MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by rdsubhas | 2025-06-09 11:53:05+00:00
The article is about – saving 30% by switching from Spot to 70% more expensive VMs. It's the opposite of what you're talking about here.

> Switching to committed use nodes that can give customers up to a 70% discount?

This information is wrong. In which cloud do you see CUDs being 70% cheaper for standard machines?

Can you link any cloud provider's page that says – use "standard machines" for a higher discount than spot machines, it can be a productive conversation.
by bilekas | 2025-06-09 11:53:17+00:00
> just some Internet rando using a misleading name for their pet project.

Thank god someone said it, there are actually so many of these strange projects that try to promote some improvement for 'their' problems and propose them as required by the EU to adopt, without understanding the complexity that's actually involved in how the EU works. Another example I'm reminded of was last week someone shared their proposal for a unified API to access particular medical data, notably the API was suiting only their needs.

But what bothers me the most is the huburis in assuming they know better and so continue to insult the EU's current systems.

Of course things can be improved, but it's not some start up that you can just break things for 80% of your customers who can't migrate to the next API version.
by Mordagh | 2025-06-09 11:53:40+00:00
> but banning someone who cares about it and removing > their proposed contributions, feels hostile.

I was curious about this so I did a little digging. It looks like the other developers were not happy with the quality of his contributions. Reading the discussions in https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/issues/1760 and https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/-/issues/1797 sheds a lot of light on the problems. Quoting two comments from the dozens there:

> @metux i appreciate you maintaining and trying to improve Xorg but > this is the second time you break it recently, you really should > implement more testing...

and

> Honestly, I would strongly recommend just not merging anything @metux > does from now on. I do not feel that their presence here has been a net > positive -- I have seen zero actual bugs solved by any of their code > changes. What I have seen is build breakage, ABI breakage, and ecosystem > churn from moving code around and deleting code. > Xorg could use some actual maintenance, but that means fixing actual > bugs and solving real problems.

In my search I also found that the XLibre project description mentions "BigTech moles killing Xorg", XLibre being "free of DEI discrimination" and wanting to "Make X great again!" (https://github.com/X11Libre/xserver). And he posted an antivax conspiracy on the Linux kernel mailing list (https://lkml.org/lkml/2021/6/10/903). And he appears to be a German WW2 apologist (https://web.archive.org/web/20190404153507/https://lists.dyn...). So... there's that too.
by troyvit | 2025-06-09 11:53:52+00:00
> This sounds great, but I don't understand what their 'design system' actually is [...]

I agree. There's a link to another article[1] where they describe their design system, but it doesn't provide much extra insight for me. They have a good diagram, but they don't define the pieces of it well enough for me to understand the whole system (that said I've never built one).

From the page I mention:

> Effective design systems rely on strong foundations through at least three core pieces: principles, styling infrastructure (design tokens), and basic elements.

Cool but what does that look like? I think it's key because they do say that a well-built design system is what makes it possible for AIs to build out interfaces for you, and given what I know of LLMs that does make the most sense. The more certainty you provide the system the better it does at accomplishing your goals.

[1] https://medium.com/paychex-ux/your-design-system-isnt-a-comp...
by mapt | 2025-06-09 11:54:23+00:00
We don't get it from raw bomb calorimetry ("Burn it and measure how hot it gets"). There are additional absorption coefficients applied before the nutrition label is printed. But for proteins, fats, and simple carbohydrates the coefficients are quite high (~95%), while progressively more complex carbs have a declining curve that ends in indigestible fiber. The difficulty is that the same person will digest more or less of the protein in their hamburger depending on how many fries they ate, how greasy those fries were, whether they ate lunch, and how much beer they drank that night. It's variable.
by Yizahi | 2025-06-09 11:55:38+00:00
The problem starts later in life, when a person starts misjudging both time/resources needed to rush complete a task and consequences of failing it.

Failing practically anything during the study in the university is a laughing matter. Worst case you have wasted 6 years on partying and got nothing in return, maybe some debt too if it was in the USA. Failing a task later in life may lead to jail time, deportation, divorce, eviction, homelessness etc. So getting familiar with procrastination and letting it get more severe with years is recipe for disaster.
by msephton | 2025-06-09 11:56:27+00:00
I use Perplexity for quick searches and sanity check answers because its native macOS popup window is by far the best user experience out of all of them: quick to launch, well designed, and pleasant to use.

I still use some others services and apps, but for much different purposes and results. For example I always turn to Gemini if I know what I want to do is mine Google web abd image search results (eg. https://mastodon.gamedev.place/@gingerbeardman/1146277358277...).

ChatGPT and Copilot are pretty good native macOS experiences but not as good as Perplexity. And I'm not aware of any other native macOS apps (Claude, Meta, etc)
by greg_V | 2025-06-09 11:58:15+00:00
> Another thing that I hear from time to time is an argument along the line of "it just predicts the next word, it doesn't actually understand it". Rather than an argument against AI being intelligent, isn't this also telling us what "understanding" is? Before we all had computers, how did people judge whether another person understood something? Well, they would ask the person something and the person would respond. One word at a time. If the words were satisfactory, the interviewer would conclude that you understood the topic and call you Doctor.

You call a Doctor 'Doctor' because they're wearing a white coat and are sitting in a doctor's office. The words they say might make vague sense to you, but since you are not a medical professional, you actually have no empirical grounds to judge whether or not they're bullshitting you, hence you have the option to get a second or third opinion. But otherwise, you're just trusting the process that produces doctors, which involves earlier generations of doctors asking this fellow a series of questions with the ability to discern right from wrong, and grading them accordingly.

When someone can't tell if something just sounds about right or is in fact bullshit, they're called a layman in the field at best or gullible at worst. And it's telling that the most hype around AI is to be found in middle management, where bullshit is the coin of the realm.
by CamouflagedKiwi | 2025-06-09 11:58:28+00:00
It is exactly an intrinsic failing of one mode of transport over another, that it produces unsanitary biological waste which at scale makes life pretty unpleasant in big cities. "It's an infrastructure issue" doesn't help if the infrastructure to solve the problem didn't exist and wasn't getting built (London's sewer upgrade was built some time before the horse situation was considered critical and was primarily to address problems with human effluent).
by donatj | 2025-06-09 11:59:19+00:00
I feel this way about the keyboard community and their love of old IBM keyboards.

In the mid-to-late 90s I had probably fifteen of them laying around and couldn't give them away. No one wanted these heavy bulky noisy keyboards. Now people pay hundreds of dollars for the originals and there's even a company[1] devoted to making new ones.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a Model M and still have a couple, but I would never pay these insane amounts for one.

1. https://www.pckeyboard.com/page/SFNT
by adrian_b | 2025-06-09 11:59:31+00:00
A 5-year old card, i.e. an NVIDIA Ampere RTX 30xx from 2020, is perfectly fine.

Even 7-year old cards, i.e. NVIDIA Turing RTX 20xx from 2018, are still acceptable.

Older GPUs than Turing should be avoided, because they lack many capabilities of the newer cards, e.g. "tensor cores", and their support in the newer CUDA toolkits will be deprecated in a not very distant future, but very slowly, so for now you can still create programs for Maxwell GPUs from 10 years ago.

Among the newer GPUs, the RTX 40xx SUPER series (i.e. the SUPER variants, not the original RTX 40xx series) has the best energy efficiency. The newest RTX 50xx GPUs have worse energy efficiency than RTX 40xx SUPER, so they achieve a somewhat higher performance only by consuming a disproportionately greater power. Instead of that, it is better to use multiple RTX 40xx SUPER.
by jonplackett | 2025-06-09 11:59:39+00:00
The problem is, if you are serious about losing weight, you need to ideally aim for something like a 300 calorie deficit. Much more and you’ll feel shit, a lot less and it’ll be quite slow or go the other way. It’s quite a fine margin and even tracking using bar codes you’re not going to be perfect.

But even more important - you really gotta track your macros if you want it to work well - and again also not feel crap.

There is no way in hell an AI camera is tracking macros well
by AStonesThrow | 2025-06-09 12:00:21+00:00
Have you read the Book of Daniel? The full Septuagint version? Bel & the Dragon, chapter 14? The Vindication of Susannah?

Pretty much half of the Tanakh’s narratives are focused on that theme.

“He who sits in the heavens laughs.”

“What is this baaaa-ing I hear...?” — Amalekite property and population not thoroughly destroyed

“Do you do well...?” — Yahweh to Job, to Jonah, to Moses, et. al.

The priests of Ba’al vs. Elijah at Mt. Carmel

“That man is you!” — Samuel to David, regarding his proto-Machiavelli seduction and murder maneuvers

“Let us [Elohim] go down [to Earth] and see what men are doing now.” Genesis 11

The idolatry of Jamnia — actually that one turned out OK
by ty6853 | 2025-06-09 12:00:22+00:00
It's even more expensive when the government regulates it to hell and back, intertwines itself with insurance industry, and has an incestuous relationship with the AMA resulting in massively fewer number of doctors than would like to go through the education. And then those same doctors, who are usually on the same professional board as say PAs, use their leverage as a hammer against other high level practitioners to ensure they don't lose a handle on their racket.
by hammyhavoc | 2025-06-09 12:00:46+00:00
> LLMs make learning new material easier than ever. I use them a lot and I am learning new things at an insane pace in different domains.

Sorry, but the the amount of bad information dispensed by models and the student's ability to go "hey, that's wrong" due to a lack of experience and knowledge means that this is going to lead to disaster very often.

People already dispensing terrible information on YouTube because they trusted an AI to generate their voice-over script to explain something when creating learning materials.
by windowshopping | 2025-06-09 12:01:25+00:00
This guide leaves out something extremely important that just fucked over a friend of mine: double-trigger RSUs. My friend thought he was getting a certain amount of stock annually, but in fact he only got it if he was still employed there when the company went public. So after six years they fired him right before going public a month later, and he got nothing. And in order to get any severance, he had to sign an agreement giving up any right to pursue any legal claims against them. I didn't even believe this was possible at first. Almost no startup equity guides mention this. Read your contracts very carefully, people!
by fidotron | 2025-06-09 12:02:36+00:00
I am not quite that age but notice a similar phenomenon, and have indulged slightly in it myself. My gut feeling is the motivation relates to how computing evolved, particularly in the 80s and 90s.

Essentially people used to feel that their inability to perform a given task was gated by their lack of access to a certain sort of machine, such as a UNIX workstation or LISP machine. Now we all have surplus computing power and cheap peripherals the sense is that we must be missing some essence that was lost since these machines, because that is the nicer explanation than that given access to tools far better than those in previous generations most of us have no idea what to do with them, or worse that we allow ourselves to be distracted entirely.

The musical equipment world is just like this too.
by latexr | 2025-06-09 12:02:53+00:00
I believe you, and I even say as much in my comment. I’m not arguing kids can’t be great, I’m only saying the post isn’t what it claims to be (i.e. this is about someone sharing their happiness, not advancing the discussion).

Additionally, while I have zero question that kids are the best thing ever for some people, it’s important to recognise that is not a universal feeling. Which isn’t just theoretical, some people do have kids and are or became miserable. You lucked out, and I’m genuinely happy for you (and your kids, because having a happy parent will give them a better life).

In short, kids are not a universal experience in either direction and it’s nonsensical to claim that would be the case.
by vidarh | 2025-06-09 12:03:10+00:00
They are already making treatment choices without good reason when they set or change the schedules.

They could already have made it worse with prior scheduling decisions, without having any idea.

Intentionally choosing to ignore a possibly harmful effect of the current lack of scheduling rules seems to me as blatantly unethical or worse as taking reasonable steps within what is already permitted to try to address a possible negative effect.

If concerned about making the schedule change for them: Provide the option. Add appropriate warnings if you like.

But also consider that any grieving families that finds out after the fact that there might be a known benefit to changing the scheduling would be equally hard to convince that you've not acted unethically and done harm.
by hkra | 2025-06-09 12:04:26+00:00
Yup. There are numerous examples of the founders passing laws that appear to directly contradict the constitution. The Coast Guard traces its enforcement authority to the Revenue Service Act of 1790, which allows US officers unfettered access to vessels in US waters without a warrant. This law has been consistently upheld because judges make the lazy argument that, since it was passed by the same Congress that wrote the 4th amendment, it’s obviously compatible with the 4th amendment.

A far more likely explanation is that it was a new government based on a new constitution and everyone was still figuring out how it all worked and, in the process, they made some mistakes. Now we’re stuck with bad laws because of founder worship. The founders weren’t perfect and they didn’t create a perfect system. It’s time we stopped acting like they did.
by ljf | 2025-06-09 12:04:32+00:00
There is usually an unmanned machine you can go and type your number plate into, how long you want to park and pay by cash or card - as an alternative - but the apps are faster and usually offer more flexibility (such as a notification when you are getting to the end of your slot with an option to extend).

You can usually also find which car parks have spaces with the apps, to save driving around. It is possible to go cash only still - but it is a pain.
by devmor | 2025-06-09 12:04:46+00:00
As someone who lost nearly 100lbs (about 45kg) calorie counting and working out, this was a big part of it.

It also just made me cognizant of my bad eating habits. I’d absent-mindedly snack on something, go to log it, then think “wait, why am I eating this right now?” and stop.

It’s essential educating yourself on nutrition through habit.
by 0xDEAFBEAD | 2025-06-09 12:04:46+00:00
My comment is too old to edit, but I would like to issue a correction. I should not have written "This article estimates that the US is the #2 longest-lasting republic after the Roman Republic", since the caption for the figure in the article states something different ("Duration of Long-Lived Democracies", i.e. the word "democracy" is used rather than "republic", and also there wasn't a claim to "longest-lived")

Never trust internet comments!
by tylervigen | 2025-06-09 12:05:05+00:00
I love and respect what Kagi is doing and I was a customer for years, but I recently canceled my subscription.

I found that have two main use cases:

1) Search - It is nice that Kagi search is less SEO spammed. That a big appeal. However, I don't reach for a search engine when I have a topical question anymore. I reach for something like o3 with search, so I don't need to dig through a bunch of articles. Over the last few years my pure search volume has dramatically reduced.

2) Maps - I travel a lot. When I toss a business into the search bar, 90% of the time I want to see it on a map. Google's Maps experience is just far superior to Kagi's. I find that I end up typing maps.google.com more often than I am happy Kagi ran the search.

I don't mind paying for a product; it just didn't work for me.

Side note: I personally dislike that their favicon looks like a "g" for google. It's always confused me.
by ty6853 | 2025-06-09 12:06:25+00:00
You're essentially appealing to the natural right to self defense. I'll grant you the constitution isn't a suicide pact -- if people are in imminent danger of death or disability then they or anyone else has a natural right to swiftly and severely deal with the transgressor. Any society that doesn't will perish, this supersedes all laws written by man.

However, after that happens there will be judgement. And the judgement is finding that quite often these renditions without process were not so justified. If you are going to act without process, you damn well better be right, and if you are not you should be judged as if you acted violently lawlessly.
by kypro | 2025-06-09 12:08:09+00:00
Surely you don't find writing boilerplate fun though?

Coding agents still give you control (at least for now), but are like having really good autocomplete. Instead of using copilot to complete a line or two, using something like Cursor you can generate a whole function or class based on your spec then you can refine and tweak the more nuanced and important bits where necessary.

For example, I was doing some UI stuff the other day and in the past it would have taken a while just to get a basic page layout together when you're writing it yourself, but with a coding assistant I generated a basic page asking it to use an image mock up, a component library and some other pages as references. Then I could get on and do the fun bits of building the more novel parts of the UI.

I mean if it's code you're working on for fun then work however you like, but I don't know why someone would employ a dev working in such an inefficient way in 2025.
by strogonoff | 2025-06-09 12:10:12+00:00
We cannot actually judge whether something is intelligent in some abstract absolute way; we can only judge whether it is intelligent in the same way we are. When someone says “LLM chatbot output looks like a person’s output, so it is intelligent”, the implication is that it is intelligent like a human would be.

With that distinction in mind, whether an LLM-based chatbot’s output looks like human output does not answer the question of whether the LLM is actually like a human.

Not even because measuring that similarity by taking text output at a point in time is laughable (it would have to span the time equivalent of human life, and include much more than text), but because LLM-based chatbot is a tool built specifically to mimic human output; if it does so successfully then it functions as intended. In fact, we should deliberately discount the similarity in output as evidence for similarity in nature, because similarity in output is an explicit goal, while similarity in underlying nature is a non-goal, a defect. It is safe to assume the latter: if it turned out that LLMs are similar enough to humans in more ways than output, they would join octopus and the like and qualify to be protected from abuse and torture (and since what is done to those chatbots in order for them to be useful in the way they are would pretty clearly be considered abuse and torture when done to a human-like entity, this would decimate the industry).

That considered, we do not[0] know exactly how an individual human mind functions to assess that from first principles, but we can approximate whether an LLM chatbot is like a human by judging things like whether it is made in a way at all similar to how a human is made. It is fundamentally different, and if you want to claim that human nature is substrate-independent, I’d say it’s you who should provide some evidence—keeping in mind that, as above, similarity in output does not constitute such evidence.

[0] …and most likely never could, because of the self-referential recursive nature of the question. Scientific method hinges on at least some objectivity and thus is of very limited help when initial hypotheses, experiment procedures, etc., are all supplied and interpreted by the very subject being studied.
by pbronez | 2025-06-09 12:10:20+00:00
I guess it makes sense to leave the door open, but what OS do you think they should consider? the mainline options basically:

Windows: status quo, dominant on desktop

Linux: investing, dominant on servers

MacOS: American, hates enterprises

ChromeOS: American, limited, uses Linux kernel.

The long tail alternative options include:

FreeBSD/OpenBSD: ditches the Linux kernel but supports much of the Linux software ecosystem

ReactOS: open source windows clone

Haiku: beta, not targeting enterprises

Redox: micro kernel OS written in rust, not ready for production

Seems like the *BSD family is the most viable of these, at least in the short term.

Redox could provide a second-mover advantage with fundamental security upgrades.
by gorgoiler | 2025-06-09 12:11:19+00:00
I know too many people who’ve had their stock zeroed out through dilution, preference vs common, partial buyouts where only some founders and investors get to sell, spurious “bad leaver” status for people who work for so-called competitors, forced resignations within particular timeframes that cause stock forfeiture, and on and on and on.

It would be an interesting addition to this guid to see these scenarios collected and enumerated with some tips around how to get caught out.
by rxtexit | 2025-06-09 12:12:09+00:00
If everyone gets $13k a year the price of everything will go up until people will no longer be able to live on $13k a year. Then you have to raise the UBI amount and then raise even more money by the government. Repeat.

To me, it is a non-starter unless you also had a massive housing build out to drive the cost of housing/rent down. We can't do that now though so that is also a non-starter.

Then even if you did massively build out housing, most the UBI will still be captured by rent/housing as some areas will become extremely low status and people will use the UBI to move to higher status areas.

All UBI really does if everyone gets it is change what $0 means. Not to mention, if you replace what people are getting currently from the government with UBI they are getting totally fucked. People on disability would get completely fucked since they are getting a basic income now but even though the UBI would be more in total, that will just purchase much less if everyone is getting the same amount.