MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by MyPasswordSucks | 2025-06-13 02:32:53+00:00
> Exact Audio Copy, the author seems to have moved on to other interests, which is a shame because I was looking for something compatible with an autoloader.

Nah, it's mostly just reached the stage where there's nothing left to do - all the "objective" stuff works as it should, and any feature adds would be a pretty heavy undertaking. It was updated a little less than a year ago, and when I contacted the author he was very responsive.

Would it be nice to have a keyboard shortcut for proper [1] cuesheet creation (ironically, all the options except the proper one have keyboard shortcuts)? Yeah, but I've learned to live with it. Would it be nice to have super-duper tagging options? I dunno, from where I'm sitting, it seems like it'd just be duplicating a bunch of foobar2000 features for negligible gain.

[1] Because nobody wants a .FLAC that starts with a few seconds of silence, inter-track gaps need to be appended to the end of the previous track, which is not how Red Book audio handles it, and means that the "proper" cuesheet format is technically a non-compliant cuesheet.
by graeme | 2025-06-13 02:35:00+00:00
Would require the bill to be short, or otherwise made ingestible. And also would require an analysis of relevant inter-related statutes and precedents.

Legal analysis is challenging because it's like wordier code.

the "Big Beautiful Bill" is 350K tokens. O3 Pro's context window is 200K, but you also lose performance as you get closer to the max.

It could analyze a section but you still have the challenge of finding relevant laws and precedents.
by PlunderBunny | 2025-06-13 02:36:24+00:00
A recruiter once asked me, before talking about anything else, if there were any software development jobs I wouldn't consider doing. I said something along the lines of "nothing involving gambling or the military" and I think that was as far as I got before he politely ended the call.

I guess it's better for both parties to be clear at the outset. We should all think about where we draw the line.
by roenxi | 2025-06-13 02:36:43+00:00
Counterpoint: No it doesn't. I've included about as convincing an argument so hopefully that satisfies you.

But I feel that is a bit light for a comment so I'll go further - producing food is a benefit to everyone and that isn't funded under the largest possible umbrella. It is funded under a highly decentralised system and works unbelievably efficiently.

There is no reason to think science is different. Even the big projects that need a lot of money (eg, a big Fusion project like ITER) have shown to be fund-able by a disparate group of entities (ironically governments). There doesn't need to be a coordinating central government giving marching orders to make it happen. Interested parties can just fund science directly.
by majormajor | 2025-06-13 02:37:04+00:00
Can you run out of new and unique problems without running out of economic innovation? If there are no new business processes, no new features or products that require new complexity, how is there room for new entrants? You either get a race to the bottom, commodity prices for commodity goods; or market and regulatory capture and artificially high prices and barriers to entry.

Where is the room for "vibe coder" - or really any of the business people that would hypothetically be using agents to "just write their own code"?

Teams and tools will certainly look different. But people crave novelty which is a big part of why I've never been on an engineering team that was staffed enough to come even close to the output the business owners and product teams desired. So I don't think we'll actually hit the end of the road there.

--

In a true-super-human-AGI world things look very different, but then there's one question that matters more than any others: where is the money coming from to build and maintain the machines? The AGI agent that can replace an engineer can actually replace an entire company - why go to a vibe-coding entrepreneur and let them take a cut when you can just explain what you need to an agent yourself? The agent will be smarter than that entrepreneur, definitionally.
by TheBicPen | 2025-06-13 02:37:09+00:00
Very confused about this point:

> Passwords, Face ID, Touch ID — things that supposedly nobody but you can replicate, but which don't prove you're physically near a given device

Password, sure. But the other 2 surely prove that you're both 1) the correct person and 2) near the physical device that scans your face/fingerprint. The article immediately follows that by saying that face/touch ID do both.
by ryandv | 2025-06-13 02:37:52+00:00
> Some of the worst behavior ive seen in my life has been done by devout catholics.

Those same "devout Catholics" can also be found identifying as secular "progressives" or whatever other word is trendy and evokes implications of moral superiority and righteousness. The religions and pantheons may differ but the core psychological mechanisms are the same.

The devout Catholic knows all the canned responses and hymns by rote, but only when the priest is there to prompt him; he forgets his moral code the second he has stood up from the pews.

Analogously the secular progressive will eagerly output all the tokens expected of a "good person" when adequately prompted with contemporary inclusive language; yet they don't appear to be able to keep to their principles in other environments when they aren't being supplied with the exact same context and tokens.
by pupatlas | 2025-06-13 02:39:36+00:00
Long time lurker, first time poster— be gentle :P

Was watching WWDC earlier this week, and was curious how close you could get to liquid glass in the browser. Turns out, pretty darn close. This approach is almost pure CSS, and even replicates the refraction you see in Apple's components. This was a quick and dirty "I wonder if" project, so there's pretty much no cross browser support (this only really works well in Chrome on desktop at the moment)— but if there's interest, I'm considering cleaning it up into a full-fledged react library (and adding real cross-compatibility).

Let me know what you think! :)
by Akairem | 2025-06-13 02:43:01+00:00
Location: Chiba/Tokyo Japan Remote: Yes Willing to relocate: Yes (Japan)

Technologies: html/css, Javascript(vanilla), SQL, Python, Java

Resume/CV: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Vv_avJRulEjQvBkSiLanajZFWLE...

Email: mclarenc@hotmail.co.uk

About me: Hi my name is Connor and I am a back-end software engineer focusing in Python and Java.

Very happy within a team environment but am also open to individual work, I happen to be one of the few people that like to work in person at the office but I am open to remote also.

I am a fast learner and have a strong work ethic, I recently moved to Japan and am currently studying Japanese while developing an app to assist with language learning. I am always eager to improve so I consistently work to broaden my skills and open new paths for myself.
by thomassmith65 | 2025-06-13 02:45:01+00:00
You are suggesting that Israel should overthrow the regime.

My conception of how Iranians would overthrow their government doesn't involve Israeli soldiers invading Iran, or a full-fledged war. My hope is, given the precarious state that Iran already is in, that an expensive and embarrassing failure - such as the destruction of its nuclear facilities - might be the final straw.

I agree that a regime change could turn out to be a disaster, but if Pahlavi is as prepared for the event as he claims, then it could be fantastic.
by majormajor | 2025-06-13 02:46:56+00:00
The question is: can an LLM actually power a true "agent" or can it just create a pretty decent simulation of one? When your tools are a bigger context window and a better prompt, are there some nails that are out of your capacity to hit?

We have made LLMs that need far less "prompt engineering" to give you something pretty-decent than they did 2 years ago. It makes them WAY more useful as tools.

But then you hit the wall like you mention, or like another poster on this thread saw: "Of course, it's not perfect. For example, it gave me some authentication code that just didn’t work." This happens to me basically daily. And then I give it the error and ask it to modify. And then that doesn't work. And I give it this error. And it suggests the previous failed attempt again.

It's often still 90% of the way there, though, so the tool is pretty valuable.

But is "training on your personal quality bar" achievable? Is there enough high-quality draining data in the world, that it can recognize as high-quality vs low? Are the fundamentals of the prediction machine the right ones to be able to understand at-generation-time "this is not the right approach for this problem" given the huge variety and complexity in so many different programming languages and libraries?

TBD. But I'm a skeptic about that because I've seen "output from a given prompt" improve a ton in 2 years, but I haven't seen that same level of improvement for "output after getting a really really good prompt and some refinement instructions". I have to babysit it less, so I actually use it day to day way more, but it hits the wall in the same sort of very similar, unsurprising ways. (It's harder to describe than that - it's like a "know it when you see it" thing. "Ah, yes, there's a subtly that it doesn't know how to get past because there are so many wrinkles in a particular OAUTH2 implementation, but it was so rare a case in the docs and examples that it's just looping on things that aren't working.")

(The personification of these things really fucks up the discussion. For instance, when someone tells me "no, it was probably just too lazy to figure out the right way" or "it got tired of the conversation." The chosen user-interface of the people making these tools really messes with people's perceptions of them. E.g. if LLM-suggested code that is presented as an in-line autocomplete by Copilot is wrong, people tend to be more like "ah, Copilot's not always that great, it got it wrong" but if someone asks a chatbot instead then they're much more likely to personify the outcome.)
by AnotherGoodName | 2025-06-13 02:48:08+00:00
Too slow to build when you extrapolate growth and cost reductions in solar, wind and batteries which seems very reasonable. As in by the time it’s built it won’t be worth running.

The CSIRO is Australian government funded and did a cost analysis: https://www.csiro.au/en/research/technology-space/energy/Ele...

Tldr nuclear is not worth building anymore. In fact they recommended no other power sources are worth building at this point given solar and winds cost effectiveness and the cost of batteries right now. This doesn't come from a climate angle. It’s pure economics.
by nevon | 2025-06-13 02:48:52+00:00
I very recently used jemalloc to resolve a memory fragmentation issue that caused a service to OOM every few days. While jemalloc as it is will continue to work, same as it does today, I wonder what allocator I should reach for in the future. Does anyone have any experiences to share regarding tcmalloc or other allocators that aim to perform better than stock glibc?
by meisel | 2025-06-13 02:51:03+00:00
I believe there’s no other allocator besides jemalloc that can seamlessly override macOS malloc/free like people do with LD_PRELOAD on Linux (at least as of ~2020). jemalloc has a very nice zone-based way of making itself the default, and manages to accommodate Apple’s odd requirements for an allocator that have tripped other third-party allocators up when trying to override malloc/free.
by majormajor | 2025-06-13 02:52:04+00:00
This was "I want to update all the imports to the new version of the library, where they changed a bit in the fully qualified package name." Should be a super-trivial change for the AI agent to understand.

Like I mentioned, it's literally just global find and replace.

Slightly embarrassing thing to have even asked Cursor to do for me, in retrospect. But, you know, you get used to the tool and to being lazy.
by diwank | 2025-06-13 02:53:51+00:00
This isn’t entirely surprising. Language-model “reasoning” is basically the model internally exploring possibilities in token-space. These models are trained on enormous multilingual datasets and optimized purely for next-token prediction, not language purity. When reasoning traces or scratchpads are revealed directly (as OpenAI occasionally does with o-series models or DeepSeek-R1-zero), it’s common to see models slip into code-switching or even random language fragments, simply because it’s more token-efficient in their latent space.

For example, the DeepSeek team explicitly reported this behavior in their R1-zero paper, noting that purely unsupervised reasoning emerges naturally but brings some “language mixing” along. Interestingly, they found a small supervised fine-tuning (SFT) step with language-consistency rewards slightly improved readability, though it came with trade-offs (DeepSeek blog post).

My guess is OpenAI has typically used a smaller summarizer model to sanitize reasoning outputs before display (they mentioned summarization/filtering briefly at Dev Day), but perhaps lately they’ve started relaxing that step, causing more multilingual slips to leak through. It’d be great to get clarity from them directly on whether this is intentional experimentation or just a side-effect.

[1] DeepSeek-R1 paper that talks about poor readability and language mixing in R1-zero’s raw reasoning https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.12948

[2] OpenAI “Detecting misbehavior in frontier reasoning models” — explains use of a separate CoT “summarizer or sanitizer” before showing traces to end-users https://openai.com/index/chain-of-thought-monitoring/
by seba_dos1 | 2025-06-13 02:55:24+00:00
Nobody can "fix the entire OEM landscape".

Mozilla could have nudged it in the right direction. They didn't try. Not even a step forwards. The entire value proposition from non-technical standpoint was "we're not Google".

Others are trying with much less leverage or resources and actually progressing. Firefox OS was born, lived and died without making a dent.
by d13z | 2025-06-13 03:01:54+00:00
This might be confirmation bias but I'm very happy that we picked Astro over NextJS. Support for Standalone server is a must for our case since we run the biggest classifieds site in Germany and vercel costs are impossible to pay.

Here is an article I wrote of why we chose it https://d13z.dev/blog/07-why-kleinanzeigen-picked-astro-over...
by a_tartaruga | 2025-06-13 03:03:37+00:00
Basically everything is just faster and I can focus either on solving things that matter more or I can work less. I've never been a great developer but now it feels like I have the option to be one as defined circa 2020.

Code base is weird so maybe my situation is too unique to generalize. Overall its systems engineering across 10s of OSS repos in 3-4 languages and a decade of abstractions operating a biggish open system at scale. A strange mix of work doing both in depth slow critical maintenance of the system and fast shoddy prototyping on top of it.
by Leo-thorne | 2025-06-13 03:05:42+00:00
I used to sit in front of my task list and just stare at it. Then I tried the author’s approach and broke everything down into tiny game-like tasks. I printed each one on a little receipt printer. Every time I finished one, it felt like taking down a small boss, tear it off, and toss it. Suddenly the task list felt way less intimidating and much more efficient. Surprisingly, the ritual worked. I was able to stick to it and even started to get a small sense of accomplishment every day. Definitely more productive than my old habit of tackling huge chunks at once.
by visnup | 2025-06-13 03:07:23+00:00
I wouldn't be where I am in life without Mikeal. Similar to other stories here, he saw things in people, in me, so quickly and with such confidence, and simply got out of our way to empower us and lift us up.

In true Mikeal style, he was able to introduce me to a new smash burger joint only a couple weeks ago while we were shuttling him around for medical stuff.

I intended to write more about Mikeal in any other medium, but don't think I'll ever finish. Even this isn't enough.
by ddejohn | 2025-06-13 03:08:26+00:00
Nothing tempts me so strongly to give up and leave a site than needing to use a magic link to get in.

Sometimes it takes minutes. I have, on more than one occasion, given up on buying a product because of this. It's actually insane to me how much effort sites put into preventing users from using them.

I get it, most people are idiots with completely non-existent security hygiene, but man does it suck being punished because of just how low the common denominator is here.
by d13z | 2025-06-13 03:10:42+00:00
I think that it depends a lot on how much customisation you have to do on top of NextJS to make it work for your personal use case.

For example if you stay as close as possible to the framework defaults, everything is golden. But as soon you start pushing it to the limits the cracks start to appear.

Last year I was working on a NextJS app with 15k files, 18k unit tests, 100+ developers in the same repository and a page with hundred of millions of page views daily. Under that conditions NextJS doesn't scale, but again, those conditions are not the majority of the NextJS cases.

In that project, we have been using NextJS as a standalone for around 5 years and each time NextJS rollout a major version it take us at least 2 months to be able to upgrade and keep it working.
by joegibbs | 2025-06-13 03:10:54+00:00
You might just not like big-budget movies - there's definitely a correlation between the size of the budget and a lack of novelty. Take a look at Wikipedia's list of most expensive films, almost every single one on there is a big franchise film - often late in the franchise too. I think the first one on there that isn't based on previous material is Avatar at #41 and I think the only other is Tenet at #62.

This makes sense - if you're funding a movie you want a return on your investment. You could make 20 risky $10m movies or one that's $200m which has to succeed or else. When you put your money into the $200m movie you want to make sure it's as inoffensive as possible and appeals to as wide an audience as possible, so you want a franchise that's proven to pump out hits in the past (or a director who does the same, like Cameron for Avatar and Nolan for Tenet).
by inetknght | 2025-06-13 03:11:01+00:00
> How is living in space meaningfully different from living in a submersible in the ocean (apart from the view)?

Just off the top of my head:

- different ability to re-stock

You could re-stock your submersible just about anywhere. You're going to have to do a lot more planning for your groceries when you go in space though.

- access to microgravity

This simply isn't available in a submersible. Microgravity provides some interesting manufacturing and biological capabilities.

- completely different pressure profiles

Combining different pressure environments in microgravity is particularly interesting to me.

- different instrumentation capabilities

It's not just the view -- the atmosphere plays merry hell with instruments when measuring the cosmos. And it does so in ways that just aren't relevant to underwater environments.
Show HN: I built a cleaner YouTube – no ads, sponsors, or doomscrolling
by Nina_F | 2025-06-13 03:11:06+00:00
Hi HN!

I built SkipCut

it’s like an ad-free, distraction-free YouTube with useful extras: background play, SponsorBlock, dark mode, playlist support, local history, download/share buttons… and it works on any device. No install. No login.

Here’s the best part: It works just by replacing "youtube" with "skipcut" in the video link. You skip all the boring stuff — ads, sponsors, intros, silence, filler and just watch what matters.

Why it’s different: No comments. No suggested videos. No clickbait.

I made this for my kid, I create a playlist and just send a SkipCut link like: https://skipcut.com?list=xyz123 It plays only those videos and stops the doomscrolling.

Just replace youtube with skipcut in the URL of any video Example: https://www.skipcut.com/watch?v=abc123

No signup required

Would love your feedback, ideas, and bug reports!

Try it: https://skipcut.com
by ramesh31 | 2025-06-13 03:11:30+00:00
Instead of asking how can we ship more code or how can we ship better code, why not "how can AI give me a better life"? Machines are supposed to make our lives easier. If I can output the same quality at a faster rate of speed, why can't I have that time back to my own life now? This is how my view on agentic coding is evolving toward. I don't want to be under the pressure of doubling my productivity for an employer. I want to capture that gain for myself.
by neilv | 2025-06-13 03:16:41+00:00
This post seems to have been unlinked somehow. It's not marked flagged, but I can't find it within 20 pages from front page (where I first saw it), nor in either of the 2 "ask" pages.

Ask HN: Have you not accepted or left a job because it was immoral? 14 points by dataviz1000 2 hours ago | flag | hide | past | favorite | 15 comments
by aiforecastthway | 2025-06-13 03:17:12+00:00
> If I can output the same quality at a faster rate of speed, why can't I have that time back to my own life now?

We have done a terrible job at allocating the net benefits of globalization. We will (continue to) do a terrible job at allocating the net benefits of productivity improvements.

The "why" is hard to answer. But one thing is clear: the United States has a dominant economic ideology, and the name of that ideology is not hardworker-ism.
by NoahZuniga | 2025-06-13 03:18:17+00:00
> data structure & algorithms questions

My understanding is that these questions are a proxy for intelligence, and they were asked because Google and the like want smart employees.

If that's why you're asking these questions, than testing using agents in the interview process doesn't make sense, because:

1. If you're hiring smart people, you can probably teach them how to use agents. (training someone to use agents isn't very hard)

2. If someone is smarter, you might in general expect them to be more capable of finding bugs in AI code.
by myself248 | 2025-06-13 03:18:18+00:00
Make sure your GNSS receiver supports OSNMA, and be _extremely_ trusting of your battery-backed RTC and profoundly skeptical of time jumps over a certain magnitude.

GNSS spoofing is trivial now and it's an extremely useful way to manipulate a target device's idea of time, which breaks all sorts of things. (SSL certificate validity periods...)
by sshine | 2025-06-13 03:19:29+00:00
Image recognition for cameras on tanks and ships using Nvidia Jetson. Job ad wasn’t very informative, and didn’t even mention they were military contractors. In the interview they kept using kittens as the example of something you wouldn’t shoot. And that I shouldn’t worry, because they only sell these systems to the good countries. Had me sit and read the employee manual for 30 minutes at the first interview. They had a strict “no porn at work” policy. Fortunately the other place I interviewed offered +15% on salary.
Show HN: I made a tool to Turn your YT videos into AI-tutor less than a minute
by hakimihsan | 2025-06-13 03:19:30+00:00
Demo video: https://youtu.be/41RnN9dhnJI?feature=shared

millions people use Youtube as a source of lessons, but 1-on-1 tutoring is still way more effective than passive learning.

So how you turn billions of Youtube passive lessons into accessible 1-on-1 learning?

the answer is, www.wiyomi.com!!