MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by sReinwald | 2025-07-07 11:44:48+00:00
You've nailed the pattern. And the regulatory environment actively enables it through what amounts to a pricing model for violations.

When the EPA or county eventually fines xAI for running unpermitted turbines for a year, it'll be what - a few hundred thousand? Maybe low millions if they're feeling particularly spicy? For a company chasing the AI gold rush with Musk's billions behind it, that's not a penalty - it's a rounding error. It's cheaper to violate now and pay later than to wait for permits while competitors build capacity.

And unfortunately, this isn't a bug in the regulatory system - it's the feature. When fines are pocket change relative to potential profits, "ask forgiveness not permission" becomes optimal strategy. The only things that actually change behavior are existential threats (criminal charges, shutdown orders) or catastrophic reputational damage - and Musk has proven immune to both.

Until penalties scale with company valuations or include mandatory shutdowns, this playbook will keep printing money. Memphis residents get respiratory disease, xAI gets compute capacity, and regulators get a check that wouldn't cover a week of Musk's jet fuel.
by positron26 | 2025-07-07 11:46:18+00:00
And then during the next token, all of that bounded depth is thrown away except for the token of output.

You're fixating on the pseudo-computation within a single token pass. This is very limited compared to actual hidden state retention and the introspection that would enable if we knew how to train it and do online learning already.

The "reasoning" hack would not be a realistic implementation choice if the models had hidden state and could ruminate on it without showing us output.
by ooisee | 2025-07-07 11:46:25+00:00
Guilty as charged—and totally intentional.

Turns out "I want a burger" beats "we have equivalent burger at home" every time—even when the home solution is objectively better.

So yes, this reads like "What my goldfish taught me about microservices." But unlike those posts, this story has no moral—just nerdy fun with enterprise software roasting.

Sometimes you gotta speak the language they actually read there +)).
by farmdawgnation | 2025-07-07 11:46:28+00:00
Hey all - wanted to share this because it's a problem I've run into a few times now and I figured other people might benefit from the solution.

Additionally, this is a pretty cool example of what AI Agents enable me to do in my spare time now. Before I had a family I had a lot more time to wrangle code myself and build things like this. With the emergence of AI Agents I'm getting to a point where I can actually build "for fun" again in a way I haven't been able to in years.

Enjoy!
by jlengrand | 2025-07-07 11:46:35+00:00
I'm a bit dual about this thing. I see it around social media and in people talking. I got diagnosed almost two years ago, and it has been a relief in a way because it finally explained a lot of the struggles I had, helped being less blameful about myself and learn physiological keys around how I am and why. At the same time, I really don't think it would have helped me knowing this much earlier in my childhood, and sometimes the tentation to use this as an "excuse" is strong like described in the article.

I wouldn't wish an earlier diagnostic to my kids, and try to approach things with an empathic approach instead.
by suyjuris | 2025-07-07 11:46:53+00:00
Just downloading them is of course cheaper, but it is worth pointing out that, as the article states, they did also buy legitimate copies of millions of books. (This includes all the books involved in the lawsuit.) Based on the judgement itself, Anthropic appears to train only on the books legitimately acquired. Used books are quite cheap, after all, and can be bought in bulk.
by lr4444lr | 2025-07-07 11:47:12+00:00
Thing is, professional therapy is expensive; there is already a big industry of therapists that work online, through chat, or video calls, whose quality isn't as good as a professional (I am struggling to describe the two). For professional mental health care, there's a wait list, or you're told to just do yoga and mindfulness.

So for those people, the LLM is replacing having nothing, not a therapist.
by matwood | 2025-07-07 11:47:45+00:00
Work long enough and a person will screw up. That's how things go. And if you never screw up, then you're not really pushing yourself. Personally, I've deleted customer tables, updated the whole table when meaning to update one record, even shipped our private key once. There are probably even more I can't remember, and others from people that I helped fix (one time a boss locked us all out of the db - only fix was restoring lol) In all cases I became a better engineer by owning the mistake quickly, fixing the issue, and then putting processes in place to avoid it in the future. I think it shaped who I was to be a better engineer, manager, and owner.

The only time I've seen people fired on the spot is when they lie. After seeing someone fired, I asked one of the owners at an old company I worked at why that was the line. He responded that even the best performers make mistakes, but if he couldn't trust someone, he couldn't work with them. This was many years ago, and as I've grown in my career I have found it to be a pretty good line to draw.
by Xss3 | 2025-07-07 11:47:57+00:00
The other day a good friend of mine with mental health issues remarked that "his" chatgpt understands him better than most of his friends and gives him better advice than his therapist.

It's going to take a lot to get him out of that mindset and frankly I'm dreading trying to compare and contrast imperfect human behaviour and friendships with a sycophantic AI.
by jappgar | 2025-07-07 11:47:59+00:00
Terminal UIs is such a step backward. It's only attractive to people who have a preexisting emotional attachment to the terminal.

I should be one of those people, I guess. I love shell scripts and all the rest... but interactive terminal UIs have always sucked.

So much of what AI companies are putting out is designed to capture developer mindshare. Substantive improvements to their core product (models) are few and far between, so they release these fidgets about once a month to keep the hope alive.

From that standpoint, TUI makes sense because it obscures the process and the result enough to sucker more people into the vibe-coding money hole.
by DocTomoe | 2025-07-07 11:48:04+00:00
You're misreading my intent - this isn't adversarial rhetoric. I'm not making a universal claim that every LLM is always more empathetic than any human. There's nothing to disprove or falsify here because I'm clearly describing a subjective experience.

What I'm saying is that, in my observation, the curve leans in favour of LLMs when it comes to consistent friendliness or reasonably perceived (simulation of) empathy. Most people simply don't aim for that as a default mode. LLMs, on the other hand, are usually tuned to be patient, attentive, and reasonably kind. That alone gives them, in many cases, a distinct edge in how empathetic they feel — especially when someone is in a vulnerable state and just needs space and a kind voice.
by csmets | 2025-07-07 11:48:23+00:00
I've been curious to know how well games can succeed (measured by the gaining of followers and wishlists) when participating Steam's NextFest. So, I took a look into the data and provided an analysis for the curious like me to view and make educated assumptions.

Some interesting stats I've discovered: - 1 in 10 games 5x their follower count - 60% of games did not achieve 100+ followers by the end of NextFest - Out of the 2582 games analyzed the median wishlists gained is 336 - Sports games got the highest growth and has the lowest market saturation

If you're releasing a game on Steam and can participate, you should. There's a high chance it will give you visibility to gain some additional wishlists before your launch. The chances of getting a lot of wishlists is 1 in 10, that's 10%.

Having participated in the past and feeling defeated by my expectation, if game making is a hobby set the expectation of gaining wishlist realistic (maybe even lower than that) to keep the positive vibes of a good outcome to help give you the momentum to finish your game. If this is your primary income, it's important to understand your market and competition to know what players want and what they're currently interesting in, but (if you're reading) you already know this :)
by pyman | 2025-07-07 11:48:50+00:00
Pirating a book and selling it on claude.ai is stealing, both legally and morally.

Pirating 7 million books, remixing their content, and using that to make money on Claude.ai is like counterfeiting 7 million branded products and selling them on your Shopify website. The original creators don't get payment, and someone's profiting off their work.

Try doing that yourself and you'd get a knock on the door real quick.
by dijit | 2025-07-07 11:49:09+00:00
And if you have something like the MNT Reform laptop[0] (which is even more to the extreme end of repairability) that those things you mention are even worse.

So, there's the rub, and it should be clear: repairability is coming with a trade-off.. Sleekness, performance, battery life.

We as consumers would rather have ultra portable, high performance laptops that feel rigid in our hands over bulky devices that could be useful for 1.5x as long (or survive more wear potentially).

Framework is banking on people who are aware of this tradeoff and want to buy a device going the opposite direction; which is GREAT!.

For example all smartphones are going larger and there's no choice for someone like me to get a small phone these days: I am forced. You're not! Someone is allowing you to make the tradeoff, and instead of understanding that these are actual trade-offs, you'd rather complain that they exist at all.

[0]: https://shop.mntre.com/products/mnt-reform
by aroojjaved | 2025-07-07 11:49:10+00:00
This repo is a collection of real-world JIRA automation scripts I created to speed up repetitive support workflows—things like auto-labeling tickets, triggering escalations, status transitions, and SLA alerts.

I used these in a production environment to reduce manual ticket handling and improve our SLA compliance. The samples are written to be plug-and-play, easy to customize, and well-documented for support engineers, dev teams, and IT ops folks.

If you’re managing a support queue or looking to scale your JIRA operations, this might save you time. Feedback and contributions welcome.
by mattigames | 2025-07-07 11:50:11+00:00
In many ways I find Korean music to encapsulate the worst parts of capitalism, the way they order the younger and most impressionable (AKA manipulable) fans of k-pop bands to post about those non-stop in their social media accounts to the point the sites suspect them of being spam bots ("stans" as they call them in modern lingo), the way they strongly push for people to call them "idols" and not just "celebrities", "singers" or "boy bands", the way that even genres that used to be dominated by outcasts like metal are now pre-selected with members that have zero ownership of the band and zero input in the creation of the songs melodies such as baby metal, that is all corporate selected and audience researched, in many ways it's the best example of last stage capitalism of the music business.
by munksbeer | 2025-07-07 11:50:21+00:00
I am interested in this topic, but I do sometimes find the compatiblism argument difficult to distill down to its essence without still leaving a sense of unfulfillment.

From my understanding, compatibilism boils down to accepting that everything may be pre-determined, but people are still free to make choices as long as they are uncoerced.

The argument from that quote above is a little bit subtler and aligns with my thinking. I don't believe we have free will in any sense, either everything is pre-determined, or it is random, and I can't even think of a definition of free will that would make sense (just like the compatiblism one does not to me). But clearly there is a feedback loop going on, and so it is inherently in the species best interest to hold people accountable for their actions, because the act of holding them accountable forms part of the inputs that lead people to make choices. Not doing this is not a great survivability trait overall. Doing so, we survive a bit more.

But I'm not sure that is strictly necessary to call oneself a compatibilist.
by BlackFly | 2025-07-07 11:51:53+00:00
Making a copy differs from taking an existing object in all aspects: literally, technically, legally and ethically. Piracy is making a copy you have no legal right to. Stealing is taking a physical object that you have no legal right to. While the "no legal right to" seems the same superficially, in practice the laws differ quite a bit because the literal, technical and ethical aspects differ.
by bryanlarsen | 2025-07-07 11:52:04+00:00
Jeff bought that dishwasher based on its Consumer Reports ratings. They must have taken his criticism into account, because it is now far from the top rated dishwasher and includes a disclosure about requiring an app.

I trust Consumer Reports and would never buy an appliance without consulting them, but it doesn't surprise me that they're a little conservative and wouldn't realize they need to call this stuff out initially.
by resurrectedcyb | 2025-07-07 11:52:07+00:00
I do not know if the borrow checker and Rust's type system have been formalized. There are stacked borrows and tree borrows, and other languages experimenting with features similar to borrow checking, but without formal algorithms like Algorithm W or J for Hindley-Milner, or formalizations like of Hindley-Milner and problems like typability for them, I am not sure how one can prove the complexity class of the borrow checking problem nor a specific algorithm, like https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/3-540-52590-4_50 does for ML.

I could imagine you being correct about the borrow checking typability problem being NP-complete. Or an even worse complexity class. Typability in ML is EXPTIME-complete, a larger set than NP-complete https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EXPTIME https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/96709.96748 .

I also am not sure how to figure out if the complexity class of some kind of borrow checking has something to do with the exponential compile times of some practical Rust projects after they upgraded compiler version, for instance in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/75992 .

It would be good if there was a formal description of at least one borrow checking algorithm as well as the borrow checking "problem", and maybe also analysis of the complexity class of the problem.
by stoneyhrm1 | 2025-07-07 11:52:10+00:00
I thought this too but then began to think about it from the perspective of the programmers trying to make it imitate human learning. That's what a nn is trying to do at the end of the day, and in the same way I train myself by reading problems and solutions, or learning vocab at a young age, it does so by tuning billions of parameters.

I think these models do learn similarly. What does it even mean to reason? Your brain knows certain things so it comes to certain conclusions, but it only knows those things because it was ''trained'' on those things.

I reason my car will crash if I go 120 mph on the other side of the road because previously I have 'seen' where the input is a car going 120mph has a high probability of producing a crash, and similarly have seen input where the car is going on the other side of the road, producing a crash. Combining the two would tell me it's a high probability.
by poulpy123 | 2025-07-07 11:52:44+00:00
While the discovery is great, there are quotes that are very clickbaity like "They understood both the nutritional value of fat and how to access it efficiently.”

No they didn't understand the nutritional value better than any other homo something before or after, or even any carnivorous animals. It's just that evolution engineered them to look for food everywhere. For example the bearded vulture diet is based on bone and bone marrow, it's not because it understands the nutritional value of bone marrow better than the other birds but because all carnivorous animals evolved to eat fat, and evolution provided a way for this bird to get the marrow more easily than the others.
by seanhunter | 2025-07-07 11:52:50+00:00
Seems pretty straightforward depending on what large means here. When I worked in an algorithmic execution business of a broker, we had to always cap our order size as a percentage of average trade size and also cap our participation so we couldn’t ever be more than a certain % of the total market volume. This was precisely so that we wouldn’t ever push the market in the way JS are accused of doing here.

If you’re trading a large % of the market volume or your orders are large relative to anyone else, you can’t claim to be arbitraging as you are executing way beyond the capacity of any kind of arb. You’re just doing the old fashioned abusive market corner in fancy clothing.
by lofaszvanitt | 2025-07-07 11:53:02+00:00
To be honest... in the last 10 years, there were maybe 1 or 2 AAA games I revisited and played multiple times. The quality is getting worse and worse. Every game steals/implements well known, 20 year old mechanics from other games, the story is for 12 year olds, same old shit repeated again and again. Basically aggressive, spoiled children in adult body commandeer 100s of people and create these godawful monstrosities.
by vrighter | 2025-07-07 11:53:03+00:00
only if you lower your standards as to what "quite well". The biggest con by the AI industry so far is convincing people that 90% is somehow "quite well".

90% is only enough for uninformed people to buy into it, and fuel the hype train. 90% is low enough to be pretty much unusable in most production environments.

This is like coding FizzBuzz but only emitting Fizz, Buzz or a number, and skiping FizzBuzz, then claiming that your system is 93.3% accurate because only every 15th output is wrong. 93.3% is utter crap.
by Y-bar | 2025-07-07 11:53:23+00:00
> significant running costs

Exactly this.

The running costs per produced MW is so high that governments has to promise to effectively pay billions in subsidies to NPP:s both in terms of cheap state-backed loans and contract-for-difference power price because because they would otherwise not be viable.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/sweden-proposes-stat...
by MarkusWandel | 2025-07-07 11:54:16+00:00
Works perfectly in Desktop Google Chrome. And on a 13 year old computer, running in Javascript, is lightning fast. Just shows how lean software can be and how responsive a desktop environment should be. Not that it was that fast originally. Never used a Lisa, but did use an original Mac 512K and the GUI environment was "ambitious" for the CPU of the day.
by stoneyhrm1 | 2025-07-07 11:54:33+00:00
I mean you can boil anything down to it's building blocks and make it seem like it didn't 'decide' anything. When you as a human decide something, your brain and it's neurons just made some connections with an output signal sent to other parts that resulting in your body 'doing' something.

I don't think LLMs are sentient or any bullshit like that, but I do think people are too quick to write them off before really thinking about how a nn 'knows things' similar to how a human 'knows' things, it is trained and reacts to inputs and outputs. The body is just far more complex.
by JimDabell | 2025-07-07 11:55:24+00:00
> this is a "can a submarine swim" problem IMO. We need a new word for what LLMs are doing.

Why?

A plane is not a fly and does not stay aloft like a fly, yet we describe what it does as flying despite the fact that it does not flap its wings. What are the downsides we encounter that are caused by using the word “fly” to describe a plane travelling through the air?
by DocTomoe | 2025-07-07 11:55:27+00:00
Any time a new technology makes people uncomfortable, someone pulls the CO₂ card. We've seen this with cryptocurrencies, electric cars, even the internet itself.

But curiously, the same people rarely question the CO₂ footprint of things like gaming, streaming, international sports, live concerts, political campaigns, or even large-scale scientific research. Methane-fueled rockets and the LHC don't exactly run on solar-powered calculators, yet they're culturally or intellectually "approved" forms of emission.

Yes, AI consumes energy. So does everything else we choose to value. If we're serious about CO₂, then we need consistent standards — not just selective outrage. Either we cut fairly across the board, or we focus on making electricity cleaner and more sustainable, instead of trying to shame specific technologies into nonexistence (which, by the way, never happens).
by lou1306 | 2025-07-07 11:56:25+00:00
> Well, that's because they're really languages and not dialects!

Indeed they are not strictly dialects of Italian, which followed its own evolution alongside them. I think most of them could still be explained as dialects of Latin, who underwent major "niche differentiation" in the immediate aftermath of the fall of Rome and the rise of barbaric kingdoms.

> [Italian] was mostly a written/literary language before that.

This is a bit of an exaggeration. Clearly, even before the early modern era "Italians" could understand each other. Dante (from Florence) lived in Genoa and Ravenna, and had no need for an interpreter from what we can gather. Ditto the many "Renaissance men" who toured around Italy (Leonardo: Florence->Milan; Raphael and Michelangelo: Florence->Rome; Galileo:Pisa->Padua). This level of interconnection becomes really hard to explain without a high degree of mutual intelligibility.
by throwawayqqq11 | 2025-07-07 11:56:43+00:00
Its not just about the creators bias. Any communication needs to be interpreted by sender and reciever and when that interpretation differs, communication starts to fail.

Recievers of such messages might see it as political when you speak about covid/masks, climate change, etc. no matter how hard you try to be unbiased. Unfortunately, anything can be a political symbol and you can either choose to accept their bias and avoid the symbol to stay "apolitical" or accept the "niche" you have been put into.

"99% of climatologist agree on ... yet, joining us, guru shananda, opposing it with equal air time" is a noble but net-negative attempt to address that bias.
by adityaathalye | 2025-07-07 11:57:12+00:00
My brain refuses to join the rah-rah bandwagon because I cannot see them in my mind’s eye. Sometimes I get jealous of people like GP and OP who clearly seem to have the sight. (Being a serial math exam flunker might have something to do with it. :))))

Anyway, one does what one can.

(I've been trying to picture abstract visual and semi-philosophical approximations which I’ll avoid linking here because they seem to fetch bad karma in super-duper LLM enthusiast communities. But you can read them on my blog and email me scathing critiques, if you wish :sweat-smile:.)
by ViolentMoon | 2025-07-07 11:57:52+00:00
Unfortunately (but given the slant of all her other articles, most likely intentionally), the author suffers from one major oversight:

The absence of labels is just as much of a marketing gimmick as their presence. Even anti-identitarianism will be weaponized. Even nothing is something. Eliminate all the labels and concepts and redundancies, and you are yet left with a "natural, unspoken, normal default" state of being.

And as it turns out, there are plenty of forces out there willing to exploit that appeal towards the "the unspoken", for either financial or political gain. The question remains, then: who or what gets to determine this unspoken part of life?