MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mikeflynn | 2025-06-14 04:18:51+00:00
Section 174 has definitely been talked about a lot over the last few years, (even here on HN from time to time) but it's tax code details like this that never seem to make it above hype-fueled misrepresentations like "AI Is Taking All Software Jobs!"

Yes, it's a huge problem for small startups. Many of them went from not making revenue in the eyes of the IRS to being profitable and having massive tax bills. FAANG has the ability to move things around to their EU offices, but they also have the ability to spin it and do a layoff to help with their tax burden but also cover up issues like over-spending on projects like a shift to VR that didn't go anywhere, for example.
by im_down_w_otp | 2025-06-14 04:20:23+00:00
Bitcask, now there's a blast from the Basho past. It always bugged me that no good secondary indexing strategy was built to make using Bitcask viable for more use cases. Everyone always wanted to use the LevelDB backend just to get at secondary indexing features (which also performance scaled inversely relative to cluster size, which was it's own problem). But having Riak exhibit consistent, high-performance was waaaaaaaay easier on Bitcask.
by StillBored | 2025-06-14 04:20:28+00:00
Internal inertia is a powerful thing. This was discussed at length on comp.arch in the late 1990's early 2000's by insiders like Andy Glew. When OoO started to dominate intel should have realized the risk, but they continued to cancel internal projects to extend x86 to 64-bits. Of which apparently there were multiple. Even then, the day that AMD announced 64-bit extensions and a product timeline it should have resulted in intel doing an internal about face and acknowledging what everyone knew (in the late 1990's) and quietly scuttling ia64 while pulling a backup x86 out of their pocket. But since they had killed them all, they were forced to scramble to follow AMD.

Intel has plenty of engineering talent, if the bean counters, politicians and board would just get out of the way they would come back. But instead you see patently stupid/poor execution like then still ongoing avx512 saga. Lakefield, is a prime example of WTFism showing up publicly. The lack of internal leadership is written as loud as possible on a product where no one had the political power to force the smaller core to emulate avx512 during the development cycle, or NAK a product where the two cores couldn't even execute the same instructions. Its an engineering POC probably being shopped to apple or someone else considering an arm big.little without understanding how to actually implement it in a meaningful way. Compared with the AMD approach which seems to even best the arm big.little by simply using the same cores process optimized differently to the same effect without having to deal with the problems of optimizing software for two different microarch.
by mikeflynn | 2025-06-14 04:23:14+00:00
Yes. Absolutely. Just not the big corps. The big corps had tools to mitigate, people to cut to throw red meat to the market, and products to hype about how efficient they are now, etc.

I don't know if Big Tech will re-staff. I suspect they might to a degree, but smaller software-focused firms absolutely will. If they are surviving, they are working with a much smaller staff and would jump at the chance to add more hands.
by unconstrastive | 2025-06-14 04:25:00+00:00
I wouldn't categorize FAIR as failing. Their job is indeed fundamental research and are still a leading research lab, especially in perception and vision. See SAM2, DINOv2, V-JEPA-2, etc. The "fair" (hah) comparisons of FAIR are not to DeepMind/OAI/Anthropic, but to other publishing research labs like Google Research, NVIDIA Research, and they are doing great by that metric. It does seem that for whatever reason that FAIR resisted productization, unlike DeepMind, which is not necessarily a bad thing if you care about open research culture (see [1]). GenAI was supposed to be the "product lab" but failed for many reasons, including the ones you mentioned. Anyways, Meta does have a reputation problem that they are struggling to solve with $$ alone, but its somewhat of a category error to deem it FAIR's fault when FAIR is not a product LLM lab. Also Rob Fergus is a legit researcher; he published regularly with people like Ilya and Pushmeet (VP of Deepmind Research), just didn't get famous :P.

not affiliated with meta or fair.

[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aEdTE-B6CSPPeUWYD-IgNVQV...
by tom89999 | 2025-06-14 04:25:52+00:00
French love wine, so they drink it even during the day and that making them pee. But removing public restrooms was a huge mistake. I am glad finding one in my country, if not, i ask a business or cafe to use theirs. Some deny it completely, others charge you with 50 ct. i gladly pay. Sometimes the problem with public restrooms is the vandalism. You cant give some people something new,clean. They ruin it in no time. Its a pity, but thats the problem of their parents raising them.
by benatkin | 2025-06-14 04:29:26+00:00
Looking through these three graphs, there's more to it than that.

Breast cancer mortality by age: https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-...

Prostate cancer mortality by age: https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-...

Testicular cancer mortality by age: https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-...
by const_cast | 2025-06-14 04:33:09+00:00
Here's a single study:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39111551/

I don't know if it's the most compelling, probably not, but I just googled.

But, you should really be looking at meta-analysis. Because you can find a single study showing almost anything. If you look at a few meta-analysis you'd find that it's undisputed that diets high in saturated fat increase your risk of CVD. It's very well supported and we understand the mechanism of action.

The recommendation of the AHA has been to have a diet high in fiber and low in saturated (animal) fat for decades now. It makes complete sense: more vegetables, more fruits, more avocados and nuts, less red meat.

As an aside: there's other problems with red meat outside of the risk of heart disease. It's also a group 2A carcinogen, meaning it probably causes cancer. Processed red meats are group 1, meaning they definitely cause cancer.

None of this is to say that you're gonna die and it's terrible for you. But when it comes to diet you need to look at the whole picture and consider balance. Eating almost anything is fine in moderation proportional to how harmful the food is. For most people, it's enough to just use your intuition and not hyper-optimize. Eating a cheeseburger is fine, but you should also eat plenty of fruits and vegetables. If you're eating mostly cheeseburgers, milkshakes, steak... yeah that's probably not good in the long term.
by skissane | 2025-06-14 04:34:37+00:00
o3 can be very honest.

But I also find it can get very fixated that some position it has adopted is right, and will then start hallucinating like crazy in defence of that fixation, and then get stuck in a defensive loop of defending its hallucinations with even more hallucinations-by hallucinations I mean stuff like producing lengthy citation lists of invented articles, and then when you point out they don’t exist, claiming stuff like “well when I search PubMed they do”, and when you point out its DOIs are made-up it apologises for the “mistake” and just makes up some more
by tsimionescu | 2025-06-14 04:34:53+00:00
To some extent, I think the axiom comparison is enlightening. In principle, axioms determine the entire space of all mathematical truths in that system. However, in practice, not all truths in a mathematical system are as easy to discover or verify. Knowing the axioms of arithmetic doesn't mean you don't get anything out of computing how much 271819 × 637281 actually is.

The claims about LLM reasoning are precisely related to this point. Do LLMs follow some internal deductive process when they generate output that resembles such a logical process to humans? Or are they just producing text that looks like reasoning, much like an absurdist play might do, and then simply picking a conclusion that resembles other problems they've seen in the past?

I don't think any arguments about the base nature of the model are particularly helpful here. In principle, deductive reasoning can be expressed as a mathematical function, and for any function, there is a neural net that can approximate it with arbitrary precision. So it's not impossible that the model actually does this, but it's also not a given - this first principles approach is just not helpful. We need more applied study of how the model actually works to probe this deeper.
by almosthere | 2025-06-14 04:38:14+00:00
I think the reason why React has shown so much staying power is that as apps get larger, they don't necessarily get more complex from a management perspective. Components, for the most part, are very self contained and with modern toolchain, you can easily see dependencies and refactor components.

This is a very different world view from $() and {{}} from earlier concepts where you hook onto globally named things. In React (without redux) you can nest and make independent memory mapped components. Redux was a terrible start in the React world, but thankfully hooks have eradicated it from most people's memory.
by TinyMomentum | 2025-06-14 04:38:40+00:00
Hi HN,

I just launched Liquid Glass Generator — a free web tool that lets you create stunning, Apple-style liquid glass (glassmorphism) UI effects inspired by iOS 26.

Real-time customization of blur, saturation, transparency, glow, and shadows

Instant CSS & HTML code export, ready to drop into your projects

Designed for frontend developers and UI/UX designers

Mobile-friendly and supports dark mode

No login, no ads, no watermark

I built this to help designers and developers quickly prototype and implement the latest glass UI effects without messing with complex CSS filters.

Check it out here: https://www.liquid-glass.pro

Would love to hear your feedback and feature requests!

Thanks for reading.
by chris_builds93 | 2025-06-14 04:38:43+00:00
Hey all- forgot to label this properly as a "Show HN" in the title.

I recently built KnowBase – a free tool that lets you convert your own documents (PDF, DOCX, TXT) into a searchable knowledge base and knowledge graph, then connect it to a Custom GPT so you can query it conversationally.

I built this to improve my workflow, avoid re-handling files, and significantly enhance the lookup capabilities of my Custom GPTs. I wanted to give others the same ability to automate and personalise document access without needing to write code or manage infrastructure.

Features: - Upload and process PDFs, DOCX, or TXT - Automatic chunking and semantic embeddings via OpenAI - Supabase integration with pgvector - One-click export to create a Custom GPT - Full local control over data (your keys, your database)

Try it here: https://knowbase-chrisbuilds.replit.app/?utm_source=hn&utm_m...

Feedback welcome!
by const_cast | 2025-06-14 04:40:48+00:00
> That's why you have to use inert placebos. There's nothing unethical about this. It's a standard safety precaution.

This isn't true.

We do use inert placebos, but for some medications, we are not going to be doing that in human trials for obvious safety and ethical concerns. Keep in mind: we do NOT just jump to human trials. We also do cellular trials and animal trials.

Again, if we're trying out a new cancer drug, we're not going to give the control group saline - we're going to give them a chemotherapy regime that we know works. I don't understand what's not clicking for you because it's actually very simple and intuitive.

And, as an aside: the government has not recommended any vaccines that are unsafe. You may feel the COVID vaccines were not safe. That doesn't mean they're unsafe. In addition, there are numerous reasons why a medication might be pulled, and it's quite rare that the reason is safety in absolute. Some medication may be less safe than another so we obsolesce said medication - but even that does not mean that it is unsafe. Just inferior.

With any medication, or in fact any substance, including even water, there are risks. We're generally very aware of the risk before the medication is administered and we work to minimize them in various ways. The simple reality is that dozens have vaccines have worked together to eradicate many diseases in the US, and these health initiatives have been very successful. Other countries are not so lucky, so they are dealing with diseases that we haven't touched in decades.

Please bare in mind that viruses and bacteria are not risk-free, nor are they necessarily the type of thing you can just recover from. For example, about 2% of people who contract Polio will develop paralysis. 2% is extraordinarily high. Just because you might be fine, or you know people who are fine, doesn't mean that the disease is low-risk. With COVID specifically, we're still uncovering long-term effects of infection. With viruses like HSV, we're also uncovering long-term effects like increased risk of cancer and potentially dementia.

Just because you get sick and seem to recover, doesn't mean that what happened was safe and done.
by ncarlson | 2025-06-14 04:40:57+00:00
> AI we don’t have a model.

So, some engineers just stumbled upon LLMs and said, "Holy smokes, we've created something impressive, but we really can't explain how this stuff works!"

We built these things. Piece by piece. If you don't understand the state-of-the-art architectures, I don't blame you. Neither do I. It's exhausting trying to keep up. But these technologies, by and large, are understood by the engineers that created them.
by byyoung3 | 2025-06-14 04:42:36+00:00
I believe is AI. A programmer is now 3x productive. As a ceo, you realize you can probably let a few people go without consequences. Also, CEO’s look and see what Elon did at twitter, and think maybe they can do the same. I wouldn’t underestimate the influence Elon has on entrepreneurs and CEOs. “If you aren’t adding pieces back in, you aren’t removing enough”.
by btilly | 2025-06-14 04:44:00+00:00
It slows down by releasing a large light sail in front of it, designed to reflect light back to a much smaller light sail behind it. The laser then pushes the large sail away, and as the sail goes it pushes the smaller sail (and ship) back. This leaves the ship at moderate speed relative to the new star, and a large sail traveling very, very quickly beyond it.

We do not yet have this technology. But we can show that it is plausible.
by nofunsir | 2025-06-14 04:44:01+00:00
I fundamentally disagree with many of their reasonings. e.g. tinting the so-called "Content Layer" instead of all the buttons, or demanding "steady state" to be "visually quiet", which is highly subjective. They are optimizing for sheep content vacuums, I mean users, and obedient developers.

As a user, I want color back on my GD buttons!

Also, I don't trust anyone who would wear those outfits.
by perching_aix | 2025-06-14 04:44:20+00:00
> Issues like this always have exceptions and grey areas

That's my point. If that holds, then it will also hold that there will be individuals who can call moderation censorship. Either we accept these categories as equals from the get-go (content filtering), or this doesn't justify equating them, which is what GP said he'd be doing if he felt the cynic rise in them.

For what it's worth, it's not that I don't recognize the ideas of moderation and censorship different. It's just that I think of them as different characterizations of the same thing - and then sometimes those characterizations I find fair, sometimes not so much.

> I have never come across anyone saying they could give up EU membership as an individual, as individuals are not members of the EU.

You're still yet to come across anyone like that, as you're misinterpreting the word "leave" for reasons beyond me.

I can leave my home, I can leave my home country, why couldn't I leave [the area of] the EU? Why did you think I was talking about some ceremonial relinquishing of my EU "citizenship" that as you say does not exist?

> you are free to do in public.

There's nothing stopping anyone from claiming any area as theirs and then imposing rules on them, trivially bypassing this notion. Examples include: not in my backyard, not in front of my house, not in this city, not in this country, etc.
by esperent | 2025-06-14 04:45:00+00:00
Of all the times and places where I'd say using your phone for distraction is not problematic, the subway would be near top of the list. What are else are you going to do? Enjoy the sounds, sights, and smells? It's not a great place for conversation even if you are with other people, and it's not a great place for meditation or reflection if you're alone.
by 9935c101ab17a66 | 2025-06-14 04:45:37+00:00
I don't have a full answer for you, but I found some more info in the CitizenLab report [^1] about the incidents.

(Small aside, but CitizenLab is excellent and such a valuable resource)

CitizenLab states the zero-click iMessage attack — CVE-2025-43200 - used as one of the vectors was fixed by Apple in iOS 18.3.1.

Apple has an "About the security content of iOS 18.3.1 and iPadOS 18.3.1" [^2] page, and it contains the following:

---

Messages Available for: iPhone XS and later, iPad Pro 13-inch, iPad Pro 12.9-inch 3rd generation and later, iPad Pro 11-inch 1st generation and later, iPad Air 3rd generation and later, iPad 7th generation and later, and iPad mini 5th generation and later

Impact: A logic issue existed when processing a maliciously crafted photo or video shared via an iCloud Link. Apple is aware of a report that this issue may have been exploited in an extremely sophisticated attack against specific targeted individuals.

Description: This issue was addressed with improved checks.

CVE-2025-43200: Apple

---

1: https://citizenlab.ca/2025/06/first-forensic-confirmation-of...

2: https://support.apple.com/en-us/122174
by akoboldfrying | 2025-06-14 04:48:44+00:00
An industry insider's take on the success of Karuna Therapeutics, a biotech company acquired for $14B on the strength of their schizophrenia drug KarXT. What struck me was the combination of how simple and almost obvious the fundamental scientific idea was (combine a drug that is known to be effective against schizophrenia but had unpleasant side effects, with a drug that decreases those side effects), and the enormous 16-year slog required to get it over the line. Some insights on (biotech) VCs too.
by rahimnathwani | 2025-06-14 04:50:48+00:00
At the time of writing, the only comment that accurately explains why OP is wrong is right at the bottom of the the thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44274018

And consider this: if your head count is stable, then amortizing software development costs doesn't really matter. Why? Because you're only deducting 20% of this year's costs but you're now deducting 20% from each of the last 4 years too. So unless your labor costs massively changed, it's basically the same thing.
by iTokio | 2025-06-14 04:51:04+00:00
I’ve been using it for 2 days now, and the first thing I noticed is that readability took a hit.

My background is a mid tone warm photo, not dark or light, icons got a white foreground that’s very hard to read against their translucent background.

The second thing I noticed, is that when I’m scrolling a webpage, icons now switch color randomly (according to the bg dominant color) and that’s distracting.

The last thing, is that my phone is getting warmer and scrolling has become less fluid, choppy. And that’s on the 16 Pro Max.

What I like the most about this design though, is that it become invisible and let you focus on what you are reading, watching.

Perfect to focus on content, but the user interface has become sometimes unreadable and when you need to interact with it, put the flashlight in a hurry, you are scanning through instead of instantly recognizing stuff. But maybe that’s just new habits to make.
by tracerbulletx | 2025-06-14 04:51:35+00:00
Yeah, the brain obviously has types of circuits and networks that are doing things llms don't do, they have timing, and rhythm, and extremely complex feedback loops, there's no justification to call llms sentient. But all the people trying to say they're categorically different are wrong. Brains process sequential electrical signals from the senses, and send sequential signals to the muscles. That's it. The fact that modern neural networks can trivially shift modes from audio, language, image, video, 3d or any other symbolic representation is obviously a significant development and something significant has happened in our understanding of intelligence.
by WarOnPrivacy | 2025-06-14 04:52:03+00:00
> I must have the last good HP printer or something. Mine is the "HP Color LaserJet Pro MFP M281fdw"

I have some of those in my care. They perform fine but they are locked to chipped cartridges.

And when HP learned their customers were moving the chips to 3rd party cartridges, HP worked out a method to cement the chips in place - to make it as hard on their customers as they possibly could.

When I referenced HP with the terms Hostility and Sabotage, it was the M281's I had in mind. Although, crapware applies too. They're reason #4,009,175 to never buy HP.
by ashdksnndck | 2025-06-14 04:54:14+00:00
There is already research in the literature showing that LLMs have neurons that model the gender [1], personality [2], ideology [3], and historic era [4] of the author. There’s also evidence that they model the distinction between the beliefs of the author and other characters, which has been summarized as “theory of mind” [5]. And we have only scratched the surface, with most research using small open-weight models that lag behind frontier model capabilities.

[1] Z. Yu & S. Ananiadou, “Understanding and Mitigating Gender Bias in LLMs via Interpretable Neuron Editing,” arXiv:2501.14457 (2025).

[2] J. Deng et al., “Neuron-based Personality Trait Induction in Large Language Models,” arXiv:2410.12327 (2024).

[3] J. Kim, J. Evans & A. Schein, “Linear Representations of Political Perspective Emerge in Large Language Models,” arXiv:2503.02080 (2025).

[4] W. Gurnee & M. Tegmark, “Language Models Represent Space and Time,” arXiv:2310.02207 (2023).

[5] C. Hardy, “A Sparse ToM Circuit in Gemma-2-2B,” https://xtian.ai/pages/document.pdf
by cryptotrader01 | 2025-06-14 04:54:56+00:00
Hey HN,

I wanted to share a new crypto project I’ve been watching called Bitcoin-Hyper. Its presale just went live, and unlike many meme-fueled tokens, this one actually has a clear roadmap, strong transparency, and a long-term strategy that makes sense, especially in this volatile market.

Why It Stood Out to Me: Transparent Presale Structure Everything about the tokenomics, allocation, and fundraising stages is laid out clearly — no confusing or hidden mechanics.

Utility-Backed Vision They're not just “another altcoin.” The project is tied to real use cases like cross-chain compatibility, staking incentives, and community governance.

Post-Launch Roadmap Beyond launch, Bitcoin-Hyper is planning CEX listings, ecosystem integrations, and continuous updates. All milestones are dated and verifiable.

No Wild Promises or "To the Moon" Talk That’s rare. The team is focused on product development and building an actual ecosystem instead of chasing hype.

Presale Access: If you're curious, the presale is live here: https://bitcoin-hyper.com

I’m not affiliated with the team — just genuinely impressed by the level of openness and market awareness compared to 90% of the presales I see daily.

Would love to know what the HN crowd thinks — especially from a technical or economic angle.