MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ToucanLoucan | 2025-06-28 14:02:04+00:00
Actually it may, even if only slightly. Because now as the GP says, the humans know the only cases they're going to get are the ones the AI suspects are not worthy. They will look more skeptically.

I totally agree that the injustices at play here are already long baked in and this is not the harbinger of doom, medical billing already sucks immense amounts of ass and this isn't changing it much? But it is changing it and worse, it's infusing the credibility of automation, even in a small way, into a system. "Our decisions are better because a computer made them" which doesn't deal at all with how we don't fully understand how these systems work or what their reasoning is for any particular claim.

Insofar as we must have profit-generating investment funds masquerading as healthcare providers, I don't think it's asking a ton that they be made to continue employing people to handle claims, and customer service for that matter. They're already some of the most profitable corporations on the planet, are costs really needing cutting here?
by throwaway83094 | 2025-06-28 14:02:16+00:00
Rose-tinted glasses. Here's what Mark Zuckerberg had to say about his own platform in 2004:

> Zuck: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard

> Zuck: Just ask.

> Zuck: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SNS

> [Redacted Friend's Name]: What? How'd you manage that one?

> Zuck: People just submitted it.

> Zuck: I don't know why.

> Zuck: They "trust me"

> Zuck: Dumb fucks
by yoavm | 2025-06-28 14:02:53+00:00
I suspect that it's you who have undergone deep mental conditioning if you think that I am justifying this war. One can hold a complex opinion, and nowhere have I said that I think this war is justified.

Not only I do not belittler their suffering, I personally helped some of them out. I also ran an organization that provided thousands of Gazan with electricity, and I was arrested by the Israeli police when encouraging Palestinians in Israel to vote. At the same time I have family members who were killed (and kidnapped) on the first day of this war. Life isn't black and white.
by achairapart | 2025-06-28 14:03:32+00:00
A few years ago I made a digital audio-guide for an interactive exhibition in the form of a Progressive Web App, using a modified version of Quiet.js[0] for proximity, e.g. You enter a room, the phone mic picks up a signal playing in this room and starts an audio track synced with video projected in the room.

Screenshots of the app:

https://pino.ceniccola.it/portfolio/img/diconodilei-1.jpg

https://pino.ceniccola.it/portfolio/img/diconodilei-4.jpg

Sadly, Safari iOS Web Audio API filtered out everything above ~16khz, so instead of playing the audio at full volume in the room I had to make a few points of contact where you had to place your phone near enough a little speaker (actually a tweeter) to pick the (now) audible whisper but at much lower volume.

By the way, everyone was already wearing their headphones anyway, and it worked like a charm with many people wondering what and how was going on!

[0]: https://github.com/quiet/quiet-js
by gorjusborg | 2025-06-28 14:03:39+00:00
It seems like the choice of a stacklike Arena API makes the examples a little more confusing than needed. An arena doesn't necessarily mean allocation 2 must be freed before allocation 1.

If this seems cool to you, check out Zig. The libraries use a similar convention where code that might allocate requires passing an allocator, which may be an arena, or something cool we don't even know about yet.
by zahlman | 2025-06-28 14:04:45+00:00
I have three different recordings of Satie's Gymnopedies on CD from many years ago: de Leeuw's, coming in at almost 16 minutes total; a version from 1968 by William Masselos totaling about 9 minutes; and on the extreme end, Klára Körmendi's version totaling less than 7 minutes.

When I used to play piano, I once timed myself playing them to my own preference. As I recall, it was around 11 minutes at the speed that makes sense to me.

Chacun a son gout. (Satie himself claimed to only eat foods that are white, after all.)
by cropcirclbureau | 2025-06-28 14:04:56+00:00
But can't you see that your description of the situation as elephants crashing, your instinct to bring up a hypothetical that there's some Palestine flag waving person out there that has the same extremist thinking that the Israelis are using today, that your need to remind yourself that Hamas (to borrow the words of some other folks in the comments today, an organization that's literally _surrounded_ by overtly hostile populace) is genocidal...can't you see how replying this to what the GP said and the article as a whole can be "mistaken" to be such an attempt at underplaying?

No, I don't blame all Jews at all and I've seen a lot of Jewish people actively work to stop the genocide. But I definitely blame this narrative of Hamas is what's been used to sell to genocide to what are otherwise normal and compassionate people. I believe the only people who can stop this are the Israeli citizens saying no and the time was way too long ago.
by Fade_Dance | 2025-06-28 14:05:58+00:00
Overanalyzing everything loses some of the "magic". I drink tea, but I assume there's a similar sort of zen-like ritual to the whole process. That's somewhat it odds with turning the whole thing into a science experiment.

Granted, some of that is a projection of positivity onto what is just another simply addictive substance, but I digress.

A lot of tasks in life have elements of this though, including creative thinking and flow-state work which continually logging and categorizing can somewhat interrupt.

In your case I'd consider doing a 1-off analysis of "the perfect cup", with full data collection for a couple of weeks. Then analyze it, distill it down, and extract the lesson and conclusions. Then go back to the more organic method, and hopefully the cup is a little better. Win win.

As some other comments have mentioned, there's a streak of obsessiveness and anxiety in the original piece. Everything doesn't need to be extensively logged, and it doesn't necessarily need to be something you do everyday. A lot of the "burden" aspect seems to be from some internal issues that the author needs to work on.

All of these approaches are just tools. They can be used with a light touch approach (maybe only very complex projects need a vigorously searchable and indexed "second brain", and most of the time a .txt file in a simple daily log that takes no more than 2 minutes per day is more than enough, etc). And I know, those two approaches don't perfectly interface with one another, but creating an all-encompassing perfect system is an exercise and futility, and if that's the goal, then no wonder it's a massive cause of anxiety.
by swedonym | 2025-06-28 14:06:03+00:00
I recently found myself this close to trading in my role at the firm for an early seat on a shiny pre-Series A Sequoia-backed AI startup in the consumer space. The opportunity seemed like a rocketship - exciting tech, star investors, that intoxicating “get in on the ground floor” energy. Why on earth would I hesitate? Well, spoiler alert: I didn’t go through with it. In this post, I’ll candidly share why I nearly jumped - and the reality check that made me pump the brakes.
by JimDabell | 2025-06-28 14:06:30+00:00
> This is the single reason React won the frontend framework market

Don’t be silly, the front-end landscape is a lot richer than you make it out to be. React hasn’t “won”, the last time there was a clear winner in front-end, it was jQuery.

> PS: in modern JavaScript, using map rather than for loops is more idiomatic!

No, it’s not, and this is exactly what I was talking about. for loops and map() serve distinct purposes.

for iterates through a series of elements.

map() transforms a series of elements.

It’s possible to use them both for the same things, but there is a very clear semantic difference between them. One doesn’t replace the other, they mean different things.

In the context of “I have a bunch of elements I want to iterate over and output”, what you want is a for loop. The reason why React devs have been convinced map() replaces for loops is that React has to force you into making everything an expression, so instead of writing for when it’s appropriate and map() when it’s appropriate, they have to write map() everywhere.
Show HN: Qling – iOS podcast player with deep personalization
by bjar2 | 2025-06-28 14:07:03+00:00
Hi HN,

I have been actively listening to podcasts for many years. But I found myself typically going back to the same couple of shows every time, and even though I liked these shows the individual episodes had a big variety in how interesting I found them. That made me wonder, is it possible to always leave a podcast feeling inspired?

That is why I decided to build Qling. The idea has been in the back of my mind since 2022, however since I have a full time job, it was difficult to embark on such an ambitious side project.

Until I found GPT-4.

I consider myself a decent engineer, but the speedup I gained working with LLMs enabled me to take on a project like this one.

I built Qling as a platform that aims to find novel, inspiring and also new content tailored for each user. The platform scores podcast episodes by inspiration and merit. I recently also added previews to give bite sized highlight snippets that can be scrolled through in a TikTok/Reels-like fashion.

How it works:

– The ingestion engine ingests ~20k new episodes/week

– Transcripts: Whisper-large-v3-turbo and Meta-Llama-3-8B-Instruct on an A6000 GPU farm

– Scoring: episode embeddings + speaker credibility + insight + inspiration

– Stack: Django + Postgres + Redis on Heroku; SwiftUI client

Try it:

- iOS app: https://apps.apple.com/app/qling-podcast-player/id6740029729

- Simple landing page: https://www.qling.app/

Looking for feedback on:

1. Do highlight snippets help you decide faster?

2. Are the “inspiring” picks accurate or cheesy?

3. Any UX issues?

4. Do you find any new and unexpectedly great content?

I’ll be in the thread all day — ask me anything and I’ll ship fixes asap.

Thanks for checking it out!
by xg15 | 2025-06-28 14:07:09+00:00
> Prior to this both sides were living reasonably peacefully in Israel and Gaza

That's simply not true. Israel never gave up control over airspace, land and sea borders after the disengagement and effectively put the strip under siege after Hamas came to power.

The west bank is cut up into hundreds of small Palestinian enclaves that are separated and controlled by the IDF. There is also a policy of systematically denying Palestinians in the West Bank resources and on the other hand priorizing the settlers.

Both areas have been under siege for decades, just with different intensity.

When the current government was elected - a year before Oct.7 - it made speeding up the land grabs and eventual full annexation of the West Bank a priority. Look at the ministers Ben Gvir and Smotrich: Both have deep connections to the settlers and have made deeply dehumanizing statements towards the Palestinians. (Smotrich officially published his "Decisive Plan" in 2017 about his proposal for a "permanent solution": Either "encourage emigration", allow them to live as non-citizens with restricted rights in isolated enclaves or "let the army deal with them". Both ministers are fully on board with the current starvation policy - or rather, it's still too lenient for them)

Ben Gvir is now head of the Israeli police. Smotrich is finance minister and "Minister in the defense ministry", a special role that gives him the ultimate authority about anything that concerns the West Bank.

All that happened before Oct.7.
by lupusreal | 2025-06-28 14:07:12+00:00
That could all be true, it seems plausible, but I don't think any of it is necessary to explain America's unwaivering support for Israel.

American Evangelical Protestants believe that the continued existence of Israel is a prophesied necessary prerequisite for the resurrection of Jesus, who will then start the Apocalypse. They think they can force prophecy by defending Israel. It doesn't matter how badly Israel behaves, they think the ends justify all of it.
by gwern | 2025-06-28 14:07:31+00:00
I'm fascinated by all these comments I see on HN and elsewhere where people will deny that a blatantly LLM-written article was not LLM-written, including cases where people praise it for not being LLM-written (eg. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44384138 ). Like, leave aside the issue of whether it's a good or bad thing (I've been doing generative text NNs since 2015, so I'm mostly for it, when done well), I'm just interested in the inability to notice.

Skimming your comments, you, for example, do not seem to be illiterate or a bad writer at all despite being ESL (although you overuse the double-sentence structure in your comments), but you describe this as being 'stream of consciousness' (it is not even close to that, look at an actual example like Joyce) and seem to think it is fine.

So I'm puzzled how. Why isn't it obvious to you that the style is so mode-collapsed ( https://gwern.net/doc/reinforcement-learning/preference-lear... )? Do you also not notice how all the ChatGPT images are cat-urine yellow? (I've been asking people in person whether they have noticed this in the Bay Area and I'd say <20% of enthusiastic generative AI users have noticed.) What are you thinking when you read OP? Does it all just round off to 'content', and you don't notice the repetition because you treat it all as a single author? Are you just skimming and not reading it?
by kleskling | 2025-06-28 14:08:24+00:00
I've been working on a JAX implementation for my own projects. I've implemented everything in the paper except guidance.

See here: https://github.com/homerjed/transformer_flow

I'm happy to see the return of normalising flows - exact likelihood models have many benefits. I found the model needed soft-clipping on some operations to ensure numerical stability.

I wonder if adding transformers can be done for the GLOW algorithm since attention and 1x1 convolutions could be made to do the same operation.
by seadan83 | 2025-06-28 14:08:51+00:00
I think many of the comments in this discussion are confusing the concept of "tribes" (in-groups & out-groups) with 'tribalism' - the form of civic society. This article is about the civic society called 'tribalism'. The contrast to 'tribalism' is 'rule of law'.

Tribalism is essentially a belief that the only reason others won't bully you is because they can't. Bully or be bullied. Rule of law instead says that it is the civic code who is the arbiter of right. 'Tribalism' vs 'rule of law' are both essentially frameworks of society and government.
by runarberg | 2025-06-28 14:08:51+00:00
I would expect that the probe makers would want some benefits from the fleet of probes they sent, the only benefit I can think of to be had are information about far away objects, which is of scientific value. The probe’s makers will therefor have to keep contact with an ever expanding fleet of probes and sift through an exponentially increasing amount of information for millions of years. This just does not seem practical when you can just build a telescope. Now time may not pass that slowly from the perspective of the probe, but for the civilization on the homeworld, this method is painfully slow. They could have built thousands or millions of telescopes during that time to gather the same information (albeit of lower quality). Which is why you would probably want to probe your nearest neighboring solar systems, but nothing farther.

As for the moral reasons to not send out a fleet of self replicating probes. These are an extreme pollution hazard. An ever expanding fleet of robots traveling across the galaxy over millions of years, growing in numbers exponentially, exploiting resources in foreign worlds, with nothing to stop them if something happens to their makers. Over millions of years these things would be everywhere, and—in the best case—be a huge nuisance, but at worse they would be a risk to the public safety of the worlds they travel to. With these risks I believe a sufficiently advanced civilization would just build telescopes for their exploration needs.
by nathan_compton | 2025-06-28 14:09:53+00:00
Do you really genuinely believe that typical american liberal types would ignore a genocide committed against Jewish people by anyone, particularly arabs? In the American liberal mind "genocide" is, essentially, synonymous with The Holocaust, and I think your average liberal is, if anything, sensitive to Jewish discrimination, over and above random people out there in the world. There are definitely anti-semetic Americans and they should be launched into the sun, but I think your sense that people wouldn't care if Jews were being killed in the tens of thousands is extremely off point.
by eviks | 2025-06-28 14:10:13+00:00
> take space in your disk and, more importantly, the mind.

They don't, your mind isn't big enough to worry about everything you store digitally. You need to at least try to state the actual issues with just knowing that your archive exists. The article at least established personal issues with maintaining the notes, but you failed to even try!

> I’m an avid deleter, have been for years, and have never regretted it.

How is it relevant when "your feelings don’t apply to them and their decision."?

> It won’t happen, the upside of deletion is just too good.

What crystal ball with the perfect visibility into the rest of your life have you glanced this certainty from?

> That regret is a you thing (shared by many others)

No, that's just an ~ad hominem you've made up. I didn't talk about regret. The issue could just be a waste of time later without any feeling of regret involved.

> Not only would you have confirmed everything

You don't have the old version, so you wouldn't know whether you've confirmed or rejected anything.

> which is extremely useful

Don't stop here, what's the usefulness?

> it is very unlikely you wouldn’t have thought of new ideas or gained new insights in the process.

You could say exactly the same thing about reading your old notes since new insight isn't banned there. The only more certain difference is the extra effort required to recreate.
by crazygringo | 2025-06-28 14:10:29+00:00
It's not about people wanting to keep it in moats.

It's about China being expansionist, actively preparing to invade Taiwan, and generally becoming an increasing military threat that does not respect the national integrity of other states.

The US is fine with other countries having AI if the countries "play nice" with others. Nobody is limiting GPU's in France or Thailand.

This is very specific to China's behavior and stated goals.
by goosedragons | 2025-06-28 14:10:44+00:00
Are you against public school in general? Should the childless be forced to pay? Are you against public roads? Should the car-less be forced to pay? Are you against firefighters? Should those not currently involved in a fire be forced to pay?

I guarantee somebody else has paid for something they haven't used that you have. We're a society. Part of that is sharing costs. Big reason so much is so fucked up right now is because we're doing a bad job of it.
by j_not_j | 2025-06-28 14:12:16+00:00
Wouldn't be worth the trouble to try.

Why, you ask?

How do you point it? Where do you point it?

You have a "telescope" with a field of view of one-planets worth of pixels. But the planet is in orbit, so it drifts away from the imaged field of view within minutes.

Meanwhile your sensor is travelling away from the "lens" so transverse velocity would be needed to track the orbit at a delta-v and direction that is unknowable. Unknowable, because you have to know where the planet is, within a radius, to put your "sensor" in the right place in the first place.

Imagine taking a straw, place it in a tree, walk away a few km and focus a telescope on the straw and hope to look through the straw to see an airplane flying past. You have the same set of unknowables.
by mopsi | 2025-06-28 14:12:35+00:00
Almost no-one[1] recognizes Crimea as part of Russia because it was entirely manufactured. Unmarked foreign soldiers invaded a country, pretended to be local rebels, staged a referendum and immediately asked to join the invading country to give the shameless land grab a veneer of legitimacy. It's a total joke that has nothing in common with genuine ethnic conflicts. The referendums in Crimea and elsewhere had to be staged because even internal polling leaked from the Russian military admin showed that nowhere did the local population support the invasion; speaking German doesn't mean that you want to live in the Third Reich.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembl...
by agensaequivocum | 2025-06-28 14:12:38+00:00
Sure there are plenty of great 2a orgs and great progress has been made in the right to carry space as more than half the states are now permitless carry when 30 years ago half the states were either may issue or no issue.

The point is the Democratic run states refuse to follow the constitution when it comes to the 2a. The courts especially the 9th twist the Supreme Court precedent and outright lie to uphold every garbage gun control law California passes. SCOTUS just doesn't care enough about the 2a to correct the blatant middle finger lower courts keep giving them.
by camjw | 2025-06-28 14:13:22+00:00
Thank you for your feedback, will probably move the login screen a bit later.

For context, people have (unsurprisingly?) been putting some pretty gnarly things into the search box so its not obvious to me whether its good to let people put in things like "an octopus hentai ring" and pay to generate that or not. Probably there is a better solution.
by ZunarJ5 | 2025-06-28 14:13:22+00:00
I also follow this philosophy. I also have an anxious brain, though. To manage the clutter, I zip up old notes & projects by date and put them in an archive folder. They're always there if I need to reference them, but I have a clean workspace too. I include file trees in those archives for easy reference. Very easy to script with a cron job.
by worldsayshi | 2025-06-28 14:14:02+00:00
When we think of 'puzzles' in the most concrete way we think of problems that are challenging but ultimately designed to be solved in a satisfactory way.

But many problems that we want to solve aren't necessarily fair to the problem solver. They can have multiple possible solutions, only half solutions or no feasible solution at all. Some of the solutions could be obvious, some of them hidden to a degree that you may never find them. And when you find something that could perhaps be construed as a solution there's no guarantee that the solution tells you it's a good solution - or if there are better solutions hiding behind the next hill. And some problems will seem very easy to some other person but insurmountable to you. And you might never even get a satisfactory explanation to why that is.

For those problems we need to either learn to accept that the solution process never really ends and/or learn to accept and settle for a fundamentally unsatisfactory partial solution. You might one day wake up and feel that the problem is actually solved or doesn't bother you that much anymore but there's no reason to bet on that. Better to bet on acceptance. That way the process and the problem can possibly settle in our mind regardless of outcome.

Such acceptance is not easy. It can only come with practice, and by also accepting that punishing oneself for being human does not make anyone happier.