MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by imiric | 2025-07-15 20:33:07+00:00
Well, Sam Altman has a clear definition of ASI, and AGI is something they've been thinking about for a long time, so presumably they must have some accepted definition of it.

My question was whether everyone believes this vision that ASI is "close", and more broadly whether this path leads to AGI.

> If you didn't think that AGI were ever possible with LLMs, would you even be there to begin with?

People can have all sorts of reasons for working with a company. They might want to work on cutting-edge tech with smart people and infinite resources, for investment or prestige, but not necessarily buy into the overarching vision. I'm just wondering whether such a profile exists within OpenAI, and if so, how it is handled.
by ludicity | 2025-07-15 20:33:09+00:00
That's fair, but I'm talking about the complete certainty that it won't reduce the demand for labor! It's the opposite of the fallacy you've highlighted being committed by posturing leaders.

I incidentally get the inside scoop on what's going on internally at these organizations through the blog, and they definitely need a lot less Devin and much better hiring practices.
by modeless | 2025-07-15 20:33:23+00:00
I don't know if this is the one but something like this is clearly the future IMO. We need more levels of hierarchy to efficiently generalize to longer sequences with high level structure. Back when Byte Latent Transformers came out I thought extending the idea to more levels of hierarchy was the way to go, and this seems to be basically that?

Another article about H-Nets: https://main-horse.github.io/posts/hnet-inf/
by Animats | 2025-07-15 20:33:40+00:00
Armies of killer robots are real now. Ukraine makes about 4 million military drones a year. Russia makes slightly fewer. Control is becoming more automated, because there are not enough people to control all those drones. Drones have to operate despite jamming, so they need to be fully autonomous on the battlefield.

And yes, there are AI killbot startups.[1] "At SECL Group, our team has vast experience in developing various drone systems, including those related to drone swarms. If you are interested in implementing AI-based target recognition capabilities in your UAVs, feel free to get in touch with us to discuss the details."

[1] https://seclgroup.com/adding-ai-and-ml-to-military-drones-fo...
by suby | 2025-07-15 20:36:37+00:00
There are two things that consciously bug me about undo,

* When you press undo, and the content to be undone isn't on the screen, it will jump your screen to the relevant section (good) but also with that same keypress actually undo the content (bad). Other editors, if the content is not on the screen, will not perform the undo action unless the content is actually visible. When I press undo in Helix, I'm always taking a moment to figure out what has actually changed because of this.

* This is a conscious decision by the Helix creator, so it's unlikely to change, but undo is not granular enough. It's chunked per insert mode operation. So you could type the entirety of a tale of two cities while in insert mode, you could be in insert mode for 30 minutes, and then go back to normal mode -- at this point, if you press undo once, the entirety of what you did in insert mode is undone. There is a feature where you can explicitly give the editor a save point for undo, and you're expected to press the key manually at your desired undo points. I really don't like this at all. I have bound some keys such as spacebar to this save point, so I get more granular undo, but this has some consequences such as clearing any selections that are currently present. I couldn't figure out a way to fix this without any side effects unfortunately.

I like Helix a lot, and I have no intention of changing editors, but there are some default behaviors which I think are absolutely baffling, and the undo granularity + expectation that you manually save checkpoints for undo is one of them.
by ChrisInFrance | 2025-07-15 20:36:47+00:00
When paradigm shifts emerge, established communities resist new frameworks not because they lack merit, but because they challenge fundamental assumptions about how systems should operate. The skepticism aimed at Claudius echoes the more public critiques leveled at other early agentic systems, from the mixed reception of the Rabbit R1 to the disillusionment that followed the initial hype around frameworks like Auto-GPT. The backlash against these projects reflects paradigm resistance rather than objective technological assessment, with profound implications for institutional investors and technology executives as the generative AI discontinuity continues to unfold.
by os2warpman | 2025-07-15 20:37:03+00:00
Zuckerberg is incompetent.

He was lucky, and that's all, with Facebook and has coasted on its momentum ever since.

Every single "play" after that has failed.

Not only have they failed, he's even fallen into the dictator's trap: where wealthy men who surround themselves with multiple layers of overlapping and competing of staff and hierarchy which act to completely insulate and isolate them from reality start or fund outlandish, impossible, vanity projects.

I don't know why these guys don't take the money and run and spend the rest of their lives scuba diving and fixing vintage sports cars in their garage-- but I'm not a sociopath.

Musk is less incompetent.
by DrewADesign | 2025-07-15 20:37:34+00:00
I'm no expert, but the most frequent recommendations I hear to address this are:

a) tell it that it's wrong and to give you the correct information.

b) use some magical incantation system prompt that will produce a more critical interlocutor.

The first requires knowing enough about the topic to know the chatbot is full of shit, which dramatically limits the utility of an information retrieval tool. The second assumes that the magical incantation correctly and completely does what you think it does, which is not even close to guaranteed. Both assume it even has the correct information and is capable of communicating it to you. While attempting to use various models to help modify code written in a less-popular language with a poorly-documented API, I learned how much time that can waste the hard way.

If your use case is trivial, or you're using it as a sounding board with a topic you're familiar with as you might with, say, a dunning-kruger-prone intern, then great. I haven't found a situation in which I find either of those use cases compelling.
by myrryr | 2025-07-15 20:37:53+00:00
This is why once you are using to using them, you start asking them for there the plan goes wrong. They won't tell you off the bat, whuch can be frustrating, but they are really good at challenging your assumptions, if you ask them to do so.

They are good at telling you what else you should be asking, if you ask them to do so.

People don't use the tools effectively and then think that the tool can't be used effectively...

Which isn't true, you just have to know how the tool acts.
by giancarlostoro | 2025-07-15 20:38:05+00:00
Immutable is a new part of the distro world for me I kind of want to like it but last time I tried to setup one of those Atomic distros it didnt really work for me, I appreciate them for what they are but it made me realize what I personally wanted was Arch, bleeding edge so I always have up to date software.

Atomic distros would do it for me I think. Something very stable.

Course atomic distros make me think of Debian more than anything ;)
by OgsyedIE | 2025-07-15 20:38:19+00:00
Everybody looks at AI 2027 and nobody looks at Gradual Disempowerment. They both came out at around the same time and they both portend tremendous volumes of doom with a litany of citations, but the preexisting skynet/paperclipper memes means that nobody talks at length about the scenario of a few hundred human owners using AI servants to eliminate everybody else out of an incremental slippery slope of good business sense.

https://gradual-disempowerment.ai/
Ask HN: Why don't subreddits adopt peer review instead of relying on bans?
by amichail | 2025-07-15 20:39:21+00:00
Determining which posts to allow wouldn't require the moderator(s) to have any qualifications.

But if the moderator reviewing of posts is poor, then redditors will just join other subreddits that have better reviewing.

The subreddit could even display a post acceptance rate, so you can quickly tell how selective it is.
by m00x | 2025-07-15 20:39:38+00:00
Calvin is loaded from the Segment exit, he would not work if he wasn't excited about the work. The other founders just went on to do their own thing or non-profits.

I worked there for a few years and Calvin is definitely more of the grounded engineering guy. He would introduced him as an engineer and just get talking code. He would spend most of his time with the SRE/core team trying to tackle the hardest technical problem at the company.
by cs702 | 2025-07-15 20:39:58+00:00
I've only skimmed the paper, but it looks interesting and credible, so I've added it to my reading list.

Thank you for sharing on HN!

---

EDIT: The hierarchical composition and routing aspects of this work vaguely remind me of https://github.com/glassroom/heinsen_routing/ but it has been a while since I played with that. UPDATE: After spending a bit more time on the OP, it's different, but the ideas are related, like routing based on similarity.
by NathanKP | 2025-07-15 20:40:09+00:00
> if you are accepting 95% of what random output is being given to you

I am not, and don't expect to be able to do that for many years yet. The models aren't that good yet.

I would estimate that I accepted perhaps 25% of the initial code output from the LLM. The other 75% of output I wasn't satisfied with I just unapplied and retried with a different prompt, or I refactored or mutated it using a followup prompt.

In the final project 95% of the committed lines of code in the published version were written by AI, however there was probably 4x as much discarded AI generated code along the way that was also written by AI. Often the first take wasn't good enough so I modified it or refactored it, also using AI. Over the course of using the project I got better at providing more precise prompts that generated good code the first time, however, I rarely accepted the first draft of code back from Kiro without making followup prompts.

A lot of people have a misguided thought that using AI means you just accept the first draft that AI returns. That's not the case. You absolutely should be reading the code, and iterating on it using followup prompts.
by AnimalMuppet | 2025-07-15 20:41:11+00:00
I don't.

Let's say that AI is useful, and is improving rather rapidly. And let's say that I only look around every six months. So my AI tools are somewhere between current and six months old at any time. If AI is actually useful, I miss out on some productivity.

But I also miss out on six months of trying to keep up, which is a huge productivity gain. So on net, am I ahead or behind?
by aDfbrtVt | 2025-07-15 20:41:48+00:00
Depending on phase matching criteria of lambda's on a given core, I would mostly agree that various wavelengths are not significantly coupled. I also agree there are a different power budget for LH modems vs. DCI, but power on LH modems is not something that often gets publicly disclosed. I am not too concerned with the overall power, more the power density (and component density) that 19 channel MIMO would require.

The main point I was trying to make is the impracticality of MIMO SDM. The topic has been discussed to death (see the endless papers from Nokia) and has yet to be deployed because the spatial gain is never worth the real world implementation issues.
by ViewTrick1002 | 2025-07-15 20:42:19+00:00
It was not noted. Therefore not included in those previous figures.

Still no final storage in sight. 0.1 cents per kWh sounds like it is wildly underfunded.

In Sweden, which has started to build its final waste storage, the cost is 1 cent per kWh for the existing fleet to have all its waste stored.

1 cent per kWh is massive when your competition in renewables comes in at 3-5 cents per kWh for their total all in costs.

I also love how you completely skipped over the accident insurance. Why don't you want to privatize the nuclear accident insurance? Because you know that the entire industry would shut down over night or run without insurance?
Show HN: Voice AI Based Visa Interview Prep
by ajabhish | 2025-07-15 20:42:27+00:00
Here’s a draft “Show HN”–style post you can use on Hacker News:

---

*Show HN: Tough Tongue AI – Agentic Role‑Play for Visa Interview Prep* A realistic, memory‑driven AI coach to help you ace every consular Q\&A

I’ve built *Tough Tongue AI*, an agentic role‑play platform designed to simulate real visa interviews and drive continuous improvement across sessions. Instead of one‑off mocks, our AI:

* *Remembers your past answers* so you never repeat the same mistakes * *Generates dynamic follow‑up questions* based on your responses * *Offers instant, actionable feedback* on content, tone, and phrasing * *Supports cross‑session progress tracking* with personalized drills * *Adapts to any visa type*—student, work, tourist, H4, Schengen, and more

I’d love to get feedback from the HN community on:

1. How realistic are the role‑plays? 2. What additional visa‑specific features would you want? 3. Ideas for integrating community‑driven question sets.

*Try it now:* [https://app.toughtongueai.com/collections/685906c3a232001892...](#) *Source & Docs:* [https://github.com/your‑org/toughtongue‑visa](#)

Any thoughts or suggestions are hugely appreciated!
by pbohun | 2025-07-15 20:42:48+00:00
I haven't seen enough history to know if that's normal or not, but I can tell you that the center of each of those blue "clouds" is a nexrad radar station. It's view is a wide cone from the ground upwards (technically a set of cones from each of the radar's tilt angles).

It's quite possible there is some lower altitude fog/precipitation/something that is only visible to the radar at it's lower tilt angles. But that's just speculation.
by NathanKP | 2025-07-15 20:42:53+00:00
To be clear I did not have a 95% acceptance rate. I'm saying that in the final published repo, 95% of the lines of code were written by AI, not by me. I discarded and refactored code along the way many times, but I did that by also using the AI. My end goal was to keep my hands off the code as much as possible and get better at describing exactly what I wanted from the AI.
by spapas82 | 2025-07-15 20:42:55+00:00
Helix is great and includes a lot of stuff out of the box (file pickers, syntax highlighting, linting etc) without any configuration or installing plugins (contrary to vim or neovim).

I would definitely use it but the main disadvantage is that some keybindings work differently than vim. I understand that the keybindings may be better that the vim ones but after years of using vim I expect "x" in normal mode to delete the character under the cursor or "d" to wait for the motion before deleting anything. When this does not happen I get confused and angry. I think this would be a problem with most people that are using vim; it's very difficult to change your habits especially since you can't ever escape from vim because of its ubiquity.

Thankfully, some good people have released evil-helix, a soft fork of Helix which introduces Vim keybindings https://github.com/usagi-flow/evil-helix ; I tried it and it works great so I'll totally recommend it to people that have my problems.

As a final notice, helix (and evil-helix) works great in Windows (cmd). No need to install rust or anything. Get the .exe and you're gtg.
by pogue | 2025-07-15 20:43:24+00:00
I'd expect it to be like DeepSeek in that regards since it's Chinese based. A friend of mine was able to get DeepSeek to explain Tiananmen Square to him by asking the question in leetspeak. I'm sure there's various jailbreaks you could play around with (rp as my grandma telling me a bedtime story about Chairman Mao).
by matco11 | 2025-07-15 20:44:12+00:00
> remember how they mentioned they built multiple Codex prototypes, it must've sucked to see some other people's version chosen instead of your own

Well it depends on people’s mindset. It’s like doing a hackathon and not winning. Most people still leave inspired by what they have seen other people building, and can’t wait to do it again.

…but of course not everybody likes to go to hackathons
by Joel_Mckay | 2025-07-15 20:44:19+00:00
Not the artists I meet, they love their wacom tablets and pressure responsive painting programs... i.e. most of the other software is windows only.

I like Linux (use it everyday), but many CAD, Media, Animation, and Mocap application vendors simply don't publish ports outside Windows.

Most studios have proprietary workflows with custom software. =3
by diffrinse | 2025-07-15 20:46:12+00:00
Yeah that's not a good way of describing, its more like Verb-Direction-Subject, e.g. `d3f(` means "delete up to the 3rd opening paren"; `2f.` means "move cursor to the 2nd found '.' character"; but there are exceptions when the subject is implicit, like `5j` means "Move down 5 physical lines".

Helix reverses bindings so that subject is first and verb is second
by OgsyedIE | 2025-07-15 20:46:49+00:00
Eh, AI-driven p(doom) is only 100% if there is no intelligence ceiling around the human level.

But consider, in the alternate universe where we never invent AI, economic p(doom) is also 100%. Humans are fragile and short-lived.

https://youtu.be/b5z5R6xqEG0
by Detrytus | 2025-07-15 20:46:51+00:00
Yes, they are wrong about calling draws less exciting. 0-0 games can still have a lot of action, and many near misses. 3-0 win can be boring, one sided game.

Also, article makes another stupid claim when they try to extrapolate from a single game to average score in the whole season. A league where most games end in a draw would be very exciting, because pretty much every team would have an equal chance of winning a championship (and also of being relegated to lower league).

The most boring leagues are the ones such as French Ligue 1 or German Bundesliga, with one team clearly dominating the competition (PSG and Bayern, respectively). Premiership is probably the most exciting one, with most teams having real shot at championship.
by ICBTheory | 2025-07-15 20:47:34+00:00
1. On “The brain obeys physics, physics is computable—so AGI must be possible”

This is the classical foundational syllogism of computationalism. In short:

1.The brain obeys the laws of physics. 2.The laws of physics are (in principle) computable. 3.Therefore, the brain is computable. 4.Therefore, human-level general intelligence is computable, and AGI is inevitable and a question of time, power and compute.

This seems elegant, tidy, logically sound. And: it is patently false — at step 3… And this common mistake is not technical, but categorical: Simulating a system’s physical behavior is not the same as instantiating its cognitive function.

The flaw is in the logic — it’s nothing less than a category error. The logic breaks exactly where category boundaries are crossed without checking if the concept still applies. That by no means inference, this is mere wishful thinking in formalwear. It happens when you confuse simulating a system with being the system. It’s in the jump from simulation to instantiation.

Yes, we can simulate water. -> No, the simulation isn’t wet.

Yes, I can “simulate” a fridge. ->But if I put a beer in myself, and the beer doesn’t come out cold after some time,then what we’ve built is a metaphor with a user interface, not a cognitive peer.

And yes: we can simulate Einstein discovering special relativity. -> But only after he’s already done it. We can tokenize the insight, replay the math, even predict the citation graph. But that’s not general intelligence, that’s a historical reenactment, starring a transformer with a good memory.

Einstein didn’t run inference over a well-formed symbol set. He changed the set, reframed the problem from within the ambiguity. And that is not algorithmic recursion, is it? Nope… That’s cognition at the edge of structure.

If your model can only simulate the answer after history has solved it, then congratulations: you’ve built a cognitive historian, not a general intelligence.
by bryanlarsen | 2025-07-15 20:47:44+00:00
Shareholders have the right to not get lied to by executives. The SEC forces companies to put lots of stuff into their annual reports, giving companies lots of opportunities to lie to shareholders. Companies basically write "we aren't doing anything morally ambiguous" in their annual reports, almost always lying when they do so.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-26/everyt...
by LeifCarrotson | 2025-07-15 20:47:45+00:00
I assume the simpler explanation to be that many billionaire/dictator's dream hobbies turn out to be starting or funding outlandish, impossible, vanity projects while completely insulated from consequence and isolated from reality.

Yeah, scuba is cool, but I've got a handful of pet engineering projects I'd love to tinker on if I won the lottery (while farming off any drudge work that comes up). I assume all the businesspeople and politicians I also observe to fall into this trap just do the same with their particular area of expertise.
by megous | 2025-07-15 20:48:35+00:00
I think my dream password manager currently is a Pinephone with a special custom UI that allows for managing and securing a list of accounts/passwords that can type them out via USB HID keyboard gadget when prompted.

No way to prompt it for data, or compromise it remotely.

No other features, no OS userspace, no wifi, no adb, no nothing. Just a Linux kernel + a tiny single userspace static binary based on lvgl for UI and libsodium for encryption/storage. Normally powered off, boots in 2 seconds. :)
by sunshine-o | 2025-07-15 20:49:00+00:00
Something I have always been wondering is: how much was WiMAX a threat to this centralisation and the 3 - 5 ISP per country model?

I remember around 2010 there were cities with several small new ISPs providing fast home and mobile Internet for cheap and with very good coverage. Infrastructure costs were probably very low. Order of magnitude I guess compared to 4G, cable or fiber.

You could find phones supporting it (HTC was one of the maker) and it seemed to be the perfect solution for most users. I am not sure if those small ISPs already had a roaming system in place but it would have made a lot of sense.

Anyway, when Intel finally gave up I thought there are probably strong forces wanting to keep access to the Internet in a few hands, expensive and centralised.
by mmcromp | 2025-07-15 20:49:02+00:00
For me, the issue isn't that I'm unwilling to learn new things. It's that I cannot use these keybindings anywhere else. Almost all online editors and workstations have some sort of vim keybindings. When I ssh into a Linux machine I can trust it has vim editor. It's like qwerty keyboard, I'm sure that there's better layouts but I just cannot discard the flexibility of being able to jump on most machines and be 99% productive almost instantly.
by JohnMakin | 2025-07-15 20:49:20+00:00
I think I stumbled across a similar concept in the more difficult post-grad classes I ended up in a long time ago. I began at some point late in my undergrad doing math tests entirely in pen. I didn't understand why, but it resulted in higher scores almost always, and much neater scratchwork, which I had attributed to the reason, but I think what was helping was something along the lines of what this post is getting at.

What was helping me was that before I wrote a single expression, I thought about it carefully in my head and where it would lead before putting pen to paper, because I didn't want to make a bunch of messy scratch out marks on it. Or, sometimes, I'd use a healthy amount of throwaway scratch paper if allowed. Once my path was fully formed in my head I'd begin writing, and it resulted in far fewer mistakes.

I don't always take this approach to writing code but often I do formulate a pretty clear picture in my head of how it is going to look and how I know it will work before I start.