MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by pinkmuffinere | 2025-06-29 03:31:56+00:00
Thanks for the good attitude!

Ah, I didn't realize 'computable' had a specific meaning in this domain -- showing the limits of my experience a bit. After looking at the wikipedia page and rereading your sketch, I think it is true that

> it eventually needs to grow faster than any computable operator we define

I'm not sure if this has implications about how quickly BB() grows compared to the "operator strength" ladder though? It's familiar/convenient to refer to tetration, pentation, etc as f() for convenience, but this is just notational -- not related to computability. When comparing BB(n) and tetration(n), pentation(n), etc(n), I don't think there is really anything that can be said 'easily' about which values are larger. BB(n) will be larger than anything that can be computed in n steps. But pentation(n) is not necessarily computable in n steps, it may take much more. We may find pentation(n) > BB(n) for all n greater than some threshold. I might be misunderstanding a logical step here though that connects them?
by Aloha | 2025-06-29 03:33:01+00:00
I got my ticket at 14 in 1996, which led me to a career in the LMR/Telecom world - I have few regrets, my job is close enough to my hobby that it never gets old. I did my extra on a lark without studying for it.

I did end up getting a vanity 1x3 along the way, because my original call was awful, both over phonetics and spoken.
by southernplaces7 | 2025-06-29 03:33:11+00:00
>I worked with a founder who dealt with only a small number of very rich customers. He would say “We only sell to the rich because they have the money.”

So you worked with someone who you claim to be a direct -knowing even- participant in this trend. You presumably benefited from this work too. No?

It's impressive how many people bemoan the dangers they see in a thing, while continuing to contribute to its growth, again and again and again, as long as the personal benefit keeps working their way.
by gehwartzen | 2025-06-29 03:33:25+00:00
It sounds more like the same psychological manipulation that underpins the IRL world (at least the US) in the form of capitalism. Engineered towards adults to buy as much useless crap as possible.

Teach kids that it’s the same kind of manipulation as in their games (and how to spot it) and perhaps they will be better equipped to not get fucked by adult life.
by moregrist | 2025-06-29 03:33:27+00:00
The amount a child can spend on Roblox is entirely up to the parents.

Children, especially pre-teens, don’t have access to credit or money without their parents consent, and a pretty easy way to limit the amount of money your child can spent on Roblox is to just make them have to ask you to buy the in-game currency.

There are problems with the game but the amount of money going into it is something a parent can and should 100% control.
by jetsnoc | 2025-06-29 03:35:55+00:00
I wasn’t aware of this, it’s extremely shortsighted. My employees’ chats are my company’s data, and I should be able to use them as I see fit. Restricting API access to our own data moves them quickly in to the 'too difficult to continue doing business with' category.

The reality is that Slack isn’t that sticky. The only reason I fended off the other business units who've demanded Microsoft Teams through the years is my software-engineering teams QoL. Slack has polish and is convenient but now that Slack is becoming inconvenient and not allowing me to do what I want, I can't justify fending off the detractors. I’ll gladly invest the time to swap them out for a platform that respects our ownership and lets us use our data however we need to. We left some money on the table but I am glad we didn’t bundle and upgrade to Slack Grid and lock ourselves into a three-year enterprise agreement...
by cmoski | 2025-06-29 03:37:03+00:00
Those are not the only two choices. There are so many great bands playing shows to hundreds or a few thousand people.

Maybe you don't value music or live music, but there are a lot of people out there that do. You not caring much for it doesn't change the fact or make it ok that they're getting stiffed by those with the upper hand in the relationship.
by extr | 2025-06-29 03:38:43+00:00
I find Gary's arguments increasingly semantic and unconvincing. He lists several examples of how LLMs "fail to build a world model", but his definition of "world model" is an informal hand-wave ("a computational framework that a system (a machine, or a person or other animal) uses to track what is happening in the world"). His examples are lifted from a variety of unclear or obsolete models - what is his opinion of O3? Why doesn't he create or propose a benchmark that researchers could use to measure progress of "world model creation"?

What's more, his actual point is unclear. Even if you simply grant, "okay, even SOTA LLMs don't have world models", why do I as a user of these models care? Because the models could be wrong? Yes, I'm aware. Nevertheless, I'm still deriving subtantial personal and professional value from the models as they stand today.
by czhu12 | 2025-06-29 03:38:53+00:00
I think, with no supporting data whatsoever, that this is a classic case of stated vs revealed preferences.

We all think we want a place to find community, learning, connection, etc, but given the choice will choose stimulus.

So, if given the choice of 10 social networks, on a scale of extremely stimulating to extremely connecting, we’ll end up choosing the stimulating one.

In which case, it seems tricky to find a business model fixes this more fundamental problem
by robocat | 2025-06-29 03:40:47+00:00
> to my ear, I’ll say something perfectly coherent and pronounced exactly as the locals do

I noticed a similar thing listening to many English people trying to speak Spanish. I could hear that the native English speaker pronounced the vowel sounds of a Spanish word incorrectly - but that the English speaker could not tell. Very common if Spanish word learnt from reading and trying to pronounce it as English might. I also hear a similar reading mistake from other countries trying to speak English.

English can have extreme vowel variation - e.g. jokes based on bending vowel sounds to change word meaning. Spanish has a few vowel sounds and they seem very similar in different countries. English accents often change vowel sounds dramatically - so English speakers are not as aware of the importance of speaking vowels correctly. As a New Zealander, our vowel sounds trip up other English speakers.

I'm not sure how we learn to fix it when our hearing or sound formation is incorrect. Someone to incessantly correct one's mistakes does help but that level of patience is hard to find.

I know that I still can't hear or say nasal sounds correctly in other languages.
by trinsic2 | 2025-06-29 03:43:12+00:00
Here is the etymology of the word:

common(adj.)

c. 1300, "belonging to all, owned or used jointly, general, of a public nature or character," from Old French comun "common, general, free, open, public" (9c., Modern French commun), from Latin communis "in common, public, shared by all or many; general, not specific; familiar, not pretentious." This is from a reconstructed PIE compound ko-moin-i- "held in common," compound adjective formed from ko- "together" + moi-n-, suffixed form of root mei- (1) "to change, go, move," hence literally "shared by all."

Your confusing political language with what came before this. Common good is the will of the people. It has nothing to do with cities, countries, or states. All of those things were created by people that wield political power. This is not the same as the common good. Common good directly relates to what is good for the people that share common values. You have been misinformed, by political society unfortunately.
by sakoht | 2025-06-29 03:43:51+00:00
The article suggests a possible model where the schizophrenia is an extreme linear progression. But the inability to find a culprit genes suggests something more complex. It is possible that there are is a group of genes that all have variations that confers benefit, but when those variations are all together negative effects occur. That makes the positive variants overall beneficial, and keeps them in the gene pool. This is why it is dangerous to presume that when we correlate genetic variants with disease and then presume they should go away. In fact, nearly any inherited disease that has survived may be conferring value to other individual when in proper partnership with other genetic profiles.
by vunderba | 2025-06-29 03:45:14+00:00
With the advent of streaming services like Spotify, it’s definitely getting worse, but the market has always been difficult from a strictly performative/sales perspective. I never made any real money from my compositions, but I pulled a decent side income teaching piano back in university.

It reminds me of ex-Soviet chess players. The emigration of so many good grandmaster-level players diluted the market, and unless you were in the absolute upper echelons (like Kramnik, Karpov, or Kasparov), you pretty much had to supplement your income by teaching on the side.
by Larrikin | 2025-06-29 03:45:25+00:00
There are tons of rappers and EDM DJs on Soundcloud (not YouTube) that have legitimately good music. They might not be good 5 years from now or even 1 year from now, but they are good now if you put the work into finding them. Seems like atleast in the DJ scene someone might be on top of the world fairly quickly even if they disappear soon after.
by BeauNer | 2025-06-29 03:45:43+00:00
There’s a wild claim floating around that ChatGPT is sending people to psych wards. The article published by Futurism leans into a sensational theory that OpenAI’s chatbot somehow broke users’ brains. It’s the kind of headline that gets clicks, sure. But let’s be real. Blaming a chatbot for psychosis is not only irresponsible, folks, it’s just plain dumb.

Mental illness is serious. Psychotic breaks rarely come from a single event, and the idea that a large language model is causing them out of the blue is, frankly, laughable. If someone believes a chatbot is talking to them like God or manipulating their thoughts, that’s a clear sign something deeper was already going on. A healthy mind doesn’t spin out because a chatbot told it something weird. It’s more likely that the person was already struggling and simply latched onto ChatGPT as part of their delusion.
by analog31 | 2025-06-29 03:46:21+00:00
The vitality of music (and probably the rest of the arts), has always depended on a symbiosis between professional and amateur musicians. Some things still need professionals, such as fielding a top level symphony orchestra. And high caliber teaching.

Among other things, I play large-ensemble jazz. Over the years, I've played in a number of bands, and the level of quality and variety achieved by players with professional training is a noticeable step above amateur players. The material that my current band plays is unplayable without training. About half of the band members have music degrees (many teach music in the public schools) and the other half are dedicated amateurs with past training like myself.

Other styles, like folk music, are essentially sustained by amateurs.

Some things can only be done by amateurs, or professionals who also have a musical hobby, such as playing experimental, obscure, or historical music. Amateur musicians also support the professional scene by attending performances, taking lessons, buying instruments (resulting in economies of scale), etc.
by landl0rd | 2025-06-29 03:49:15+00:00
If toy stores had a subscription fee or where you had to buy a new access pass every year, that would be fine.

They don't work like that, though. They rely on maximizing the take from each individual child. They're designed so that the sky is the limit. You pay 5-10 bucks here, then you're enticed to pay 5-10 bucks for another toy, then you're scrounging or begging for another 5-10 bucks for the next toy.
by jjani | 2025-06-29 03:49:39+00:00
I'm sure it's the #1 platform involved in "defending children accused of crimes involving online platforms" in whatever US state that attorney operates in. But even that sounds better than the lifelong dopamine system disabilities that the likes of TikTok causes. Every other adult I talk to about social media admits having had to very deliberately uninstall/disable TikTok, else they just couldn't detach themselves from the screen. Now imagine what it does to kids. And how big of a % of users ends up like this compared to the % of all Roblox users traumatized by it.

Before anyone comes in accusing me of unfairly pointing fingers when Meta (Instagram reels) and Google (Youtube shorts) are just as bad, truth is the latter two just haven't managed to make their algorithms half as addictive. I'm sure they'd love to, there's nothing inherently better about them, but so far they haven't cracked it.
by wat10000 | 2025-06-29 03:50:18+00:00
> In one model there is an object called Q that satisfies all of the properties in ZFC of being a natural number, but is infinitely large. In this model the Turing Machine halts after Q steps.

That doesn’t make any sense. A Turing machine can’t halt after a infinite number of steps. It either halts after a finite number of steps, or it never halts.

I’m sure there are models of hypercomputation and corresponding “what’s the largest number of steps they can run?” functions that would admit infinities, but those would not be Turing machines and the function would not be the Busy Beaver.
by drdaeman | 2025-06-29 03:51:36+00:00
I think you're over-dramatizing this. It's not "post-truth" - nothing about things being true or false changes. Or at least when I'm reading "post-truth" I'm thinking about a world where truth is unknowable as it's indistinguishable from a forgery. That's not what's really happening, though.

I would like to suggest a different lens to look at it through. In my understanding, we merely had a very brief period of time where a probability of mass audiovisual media from an untrusted source being an inaccurate portrayal of events was low enough we very rarely bothered to actively think about it and consider if it could be "fake". Or I would rather say "artist depiction", to make it match pre-mass-photography world more accurately.

All that changes is this probability. It used to take a lot of resources to make a good realistic-looking media, now it's becoming a commodity. What required a resources available only to a few, is now rapidly becoming cheap. That's really all what's happening - the rest is all the same, our senses can still lie, and we can still believe in things that never objectively took place.

And it's only about the realistic-looking audiovisual media. Other types of media (such as texts or non-realistic graphics) had those issues since forever. And we're still mostly fine (though the rapidly increasing scale of mass communications poses their own challenges, of course, but that's a related but different issue).

There are at least two ways I beleve this will be approached:

1. Updating mental models of trust, so we don't eagerly believe random people posting videos on the Internet anymore. Not easy (especially for old timers, as we are tend to be quite firmly set in our ways of thinking), but next generations would be born to the new reality and misplaced trust won't be an issue again. The obvious danger is the instability during the transitional period - societies have huge inertia, so a few decades could get quite messy.

2. Attempt to legally or technologically keep said probability low. Trusted cameras, AI regulations, extra online policing - those kind of things. The obvious dangers are that this could have all sorts of weird implications for freedom of speech, personal computing accessibility, and could also contribute to increasing power disparity.

Whatever happens in the future is unknown. All we can do it to try our best to steer it in direction we think is right.
by analog31 | 2025-06-29 03:51:45+00:00
Sorry for the late reply. I was being somewhat sarcastic, or maybe not. During the "dot com" era, investors were throwing money at anybody willing to take it, and a start-up was questioned about whether it was maintaining a sufficient "burn rate." In hindsight, it was a speculative bubble.

The company that I work for survived that era by not doing those things.
by Timwi | 2025-06-29 03:52:16+00:00
But it stops you from getting an equivalent coke from any other vendor, even if you might want to (because it might be cheaper). You're assuming that everyone finds it as important as you do that your “Coke” comes from a specific manufacturer regardless of what the product actually is or contains.

For Coke you might be right about most people (though not me) but there are plenty of products where brand loyalty isn't a thing. People just want some decent hand tissues around, nobody cares if it's made by actual Kleenex.
by YZF | 2025-06-29 03:53:20+00:00
Palestine is not a state. That much is fact. It's not a matter of "position". It does not meet any definition of state. The UN also does not consider Palestine to be a state and it is not a member of the UN. The UN and the ICC can declare the moon is made of cheese and the earth is flat. Pretty much nobody recognizes the "state" of Palestine.
by discoutdynamite | 2025-06-29 03:53:40+00:00
For your consideration: the theory of "Positive Disintegration" developed by Kasimir Dabrowski does help to explain the capacity and reality of schizotypal disorders. The easiest way to explain it, is that human brain potential for "over-excitation" leads to personality development; this is natural and human. The stages of personality development are not guaranteed to succeed and proceed correctly. Most cases of schizophrenia may be a result of failed re-organization, or a failure to develop the final, executive, function. In cases of "arrested development," this process may be delayed till later in life. This is the so-called mid-life-crisis, which also can fail, and then you get adult onset schizophrenia. This is all emerging research thats usually locked up in foreign language journals. Almost no medicine to be sold here, AMA and APA are not interested...
Show HN: Readeck – Mobile client for organizing bookmarks (Android, open source)
by potetotown | 2025-06-29 03:56:01+00:00
Hi HN,

I built a mobile client for Readeck, an open-source bookmark manager. The app lets you organize your bookmarks with labels and collections, search and filter them, and use everything offline. It’s free, MIT-licensed, and currently focused on Android.

Organize bookmarks with labels & collections Search and filter bookmarks Offline support Clean, mobile-friendly UI 100% open source (MIT) GitHub: https://github.com/linkalls/readeck_related_app

I’d love to hear your feedback or suggestions!
by ocdtrekkie | 2025-06-29 03:56:39+00:00
I wonder how much of that was due to cursed distro repositories.

I will probably never forget the rage I felt at discovering the reason my scripts broke between Debian versions was because "apt-get install mysql" started silently installing MariaDB instead, which was close but subtly different enough. (I am honestly surprised considering an Oracle trademark is involved, no lawsuits were filed over this.)
by Rotdhizon | 2025-06-29 03:57:26+00:00
Roblox has a seemingly impossible to solve problem with child predators. Kids have the oddest talent of being able to stumble into the most unknown, niche games where these people lurk. Roblox now has voice chat as well and you have grown adults talking to teenagers in private, unsupervised and away from parental attention.

Roblox currently has a massive event going on that was hit with a huge controversy. They picked over 1000 games to be advertised and someone accidentally (or not) picked a child romance themed game to put on the list. Without explicitly having sex, people have figured out how to game the system by letting players use emotes to do normal things but really they are intended to role play sexual activities (pushup emote while over another player laying flat on a bed for example). There's a specific term for these games but I can't recall it at the moment. It was called something like "condo games", the genre that refers to these romance games. The people who make these games do it intentionally, some of them make literally dozens/hundreds of these games, all aimed at children. Some of the game developers absolutely need to be investigated by law enforcement. Look up the video on youtube called "How One Developer RUINED Roblox's Biggest Event Overnight" and skip to around 2 minutes and he explains this in detail. This developer made children themed romance games that gained a quarter BILLION plays.

As an adult that does occasionally enjoy some Roblox experiences, there's no problem for me. Stick to the front page, featured stuff and you're fine. The problem is solely with kids/teens going where adults don't realize and getting caught up with this predators.
by jjani | 2025-06-29 03:58:11+00:00
As long as the founders aren't looking to make billions, it's very possible to run a healthy social media platform, as evidenced by Front Porch Forum [1]. 20 employees, human moderators (gasp)! There's also Metafilter which is paid [2].

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/08/10/front-p...

[2] https://www.metafilter.com/
by stego-tech | 2025-06-29 03:59:19+00:00
Reductionism is fine when a supermajority of available data paints the same picture, and that's what's happening here.

* Founders aren't trying to solve a problem, they're trying to grab table scraps from VCs and the already-wealthy to try and save their own skins. As a result, it's all about exit strategy, growth, and moat instead of business fundamentals and customer experience.

* VCs and their wealthy backers aren't looking for good business, they're looking for good profit. It's why they'll gladly invest into slop or outright grifts, and why they demand anything they invest into have an exit strategy (i.e., IPO) planned so they can cash out before the company collapses.

* Talent who wants to build a long-term career with a company - and accordingly focus on fixing its flaws, improving the customer experience, and saving expenditures - can't, because companies no longer fundamentally exist to provide long-term solutions and products, only short-term growth YoY. This ultimately ends up harming output and innovation, because why bother giving it your all when such efforts are counter to the "explosive growth" narrative and likely to get you PIPed?

* Retail investors and Business News are left feeding a monster that runs on Fairy Tales and ignorance, promoting big gains and huge losses rather than actual investing advice or corporate accountability.

It's all just a disgusting grift, is what I'm reducing it to, and I can't really fault Founders either since they're just trying to strike gold in an emptying mine shaft before it's closed off or collapses in. They're playing the game they think will net them safety and success...even though they may have better odds on some casino games instead.
by GarnetFloride | 2025-06-29 03:59:22+00:00
What is it with so many people saying art should be a hobby? except for the really great.

But how are you going to get good if you don't get any practice and feedback?

I remember someone lamenting people videoing comedians in small venues and posting the fails, that follow you forever. How are you going to get good at stand up if you can't fail and learn?

Not everyone can be Steven King and get an advance worth 3 years salary for their first book.

Well, you know, it is kinda like how companies are replacing all the juniors with AI. It's cheap, for now. But then comes the question of what do you do in 5-10 years when you need some seniors with actual experience?