MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by kiitos | 2025-06-07 05:51:40+00:00
What on earth are you talking about??

If the LLM hallucinates, then the code it produces is wrong. That wrong code isn't obviously or programmatically determinable as wrong, the agent has no way to figure out that it's wrong, it's not as if the LLM produces at the same time tests that identify that hallucinated code as being wrong. The only way that this wrong code can be identified as wrong is by the human user "looking closely" and figuring out that it is wrong.

You seem to have this fundamental belief that the code that's produced by your LLM is valid and doesn't need to be evaluated, line-by-line, by a human, before it can be committed?? I have no idea how you came to this belief but it certainly doesn't match my experience.
by Imustaskforhelp | 2025-06-07 05:52:51+00:00
Really interesting.

As someone who wants to monetize his side projects, I am not sure what I should do.

Should I make it 1) open source under permissive license (MIT)

2) open source under restrictive license (AGPL/SSPL)

3) source available and only permissive if you pay me a license (like how redis did it in the middle but actually this time , instead of changing license after project is already famous, I do it from the start of the project)

4) not make its source available and distribute a binary for fixed one time.

5) I do any of the above things but with primarily supporting saas? and supporting the ability to move out as you mentioned

Currently, most of my software that I write is just open sourced with MIT and I just private the software that I think has value.
by foundart | 2025-06-07 05:53:49+00:00
With SaaS you mostly give away the chance to benefit from the near zero marginal cost of software. The vendor probably shares the benefit of the marginal cost via lower prices, but at some scale of users and some price per user, the SaaS customer will end up getting a bad deal.

The problem is, you'd be foolish to run your own thing in the early days of a company. It's only when you've succeeded and scaled that it becomes a problem. You survived long enough to need to scale in part by keeping costs low and one way you did that was by using SaaS services instead of building and/or running versions of those tools yourself. That was smart.

As the business grew at least one or two of those SaaS services got so entwined into the daily operations of your company that there is now no way to replace them without a lengthy, risky, and expensive migration project.

The SaaS problem is a negative side effect of your success.

edited - a typo and a word change
by imiric | 2025-06-07 05:54:41+00:00
> I think the intuition the authors are trying to capture is that they believe the models are omniscient, but also dim-witted.

We keep assigning adjectives to this technology that anthropomorphize the neat tricks we've invented. There's nothing "omniscient" or "dim-witted" about these tools. They have no wit. They do not think or reason.

All Large "Reasoning" Models do is generate data that they use as context to generate the final answer. I.e. they do real-time tuning based on synthetic data.

This is a neat trick, but it doesn't solve the underlying problems that plague these models like hallucination. If the "reasoning" process contains garbage, gets stuck in loops, etc., the final answer will also be garbage. I've seen sessions where the model approximates the correct answer in the first "reasoning" step, but then sabotages it with senseless "But wait!" follow-up steps. The final answer ends up being a mangled mess of all the garbage it generated in the "reasoning" phase.

The only reason we keep anthropomorphizing these tools is because it makes us feel good. It's wishful thinking that markets well, gets investors buzzing, and grows the hype further. In reality, we're as close to artificial intelligence as we were a decade ago. What we do have are very good pattern matchers and probabilistic data generators that can leverage the enormous amount of compute we can throw at the problem. Which isn't to say that this can't be very useful, but ascribing human qualities to it only muddies the discussion.
by profsummergig | 2025-06-07 05:55:30+00:00
1) I tried it, enjoyed it, thank you for building it.

2) I learned something new: I was aware of how making the exhale longer than the inhale promoted relaxation. Somehow I hadn't thought of inverting it for the opposite effect: more energy. Your app mentioned it and it was an "aha" moment for me. I tried it, and certainly feel something, but too early to say if it's a placebo effect or something real. Thank you for this new knowledge.

3) The pause portion. What does Richie Davidson (or other research say about it). What does it do, please? That is, what is the difference between not pausing at all between inhale and exhale, vs. pausing (i.e. box breathing)? Thanks in advance.
by Imustaskforhelp | 2025-06-07 05:56:50+00:00
for what its worth, I use cloudflare workers a lot and I write it in a way where my code can run on anywhere else (and heck, if you really want it, you could run the code locally using wrangler dev I suppose? )

But I guess my software can work with only some changes or I suppose even without some changes on pure node/bun/deno as well
by toast0 | 2025-06-07 05:59:44+00:00
> Train stations are usually closer to downtown than airports

This is handy if your destination is in downtown (and your origin is convenient to downtown as well), but if not, you'll need to find other ground transportation. If a rental car makes sense, they're typically easy to find near airports, but a lot of train stations don't offer them. Long term parking is hit or miss, too.
by felineflock | 2025-06-07 06:00:12+00:00
I honestly expected the article to start like

Smalltalk, Haskell, and Lisp

...walk into a bar.

Smalltalk: “Bartender, please send an instance of Martini to me - selector withOlive: set to true.”

Haskell: “I’ll take beer >>= chill, but only if it’s defined for all inputs and returns IO ().”

Lisp: “(drink ’(ale (temperature cold))) .”

The bartender mutters, “Great ... an object, a functor, and a list.”

Then a janitor walks by sweeping the closures that they left.
by peepeepoopoo132 | 2025-06-07 06:00:45+00:00
The standard 80 hour weeks at Musk's companies are incompatible with human life. It's very, very disappointing to see Musk publicly complain about falling birth rates but fail to recognize the connection between overtaxed employees and poor fertility.

Edit: He said he's resigning because he's had to spend too much time away from family, implying that the work-life balance at Tesla has been very bad.
by xp84 | 2025-06-07 06:02:01+00:00
> that you should break bread with your opposition

I was agreeing with you completely until I hit this phrase.

What Democrats have you seen "breaking bread with" their opposition? Most Democratic politicians and pundits (not saying voters) spend most of their effort on demonizing those they disagree with, on intentionally imputing the worst motives for their every opinion. If you don't support the most maximal definitions of every ideal they have, you're a bigot. If you didn't vote for Harris, you're a monster who must love Trump. etc.

The West Wing Dems could actually bring themselves to hold their noses and cut a deal with their Republicans that gave each side something important to them. To be fair, both parties now consider that practice to be basically treason.

It's the parties that are killing us.
by potamic | 2025-06-07 06:02:31+00:00
What could this mean for dental or orthopedic titanium implants? From my understanding these also corrode at a small rate and release titanium ions into the body (nothing is apparently perfectly inert). I assume titanium ions oxidize and will result in titanium dioxide particles deposited across the body. So far, it has been said to be non toxic, but if research is coming out about toxic effects from food consumption route, could this have implications for people living with implants long term?
by tptacek | 2025-06-07 06:03:34+00:00
No, what's happening here is we're talking past each other.

An agent lints and compiles code. The LLM is stochastic and unreliable. The agent is ~200 lines of Python code that checks the exit code of the compiler and relays it back to the LLM. You can easily fool an LLM. You can't fool the compiler.

I didn't say anything about whether code needs to be reviewed line-by-line by humans. I review LLM code line-by-line. Lots of code that compiles clean is nonetheless horrible. But none of it includes hallucinated API calls.

Also, from where did this "you seem to have a fundamental belief" stuff come from? You had like 35 words to go on.
by eviks | 2025-06-07 06:05:16+00:00
> Go to your nearest hospital and notices a sea of young nurses handling you and your family's medical data on a clipboard, paper, and a very poorly secured 20 year old workstation.

If you ignore the core difference - scale - you won't be able to see the difference. Young nurse won't be able to leak all data on all people even if those local papers and workstation are left on the sidewalk for anyone to see
by athrowaway3z | 2025-06-07 06:06:11+00:00
> Probably meant as a confidence boost to the sleep-deprived founders out there. But teaches nothing.

The post insist 2 to 4 million ARR in 1 year is the new norm. My guess its meant for their own investors and get founders to undervalue their achievements (Or learn to get creative with what ARR means).
by kgwgk | 2025-06-07 06:08:27+00:00
> You're talking about making a 30-year duration bet that inflation will not increase. If you call that risk-free

I didn’t say anything about “risk-free” (the closest is the second paragraph but you don’t address it at all).

I was clearly commenting on the quoted sentence “Held for 30 years, bonds are eaten alive by inflation” which has not applied since the seventies, doesn’t seem the best assumption going forward, and has an easy solution as discussed.

> reflects whatever happens with inflation much better than betting on a fixed rate of 5% that can never increase.

If your main objective is to beat inflation, getting inflation + 2.50% with certainty seems an attractive proposition! (Inflation-linked bonds have a “fixed” rate on top on inflation.)
by safety1st | 2025-06-07 06:08:28+00:00
I mean, the link not many people have made is that executives want to replace programmers with AI because of Section 174.

It has effectively become a lot more expensive and difficult to employ a programmer. Once this change went into effect we started to see hundreds of thousands of layoffs.

Then tech executives started aggressively talking up how you could use AI to write code instead of having humans write it.

Now of course reducing headcount and the associated expenses and replacing them with a bot sounds tempting to executives no matter what. But it sounds REALLY tempting when you've been on a hiring freeze since 2022 due to the fact that you can no longer deduct employee salaries in the year you pay them out.

Bear in mind that both Republicans and Democrats say they want to fix this and haven't done so due simply to gridlock and government incompetence.

I think most software businesses are taking a wait and see approach. Don't hire until this thing gets fixed. In the meantime, double down as hard as you can on automating those programmer jobs out of existence, in case the law never gets fixed.

Section 174 is the root cause.
by KingMob | 2025-06-07 06:10:32+00:00
Here's a falsehood list about falsehood lists:

1. I'll never need to learn a falsehood list, so I can skip it.

2. A falsehood list is complete at the time of writing.

3. OK, but it will surely get updated with new falsehoods and clarifications.

4. Skimming the falsehood list is all I need to do to learn it.

5. OK, but surely I'll remember to recheck the falsehood list once I actually need to, right?

6. If a falsehood doesn't immediately make sense to me, there must be something wrong with it, despite the author having domain expertise that I don't.

Literally had to point out just last night how UTC is not sufficient in all scenarios. I swear it happens every 6 mos on Reddit.
by EMM_386 | 2025-06-07 06:10:46+00:00
Well, as a senior software engineer and commercial pilot ... I am left confused.

Not all the things in the list, because I am aware of those. I might have missed the runway numbers changing based on shifting magnetic field of the earth, but that's a thing too. Runway 22? That's now Runway 21.

But why programmers specifically would believe this, as opposed to ... any other profession that is not aviation?
by khazhoux | 2025-06-07 06:11:54+00:00
I work the longest hours of anyone I know (friends implore me to stop). I'm one of the first cars in the garage, one of the last ones out. Start at 8, home at 8, 15 minute lunch, 2 hours at night with overseas team. A few hours cram-work Sunday night. 3-5 hours of sleep M-F (5.5 hours is a rare luxury). These numbers are accurate and consistent every week for last 12 months.

It's still not 80 hours a week.

So I get a bit miffed when people cry "Wah, we all work 80-hour weeks!" No, I don't think so.
by thatswrong0 | 2025-06-07 06:14:15+00:00
Yep.

On top of that, the complexity of front end (for me, which is in a “real time” app) often comes down to providing a user experience that “feels good” while also accounting for the complexities of keeping things in sync with the backend(s). For example, I often want a user to be able to update a thing and I want that change to feel immediate, but if 1% of the time that errors out because of business logic reasons, I need to be able to undo the immediateness, restore the previous state, maybe reconcile the local state with the newer remote state, and then display the problem to the user.

Maybe I’m just doing things wrong but there’s just a lot of complexity related to that and I struggle compartmentalizing it in a maintainable way
by hattmall | 2025-06-07 06:14:17+00:00
No, he's saying that people respect the law, which they do. It's all about finding loopholes, and sticking to the letter of the law while working around the law to do whatever the law prohibits but doing it in a way that remains legal. This entire situation came up because of loopholes. A great way to offshore money was to spend it on software developed by overseas subsidiaries.
by JustinCS | 2025-06-07 06:14:55+00:00
This seems like a case of selection bias, where they are looking at all the Gen AI startups and seeing that they are making revenue faster than previous startups. But Gen AI startups have mostly only started very recently, so it's obvious that all the successes must have grown fast, as they haven't been around long enough to grow slowly. Maybe in 5 years, we'll see a lot of cases of successful startups that took a slower growth trajectory instead.

But whether it's short-sighted for the investors or not, I think the takeaway for founders is "investors now expect you to make more revenue faster, and B2C applications are more interesting than before".
by throwaway843 | 2025-06-07 06:17:55+00:00
The FUD is little more, and in many cases is, one liners that play on insecurity.

There is no case to justify an assumption as true.

How would you judge the impact of 'technology' over the past 20 years? The 20 years before that were pretty revolutionary too, and so were the 20 years prior to that.. and... the 20 years prior... and... Bias comes from the life one's lived.

How to measure the impact, then? Life expectancy? Education? Gender equality? Access to clean air and water? A safe house that the majority of people can afford doing a job they don't hate? All these things that go into Human Development? Of which HDI [1] is but one, of which some have had progress in some countries. But fear mongering, playing on insecurities, that gets investor money for the hope some fraction of wealth can be accumulated by peddlers of such insecurity. You are a useful distraction.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index
by bob1029 | 2025-06-07 06:18:03+00:00
I agree that full stack is the best path.

Building a front end that other humans will use is literally art. Like in the classical sense. Confounding this with an API surface, 2nd state machine and additional team (the backend developers) turns an already difficult mission into an impossible one.

Learning how to do the whole thing is a lot easier in 2025 than it was in 2010. You have a consistent browser API surface and a chatbot that has the capability of every junior developer on earth combined at your disposal.

Being put into the position of full ownership means you will reject bad technologies out of sheer survival instinct. You'll reach for approaches like SSR. Putting all of the state on the server (by using server side rendering exclusively) means that there is no more API. No more distributed state. You are now permitted to write sql queries that directly populate the relevant HTML partials without any intermediate bullshit. Imagine how quickly we could compose response bodies if the authoritative data store lives on an NVMe disk in the same machine. You could be measuring your page render times in microseconds instead of milliseconds.
by xp84 | 2025-06-07 06:19:36+00:00
If I understand correctly, you're proposing sex-selection (terminating males?) as a hack to theoretically produce more child-bearing women in the next generation, who would, I assume, just reproduce promiscuously or form polygamous relationships?

I have to admit, it's an outside-the-box idea, but it would still take 25 years to start bearing fruit (no pun intended).

> culturally

Yeah, honestly, especially in Asia where they de facto did the opposite for so long, all those "extra" males seem to mostly just be alone. I'd worry that the generation with way too many women would reproduce at a disappointing per-woman rate, with the women choosing to roll the dice and either land a monogamous husband to maybe have kids with, or to just pursue their career, rather than be a 'side-piece mom.'
by riehwvfbk | 2025-06-07 06:19:47+00:00
A government that runs the richest city in the country (SF trades this spot with NY every few years) and makes it look the way it does is the definition of dysfunction.

And Detroit... well, I guess now that they've bulldozed all the abandoned buildings it looks less like a post apocalyptic hellscape and more just abandoned. An improvement I suppose.
by supriyo-biswas | 2025-06-07 06:21:58+00:00
After looking at their repos, especially [1], I think it'd probably have been better if they made a soft-fork of Wordpress with its own infrastructure instead of the current setup where they try to hijack core wordpress with alternative implementations. This approach is doomed to fail, as the core Wordpress developers would be forced by executive directives to break said mechanisms.

Also, the jkpress post by Matt Mullenwegg linked in TFA has to be one of the most unprofessional and caustic things I've ever seen someone write, and reflects poorly on his character.

[1] https://github.com/fairpm/fair-plugin
by cguess | 2025-06-07 06:23:23+00:00
Even the Eastern US has to deal with river and water landings all the time. You can book a scheduled flight from the East River right in-between Manhattan and Brooklyn to Marthas Vineyard, or the Hamptons or a number of other destinations. Not to mention those happen in the middle of arguably the most complex commercial airspace in the world.

It's pretty cool to be on a ferry and see a plane land basically next to you in the middle of the river.
by achtaitaipai | 2025-06-07 06:23:26+00:00
Ohh thank you, I’d be thrilled! I’ll add an MIT-style license a bit later today. What’s your native language? Right now it’s fairly easy to add translations to the site for left-to-right languages.

In any case, feel free to fork, send a pull request, or reach out if you'd like to help make it more accessible!
by willis936 | 2025-06-07 06:23:43+00:00
Yeah it's 3E21 in SI units. The wikipedia graphs also highlight how nonlinear performance scales across machines. W7-X isn't 1000x larger than T3, yet performs ~1000x better. Confinement field strength (a little expensive) and major radius (very expensive) are knobs that turn these from research machines into power plants.
by proc0 | 2025-06-07 06:24:33+00:00
I think JP is just a bad communicator that is stuck in his professorial mode where every sentence has to be the deepest thought that makes your mind explode. Of course it usually comes off as over the top and lacking self-awareness. His ideas have some merit but only after you've listened to them explained again and again. They could easily be simplified, imho.

> So, in what way, if predator is real, in what way isn’t dragon real? Doesn’t take that much imagination to see the identity. And then wouldn’t the fundamental task of edible primates be to figure out how to overcome the dragon forever?

I watched this interview, and he literally just means that even though something may not be physically real it can still be real, i.e. Harry Potter is real but he is not physically real. For whatever reason JP beats around the bush trying to concoct some genius soundbite and instead just appears to not engage with the subject matter.

I'm a fan of Dawkins more than JP but Dawkins also lacks in imagination and philosophical skills to meet JP in the middle. JP's ideas aren't that complicated but I think the backlash he's getting for being dense is his own doing.
by JustinCS | 2025-06-07 06:25:05+00:00
Related to taking tiny steps, I've set up a daily habit checklist with the lowest bar possible, even lower than the author's suggested log statement. When it comes to software dev, it's just "open my IDE and look at my notes for what to do next". This usually just takes 10 seconds, but it's the first step in starting and usually leads to me doing at least a bit more, so it's helpful when I'm at my lowest in terms of energy. And even if I do nothing else, I get some satisfaction that I at least completed my to-do and did a tiny bit more than nothing for the day.
by vonunov | 2025-06-07 06:25:11+00:00
Yes, that is the idea. I'm not suggesting that this is a thing anyone should take it upon themselves to do when it's not a practice established in that context. I have had one job I remember, maybe one more I don't, where a certain range of actions that weren't destructive to data or revenue were sanctioned to that end by our immediate levels of management. If that's not the case, though, this should be only a what-if fantasy to indulge in, of course.
by BoorishBears | 2025-06-07 06:26:25+00:00
You typically don't have a concept of weekend/not-weekend when you're working 80+ hours.

I've done periods of what I call "sleep/work", where I wake up with my laptop next to my head, immediately start working, and work all day: definitely not leaving my house and usually only even leaving the room to grab deliveries or use the restroom. I'd work until I literally couldn't stay awake, with the laptop next to my head and ready for when I wake up to continue. So literally for entire days I'll have done nothing but sleep and work, with even eating being done while working.

You can certainly do it, but it's an (unproductive) expression of mental illness that will additionally worsen every facet of your existence in short order. Elon's definitely mentally ill too: either for doing it regularly or being enough of a sociopath to claim that others should do it on his behalf.
by shakna | 2025-06-07 06:27:36+00:00
Never, ever, throw any non mainstream language at an LLM. You will get absolutely nothing but bullshit back. They do not comprehend, and so they cannot move away from generalisation to actually speak about the language. There is not a large enough public source to train the model.

If you're throwing something to a con-artist, don't be surprised if everything you get back does not line up with reality.

EDIT:

Here's a simple example on godbolt: https://godbolt.org/z/hcxhvGnTc

As you can see, it just returns a pointer. No copying happens. There's a different length marked along with the pointer, but that's it.