MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by klabb3 | 2025-06-05 13:18:57+00:00
Disagree. Untrusted code was thought to be a meaningful term 20-30 years ago when you ran desktop OSs with big name software like Microsoft Word and Adobe, and games. What happened in reality is that this fence had false positives (ie Meta being one of your main adversaries) and an enormous amount of false negatives (all indie or small devs that would have their apps classified as viruses).

The model we need isn’t a boolean form of trust, but rather capabilities and permissions on a per-app, per-site or per-vendor basis. We already know this, but it’s incredibly tricky to design, retrofit and explain. Mobile OSs did a lot here, even if they are nowhere near perfect. For instance, they allow apps (by default even) to have private data that isn’t accessible from other apps on the same device.

Whether the code runs in an app or on a website isn’t actually important. There is no fundamental reason for the web to be constrained except user expectations and the design of permission systems.
by bluejay2387 | 2025-06-05 13:18:58+00:00
2x 3090's running Ollama and VLLM... Ollama for most stuff and VLLM for the few models that I need to test that don't run on Ollama. Open Web UI as my primary interface. I just moved to Devstral for coding using the Continue plugin in VSCode. I use Qwen 3 32b for creative stuff and Flux Dev for images. Gemma 3 27b for most everything else (slightly less smart than Qwen, but its faster). Mixed Bread for embeddings (though apparently NV-Embed-v2 is better?). Pydantic as my main utility library. This is all for personal stuff. My stack at work is completely different and driven more by our Legal teams than technical decisions.
by vel0city | 2025-06-05 13:19:42+00:00
I've had several different cars from a few different manufacturers with different levels of ADAS systems and have used them on many long road trips and short trips. I haven't used any Tesla ADAS system for very long though.

The highest level of ADAS system I use regularly has facial attentiveness tracking. If you spend too much time drinking coffee or even looking out the sides of the car it will alert you and eventually turn off. So you're not spending a ton of time drinking coffee or reading emails.

It's really nice having the car just want to stay in the center of the lane and keep the following distance all on its own. It's less fatiguing on your hands and arms having the car feel like it's in a groove following all the curves for you instead of resisting your input all the time for hours and hours. It's incredibly nice not having to switch between the brake and the gas over and over in stop and go traffic. Instead, the only thing I need to focus on are the drivers around me and be ready to brake.

I've driven between Houston, Dallas, and Austin dozens of times with ADAS systems and another dozen or so times with only basic cruise control. It's way nicer when the only time I have to touch the gas and brake are getting on and off the highways. I'm considerably more relaxed and less exhausted getting to my destination.

Let's assume all these options are either the same price or an immaterial difference to the price of your next car. If you had an option for a car with basic cruise control or no cruise control, which one would you take? If the option was basic cruise or adaptive cruise which kept pace with traffic and operated in stop and go conditions, which would you choose?
by aaronbaugher | 2025-06-05 13:19:56+00:00
Yeah, that's just how developing new technologies works. Home PCs, VCRs, CD players, cell phones: every one was hundreds or thousands of dollars at first, a plaything for wealthy people. Then as volume increased, prices came down to where most people could afford them and they became mass-market consumer items.

It doesn't always work out. Sometimes another technology or a competitor gets over that hump first, and the other (LaserDisc, Betamax) never gets the volume it takes to become an affordable commodity. And it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with which one was better. But that's the path to selling a new tech to the masses: sell with a high price tag to the wealthy first.
by Trenthug | 2025-06-05 13:20:30+00:00
I appreciate the depth of your reply and the emphasis you place on existential interaction as the basis of consciousness. That said, I want to raise two concerns: (1) the vagueness of “interaction” as used here, and (2) a tendency toward romantic framing that avoids definitional clarity.

1. What counts as “existential interaction”?

You argue that consciousness emerges not through symbolic representation, but through interaction in existential reality. But without a precise definition of “interaction,” this claim risks becoming ungrounded. For example:

Is “interaction” limited to direct physical or sensory engagement?

Do internal simulations, like mentally rehearsing a conversation or planning for the future, count as interactions?

What about dream states, or belief changes based on remembered or imagined events?

If we accept that internal dynamics (e.g., recursive simulations, belief updates, predictions) can alter future actions, then not all meaningful interactions are external or physically causal. Consciousness, in this view, involves a recursive loop between internal symbolic representations and potential behavior—even in the absence of outward interaction. This is testable and describable in formal terms using information theory and algorithmic complexity.

By contrast, the term “existential interaction,” as used in your comment, is philosophically resonant but operationally undefined. Without constraints, it becomes a poetic placeholder rather than a conceptual tool.

---

2. Romanticism over rigor

Statements like “things are as they are perturbed” or “calling something a thing doesn’t make it that thing” suggest a romantic metaphysics—inspiring, but unfalsifiable. These phrases evoke feeling rather than structure. They resist the very thing science—and rigorous philosophy—requires: a shared, consistent definitional frame. That’s not necessarily wrong, but it weakens the explanatory utility.

My approach seeks to balance both: symbolic representation as compressed memory of prior interactions, used in a recursive, predictive loop to inform future behavior. These symbolic structures interact within the system by modifying the being’s internal state and expected outcomes—this is both measurable and philosophically defensible.

---

To summarize:

Existential interaction, unless defined, cannot distinguish between conscious and unconscious systems.

Romantic language about being and perturbation may inspire, but without operational clarity, cannot explain.

Symbols, when used in recursive, desire-driven feedback loops, are not inert—they’re interactive mechanisms embedded within the system’s dynamics.

Would you agree that we might need both existential embeddedness and internal symbolic recursion to fully describe consciousness?
by throw0101d | 2025-06-05 13:20:33+00:00
> Also a bit pricey at 250k Eur...

That's the annual salary of of 2-3 airline pilots, which you pay year after year in OpEx. This is a one-time CapEx that will work for years and may allow you to fly (i.e., generate revenue) when otherwise you would be grounded:

* https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/gps-interference-airlines-1.72...
by TimPC | 2025-06-05 13:20:52+00:00
AI companies aren't seriously arguing that copyright shouldn't apply to them because "it's bad for business". The main argument is that they qualify for fair use because their work is transformative which is one of the major criteria for fair use. Fair use is the same doctrine that allows a school to play a movie for educational purposes without acquiring a license for the public performance of that movie. The original works don't have model weights and can't answer questions or interact with a user so the output is substantially different from the input.
by lloeki | 2025-06-05 13:20:59+00:00
The comparison I made was in response to:

> Does it really take you a million Euros to set up a DNS server?

The subtext of the above being that it "obviously" shouldn't cost 1M to slap BIND on a spare beige box in a closet.

The subtext in mine was to put the scale context back in, not really comparing this project to Cloudflare who has more POP but also does a lot of other things (and so providing the DNS part for free is really a rounding error in their biz bottom line and they probably couldn't really tell how much it would actually cost).

But then again the QA invites the comparison, they clearly position as challengers to 1.1.1.1/8.8.8.8/9.9.9.9

I didn't mean it to be knee jerk at all, sorry of it came across so.
by shagie | 2025-06-05 13:21:01+00:00
The node for it on Everything2 makes it a little bit easier to follow with links to the English word. https://everything2.com/title/A+Plan+for+the+Improvement+of+...

So, its something like:

For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be [replased](replaced) either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet.

It becomes quite useful in the later sentences as more and more reformations are applied.
by Kon-Peki | 2025-06-05 13:21:04+00:00
> The Morning Midas had departed Yantai, China on May 26 and was heading to Lázaro Cárdenas, Mexico

What is it doing 300 miles south of Adak, Alaska? (Yes I understand the curvature of the earth vs map projections causes the shortest route to appear to be a curve rather than a straight line). This should be passing within a few hundred miles of Hawaii, not Alaska, right?

Are these things incapable of sailing in open ocean? Do they always stay within a few days sail of land?
by j_seigh | 2025-06-05 13:21:41+00:00
You used quotes so I can't tell if you think it's a real problem or just a self inflicted one because the warning that finalizers aren't guaranteed to run was ignored.

If the finalizer was for an object that is just memory, it's not a problem. The GC has decided it doesn't need to recover the memory used by that object just yet. I've seen this with heaps defined to be large enough to handle a memory spike. When the spikes stop happening, a lot of stuff in the old gen pool just stays there. At one point I was looking at 50GB heap dumps looking for memory leaks.

It is a problem when the object has non memory resources like a socket descriptor. You can run out of descriptors. So not relying on GC and using try with resource is a good idea.
by petargyurov | 2025-06-05 13:21:42+00:00
Next.js feels like a tech demo that exists to demonstrate a bunch of highly optimised paths to frontend development. Yes, my page probably will load faster if I did so and so, but all the work required for it is not worth the 2ms saved.

I'm sure someone will chime in with "skill issue", and that's true to some extent, but you gotta admit it's an over-engineered "solution".
by borromakot | 2025-06-05 13:23:17+00:00
1. Yes 2. You didn't answer my question? Your answer ""Practically never crash" ignores software bugs, resource exhaustion, or bad architecture" indicates I think ignorance of actually deploying BEAM applications, and instead just making statements based on things you've heard. Isolating failures in software systems is not a bad thing. The developer can choose the boundaries between the elements of their system up to and including "stopping the entire application if things go wrong".
by Dvirben | 2025-06-05 13:23:37+00:00
We believe AI shouldn’t just answer internet questions — it should understand your team, your docs, your emails.

That’s why we’re building iGPT, a secure, personalized AI that connects to your tools (Gmail, Slack, Drive…) and gives grounded, cited answers from your own company’s knowledge.

We’re now opening a private design partner program for forward-thinking teams who want to co-create the future of internal AI.

Looking for 5–10 teams to shape the future of AI for internal tools. If you want a personal GPT for your company, check it out
by lukan | 2025-06-05 13:23:53+00:00
Indeed. Actually I did not try to attack. My intention was showing mild irony to something I perceived as an attack.

Those nuances easily get lost in text, I know, but that my post got flagged and his initial one did not, I really did not liked and that angered me a bit. But I can live with that, without making a drama out of it. Thanks for trying to mediate.
by scream4ik | 2025-06-05 13:23:59+00:00
I've been using JetBrains AI Assistant and liked the built-in integration. But I found it frustrating that it doesn't use much of my project context — it often gives answers that don't "know" the codebase.

So I built RAGmate - a small open-source server that adds local RAG support to JetBrains AI Assistant.

What it does: * Scans your project and builds a local vector index of your code * When you ask questions in JetBrains, it injects relevant context into the LLM prompt * Fully local — works with OpenAI API, LM Studio, Ollama, or anything with an API * Requires no plugins or cloud syncing

It’s essentially a way to turn JetBrains into a smarter AI assistant, aware of your actual codebase.

I’m not sure who else runs into this issue - if you've tried AI features in IDEs and found them context-blind, I'd love your feedback or ideas.
by hu3 | 2025-06-05 13:24:01+00:00
> Of course you can do most of this in Copilot too, but you'd expect something that maybe works and needs a lot of cleanup.

That hasn't been my experience with Copilot next edit feature.

It often understands exactly what I'm doing and I'm able to just tab tab around the file. Like my example about variable loop scope fixing.

My experience is that Copilot does everything you said including considering files I viewed previously to better understand what I'm trying to do.
by arp242 | 2025-06-05 13:24:08+00:00
I have rarely found logs useful to debug or track down any production issue. Errors on the other hand are almost always useful. I never understood why some people focus so strongly on logs, which tend to always just get ignored, and errors never get noticed.

Maybe one reason is that in many organisations I've seen a lot of "noise" in the error logs, logging things as errors that really aren't errors, which hugely reduces the usefulness. It requires a bit of discipline to keep the error logs clean, but honestly, it's not that hard.
by Bjartr | 2025-06-05 13:24:19+00:00
Had a chat with Claude over this paper and it did ultimately help me understand it better. So in case it helps others, I'm going to share the bits I think are important from that. (Just wanted to disclose my use of AI)

To start with, this is a paper on programming language research first and programming languages themselves second (by way of how that research influences them).

I think some readers might be put off by the feminist framing and miss that these are ideas many on HN have expressed before.

For example, the paper makes the point that PL research tends towards mathematical formalism over human experience. This sounds like an odd thing to say at first, but consider the well established meme on HN: "What is a monad? Monads are monoids in the category of endofunctors" as though that were a helpful answer. That meme is saying the same thing. That focusing exclusively on the mathematically pure concept is actually an obstacle to understanding which limits the usefulness in practice of PLs, independent of a PL's capabilities.

It's an interesting framing to be sure, and perhaps the observed values and behaviors of the PL research community is deeply influenced by a masculine framing. However, I do wonder how much of it at least originated from the domain itself.

The hardware limitations of early computing made strict formalism essential - unless you got your formalism correct, your intent couldn't be mapped to execution on silicon. Mathematical rigor wasn't just preferred, it was often the only path to creating anything that actually worked. Even today those formalisms remain the fundamental building blocks that enable the higher levels of expressiveness we enjoy.

Fields of research, science in general really, have momentum. Strict formalism and a willingness to deal with, or even value, high complexity was what it once took to make meaningful headway in the field of programming languages. Today, perhaps, that is less true, but those that succeeded in the past will continue to shape the field for some time.

I do think this is ultimately a problem for the field. There are aspects of PL research and design that that certainly do require formalism and are inherently complex in a way that requires a certain approach. But that doesn't mean the field needs to remain forever closed to discussions and research around how the decisions that are made impact the world at large and the people in it.
by chuckadams | 2025-06-05 13:24:30+00:00
Some devices don't bother to limit the size of the GET, which can enable a DOS attack at least, a buffer overflow at worst. But I think the most typical vector is a form-data POST, which isn't CSRF-protected because "it's on localhost so it's safe, right?"

I've been that sloppy with dev servers too. Usually not listening on port 80 but that's hardly Ft Knox.
by laxmiiapp | 2025-06-05 13:24:50+00:00
Running a business is hard. Tracking your numbers shouldn’t be.

When I started LAXMII, it wasn’t because I wanted to build another app. It was because I realised most tools out there weren’t built for people like us — the ones doing everything ourselves, figuring it out as we go.

Accountants have their software. But what about the rest of us?

LAXMII helps you: • Track income & expenses • Send quotes and invoices • Manage your inventory • View cash flow in real-time • Get AI-driven insights to grow smart

I’ve just launched it — after a long grind — on the App Store & Google Play. And to thank early believers, first 1,000 users get lifetime access before we move to subscriptions.

If you’re building something — full-time or after hours — this might make your life easier. Would love for you to check it out.
by chrismorgan | 2025-06-05 13:24:54+00:00
I’m not certain, but I think Firefox just implemented 3D transformations for SVG from the start. It wasn’t exactly hard to conceive. Certainly by mid-2017 it had it. Somewhere around that time there was also concerted effort toward aligning SVG and CSS.

(Firefox’s implementation does still suffer from one long-standing bug which means you want to make sure your viewbox unit is larger than one device pixel, but that’s normally not hard to achieve. https://oreillymedia.github.io/Using_SVG/extras/ch11-3d.html... shows what it’s about. I don’t really understand why that problem isn’t fixed yet; what I presume is the underlying issue affects some HTML constructs too when you scale things up, and surely it’s not that rare? I know I found one such problem a decade ago (and, being in HTML, it couldn’t be worked around like you can with SVG). They’ve improved things a bit, but not entirely.)

Sadly, no one else seemed all that interested in making 3D transformations work properly in SVG content.
by allthingsgo2 | 2025-06-05 13:25:18+00:00
well, in another case of individual resorted to act thru political violence in New Zealand's Christchurch mass murder... the PM changed the State-wise gun-law but one can also argue that deterrance against 'spreading of terrorism belieaf system' can also be enhanced if the State was to re-enact death sentence for home-grown mass-murderer, no? Soft-targets will always be there and so is mass hysteria, yes?
by 1718627440 | 2025-06-05 13:25:30+00:00
> Let’s consider a definition in a simple grammar: digit : 0..9. [...] In Arabic, digits are not 0-9 but 0..9.

Aren't those just different glyphs? This can be even seen by the fact that HN converts them both to the same symbols. The mapping from characters to glyphs isn't defined by a programming language, it is defined by a font.
by nxobject | 2025-06-05 13:26:46+00:00
A small thing, but I appreciate their free trial usage "starter pack" - the landscape of SWE assistance tools is pretty large these days, and it's impossible to assess fit for the use cases you're interested in without trials. As much as all the positive feedback and/or hype about Anthropic's product is tempting, for hobbyist use I can't quite justify shelling $20 out of the box. (That's to say I can't bill it to someone paying me...)
Show HN: LaminarFlow – Launched v0.1 – open-source finance platform for startups
by ydew | 2025-06-05 13:26:47+00:00
I'm Yash, and I'm building LaminarFlow — an AI-native, open-source platform to help startups, founders, and SMBs manage their financial ops more efficiently.

We have recently launched v0.1 and got a really good response.

We're still in a testing phase!
by clejack | 2025-06-05 13:27:09+00:00
This is probably one of the more observant posts I've read. I'm reluctant to accept the idea that things can't be fixed, but when framed with "because they were designed to operate within their current failure mode," I'm compelled to agree at least partially.

It does seem like most meaningful change comes at the failure of a system or when a new clean slate emerges. E.g. the fall of Rome leading to modern Europe or new land (from the euro perspective) leading to the United States of America.

As I'm writing this I'm now realizing that defining the U.S. as a clean slate example is inaccurate because the indigenous system was destroyed in the process.

With that said, meaningful change is possible without collapse, but I'm wondering if this sort of change requires special circumstances that I can't currently describe. The civil rights movement is an example of this.
Show HN: DashGPT, an AI spreadsheet to dashboard tool
by mo_s | 2025-06-05 13:27:16+00:00
I guys, I built this spreadsheet to dashboard tool. You can attach any csv and optionally a prompt for what insights you want it to include, and it reasons over the data and produces a dashboard of different charts.

Let me know what y'all think! Demo Video/more here:

https://www.producthunt.com/products/spreadsite/launches/das...
by prophesi | 2025-06-05 13:28:23+00:00
What environment issues were you running into? We use mise/asdf to manage which version of erlang/elixir our project is using, and only needed to containerize our database to ease its maintenance.

For the dev experience, I'd also recommend NextLS/Lexical over Elixir LS until the official one is out. It should compile much faster for nontrivial Elixir applications.

https://elixir-lang.org/blog/2024/08/15/welcome-elixir-langu...
by Corrado | 2025-06-05 13:28:25+00:00
I wouldn't go so far as to say it was a "scam" but there were definitely reasons that other automakers didn't take them up on the offer. IMHO if someone like Ford or Toyota had taken them up on the offer they could be miles ahead of the competition today and not lagging behind the Chinese competitors. While there were strings attached there were also a lot of good ideas in those patents that would have boosted development and deployment timelines.
by sheepscreek | 2025-06-05 13:29:03+00:00
> install someone who can focus on excellent delivery (like SpaceX)

You know, I’ve thought about this too. What makes us think he hasn’t done this already? He could have an org structure where someone else is in charge of everything and still be this “veto guy”.

Personally, I don’t think he’s very excited about electric cars anymore. Tesla has mostly achieved what it set out to do. Electric cars are undeniably mainstream now. His next passion is possibly Optimus (which would also help with Tesla manufacturing and Mars settlement) and AI (same - would help with everything, make Optimus smarter). Maybe the only thing he might still be excited about, related to cars, is the self-driving taxi service. That could become a highly profitable business with a massive entry barrier for anyone that wants to compete with them. I believe in this thesis even more after the success of Starlink.

As for competition - Waymo had been too cautious and slow in its rollout to a fault. Much like Google’s AI policy before ChatGPT. Tesla can still beat them to a punch. Being a fully vertically integrated car company, they can churn out robo-taxis faster than anyone else.