Android wouldn't be worse. You have a better selection of phone, and you could run /e/OS, Calyx, or something else, but that's just a hassle. I'm not a big fan of the direction iOS is developing, it tried to do way to much and the UI has become a mess.
by samus | 2025-06-29 09:08:26+00:00
Spending most of the day together with people whose company I value, sounds wonderful to me! There are plenty of sports out there and most people should be able to find something that they would both enjoy pursuing and strive to carve out time for it.

You can very well argue that a typical 40h work week leaves too little time to do enough of the good things. But most people would still most likely keep kicking back and using their time inefficiently even if we had to work much less than now.

Remaining too much time sitting in static positions is bad, sure. But people doing physical work are also exposed to massive health risks as usually the load is repetitive and uneven. Both populations need corrective action, but for the physical worker it is more tricky to add a workout routine because their bodies are already overtaxed.

Healthy food being bland and bad tasting is simply a sign of not being able to cook well. Learn stir frying and add some herbs, spices, and sauces. (Yes, sauces often contain sugar, but IMHO it's well worth giving up candy for better tasting real food!)

I hope you are aware that many societies displayed in Star Trek (and similar SF) are for storytelling purposes almost necessarily either oversimplified, have weird traits, or are caricatures reflecting something out-of-universe? For most of them we know very little about how daily life is actually like for a civilian. Of course it doesn't seem compelling to be part of any of these societies. And it is unconvincing to argue that a healthy lifestyle is necessarily one where we won't be able to have fun.

Anyway the point of that episode was to highlight the extreme cost of maintaining such a society, not the lifestyle itself. And of course it would be quite appealing to explore the universe in the comfort of a five star hotel, which living and working on the Enterprise-D surely must feel like.
by dotancohen | 2025-06-29 09:09:31+00:00
This is why orbits should be regulated like RF space is regulated. But it should probably require insurance, as the ability to put something into orbit does not imply the financial or technical ability to clean up the orbit. (Actually nobody has this capability today)

Ruined orbits should be made available essentially for free, and cleaning up that orbit would provide the entity that bought it with a very valuable resource they could then sell.

Of course, this plan requires cooperation between all nations and entities who have the ability to launch objects into orbit. We have precedent in RF, the sea, and in airspace regulation. To an extent.
by sdpy | 2025-06-29 09:09:47+00:00
A similar idea appears in a more recent short story, How It Unfolds (2023) by James S.A. Corey. The premise is using a technology called “slow light,” which can clone people and objects using “enriched light.” The National Space Agency scans a group of 200 people (not only their physical forms, but also their consciousness, memories, and feelings) and transmits several thousand copies of this data package across the galaxy. The hope is that, on arrival, each package can "unfold" into a fully reconstructed version of the original team and habitat on some distant alien world.
by pbhjpbhj | 2025-06-29 09:09:51+00:00
Do you have any insight as to why, seemingly, there is no contractual obligation on contractors to make a working system. They seem to make something approximating a working system, vastly overcharge -- like x1000 -- for output that appears to be 3 months of work by one junior programmer, but then get paid as if the system actually worked.
by tialaramex | 2025-06-29 09:10:21+00:00
> Java and C# are mentioned as MSLs and yet they totally let you race.

In Java a data race means loss of sequential consistency. Humans generally don't understand programs which lack sequential consistency so a typical Java team probably can't debug the program, but the program still always has well defined behaviour - and chances are you don't want to debug the weird non-sequentially consistent behaviour anyway, you just want them to fix the data race.

In C# data races are not too dangerous for trivial objects which are valid for all bit patterns. If you race an integer k, well, now k is smashed, don't think too hard about the value of k, it does have some value but it won't go well for you to try to reason about the value. For a complex object like a hash table, it's Undefined Behaviour.

Meanwhile in C or C++ all data races are immediate UB, you lose, game over.
by PeterStuer | 2025-06-29 09:11:31+00:00
It could be they need to force usage to generate more quality training data over the MS codebase. You'll get a huge amount of prompt/llm_answer/human_correction instances if all MS programmers are forced to produce these e en if initially it does not increase or even decreases their productivity.

We saw the same in the early offshoring days. Firms forcing this on their project leads, knowingly expecting, accepting and swallowing the productivity losses to learn how to set this up for the promise of future cost savings.
by tim333 | 2025-06-29 09:11:49+00:00
I usually disagree with Garry Marcus but his basic point seems fair enough if not surprising - Large Language Models model language about the world, not the world itself. For a human like understanding of the world you need some understanding of concepts like space, time, emotion, other creatures thoughts and so on, all things we pick up as kids.

I don't see much reason why future AI couldn't do that rather than just focusing on language though.
by zer00eyz | 2025-06-29 09:12:06+00:00
> There is obviously a difference between understanding what smarter people have already done, and actually innovating and building on what they have done. The latter requires a much deeper understanding.

Does it really?

When you build a DB do you really spend a lot of time thinking about set theory? How about 4th normal form? Or do you just do it?

Right now the thing that keeps those with an engineering mindset out side of the playground is COST. Get a 96gb GPU below 1000 bucks and they become toys, below 500 and a kid can get into playing with one (if that seems insane, it's the cost of a PS5).

You know what a 96gb GPU does... it opens up the idea of shoving small models into games. No more "I took an arrow to the knee" meme's because you could fill a world with characters in a story. It means running models at home makes sense.

The people working at removing "training" as a distinct step and making that an "ongoing" process (without it being lossy) are going to have a massive impact on the industry (more so in smaller models, we might get REAL agents). I would be willing to bet that it's an engineer that solves the issue and not someone with a math or ML background.

There are tons of ways the landscape will change and open up. In a few years that top 100 maybe one or two will be a a Dennis Ritchie or Michael Stonebraker.
by drysart | 2025-06-29 09:13:47+00:00
Because Apple makes its money by selling you hardware and services, not by selling advertising. Companies ultimately serve whoever they make their money from; and none of the other big tech players have a comprehensive business model where the end user is the customer instead of the product.

And because it has positioned itself as the single most prominent privacy-conscious champion in big tech through repeated actions over the course of many years.

There are plenty of reasons to dislike Apple depending on where your priorities are (lack of openness and cultivating an ecosystem based on locking you into it by not interoperating with anyone else are great places to start); but it's hard to make an argument that anyone else in big tech even comes close to the amount of trustworthiness Apple has demonstrated for their users.

The fact that Apple actually pushing an ad to its users is headline news speaks volumes to the trust they've earned (and damaged by doing so). Do you think it'd make headlines if Google showed its users an ad? Or Microsoft? Or Meta?
by liendolucas | 2025-06-29 09:13:54+00:00
I can't see why wouldn't it work. You definitely have some options. Group or family subscriptions is one. Then you can have extra charges for people for example that post above the average (it would make sense to extra charge those who abuse posting). If someone is unable to pay for some reason don't cancel the account(s) simply make those read-only. So even if they don't pay they are not excluded. Bear in mind that people pay for lots of subscriptions! Streaming services, newspapers, vpns, etc. So again if is setup as a profitable but not greedy profit business it should work. One of the key things is convincing people why using a non-manipulative social network is a way better choice than the "free" options. I'm not very good with business ideas but I do believe that there's absolutely room for a healthy social network out there.