MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mandmandam | 2025-07-22 09:32:31+00:00
You can do all the 'proving your chops' and in-the-box thinking in the world and still get ostracized for your creative insight.

* Semmelweis - medicine. Demonstrated textbook obstetric technique at Vienna General Hospital, then produced statistically impeccable data showing that hand-washing slashed puerperal fever mortality. Colleagues drove him out of the profession, and he died in an asylum.

* Barbara McClintock - genetics. Member of the National Academy, meticulous corn geneticist; her discovery of “jumping genes” (transposons) was ignored for 30 years and derided as “mysticism.”

* Georg Cantor - mathematics. Earned a Ph.D. and published dozens of orthodox papers before writing on transfinite numbers; was then declared “a corrupter of youth”. Career was blocked, contributing to a breakdown.

* Douglas Engelbart - computer science. Published conventional reports for years. When he presented the mouse, hypertext, and videoconferencing in “The Mother of All Demos” (1968), ARPA funding was slashed and he was professionally sidelined for the next twenty years.

Then you've got Stravinsky, Van Gogh, Caravaggio, James Joyce; all who displayed perfect 'classical' techniques before doing their own thing.

In economics you've got Joan Robinson and Elinor Ostrom.

And let's not forget Galileo. I'd even put Assange in this list.

So, "following the rules" before attempting to revolutionize your field doesn't seem to actually help all that much. This is a major problem, consistent across many centuries and cultures, which ought to be recognized more.
by psychoslave | 2025-07-22 09:32:50+00:00
Zero is taught routinely to primary schoolers today, but it has been a hard thing to come with for scholar who struggled to nail as smooth as a concept as we know it now.

The bias toward familiarity is detrimental to edge research, but on the other hand if no one smooth the baseline, most advanced knownledge will remain just that and will never reach their full utility to humans. Finding the proper set of concepts that makes it click can be very complicated. Finding a communicable simple thought framework to let other also enjoy it and leverage on it to go further can be at least as hard.
by alganet | 2025-07-22 09:34:50+00:00
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, since it seems that people actually need to proper understand the expectations of such technologies before using them.

However, since we're talking about fiction and metaphors, I find it lacking in nuance.

I understand that you are compelled to repeat the idea that "it's just a next word predictor", and it probably is, but I'm not sure if the agency and consciousness discussions fit the theme of the conversation.
by zenolijo | 2025-07-22 09:34:52+00:00
I work for a company with 1000+ people in RnD doing software development. 80% of those use Ubuntu and have one desktop and one laptop (HP EliteBooks) and that works fine.

You are right that not all devices don't work perfectly, but the Bluetooth headsets, Bluetooth mouses, conference rooms etc. that the company supports are tested for compatibility before being bought by our IT department.
by nchmy | 2025-07-22 09:35:35+00:00
Here's a few great links that might be what you're looking for

https://v5.chriskrycho.com/essays/jj-init/ https://v5.chriskrycho.com/journal/jujutsu-megamerges-and-jj... https://ofcr.se/jujutsu-merge-workflow
by jillesvangurp | 2025-07-22 09:37:59+00:00
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/explain-how-france-pays-for...

Here you go. Fairly detailed overview of how most of the cost is not factored into the monthly bills consumers pay. It basically involves a lot of state backed debt, subsidies, etc. Also note the massive investment in a waste storage facility.
by al_borland | 2025-07-22 09:41:15+00:00
This isn’t really a new problem, we just have new tool to highlight it with.

People have been developing tools to democratize software development for decades. No-code, low-code, “Watch me do” scripts, etc.

The gap is the understanding that the computer can do work for you, and you can control what work it does automatically. I’ve seen non-coders hack stuff together with a little Google-fu 20 years ago.

Generally people need a problem that’s annoying enough to need solving, and they need enough of those problems to start to build that muscle to start solving more minor things.

In college I had programming classes. I did well in them, but it felt like a paint by number. I wasn’t solving my own problems and after the class I never touched it again. It wasn’t until years later at work where some things became annoying enough to start automating stuff. Now automation is my full time job. But even with that, it took years for any of that to transfer to my personal life. I just didn’t have any problems that were annoying enough to solve.

These days when I reach for a little code to help solve a problem for someone, it’s not that they lack the tools, they lack the mental framework to make something custom, and even the hour or prompting the author mentions is too much. The problem isn’t that big for them.

I think things like Apple’s writing tools are going to be more what people actually use. For example, telling it to turn data in one format into a table. This is a really annoying task to do manually that AI can take care of with a quick prompt. Even stuff like this, I think it will take a while for people to see it enough that they think to use it.

While there are things I have today that wouldn’t exist without AI, because I wouldn’t have bothered, I think it will be the largely the same people making stuff. They’ll just make a little more. Maybe some people on the fringe will start making stuff, but I suspect they’d make stuff either way, even if it’s just some Apple Shortcuts or a little bit of Powershell.
by WA | 2025-07-22 09:41:42+00:00
> Imagine if these "products" were subject to the laws of product liability in the United States like real products sold there.

Software products are products and they come with liability. Maybe many bullshit apps can't cause any harm and don't really matter, but most evident is software in the medical space. Also, if you step outside of the US, software products in the EU must comply with the GDPR. If you fail to comply, you are held liable.
by mathw | 2025-07-22 09:41:42+00:00
My understanding is that more recent fission reactor designs are done in such a way that they fail in ways which cause the reaction to diminish rather than build up further, which puts you in a better place than, say, Chernobyl.

You still have a very hot very radioactive lump of death in the middle of your busted reactor when it's all done though, and that's definitely not fun. Fusion failure modes - in current designs anyway - are far more appealing to anybody who happens to be in the area at the time.
by dzaima | 2025-07-22 09:42:17+00:00
I specifically have the WIP head description include the name of bookmark that it's attached to, if any (emulating git's non-detached head), so can't leave it empty (and generally wouldn't want to, for easy way to identify it, esp. with multiple workspaces).

Some push blocker for certain commit name patterns would make sense to look into.
by lostlogin | 2025-07-22 09:42:50+00:00
No.

There isn't a restraint strong enough to prevent image degradation from movement. Clench and unclench a muscle group and you'll ruin images through that area.

Breath-holding can be controlled via the anaesthetist. For example, cardiac imaging on young humans requires a GA. Tying down a kid to force them into a scanner would be brutal? No thanks. Many are just terrified, and will remember the event, making subsequent scans even harder. This doesn't seem like something anyone would advocate.
by ben_w | 2025-07-22 09:44:51+00:00
> Processed food is, in a sense, pre digested.

While true, this is also the case with all cooking, which makes it difficult to separate the various other things.

Don't get me wrong, the older I get the more negligence I see in corporations promoting their new things, so I'm now absolutely on-board with a cautious and conservative set of testing requirements for novel foods.

This is just to say that the boundary condition for such novelty isn't what most people think it is.
by 0points | 2025-07-22 09:45:09+00:00
Interesting! I used whipser last year to attempt to build an audio transcription tool but gave up due to excessive amount of hallucinated output no matter what model I used.

It would produce seemingly ok output until you started paying attention.

One example, it insisted that Biggie Smalls sings "Puttin five carrots in my baby girl ear". (its "carats").

It's apparently not useful in transcription as it don't reason [sic].
by pjmlp | 2025-07-22 09:45:16+00:00
Only if you are talking about UCSD Pascal on the early Apple systems, which the article touches on.

AppToolbox exists and has required for all Mac systems since the classic model.

It was later on replaced by the C++ version when MPW was introduced, and all the plain C like functions, where actually C++ under the hood with extern "C".

Apple like Microsoft and IBM, all pretty much into OOP for userspace frameworks early on, where UNIX birthplace of C++, was still a C land for the most part, with exception of efforts at Sun and NeXT.
by surgical_fire | 2025-07-22 09:45:26+00:00
The answer is to redistribute the excessive wealth to the population, be it theough improvements in public infrastructure, be it through providing better and cheaper access to things such as healthcare and education, be it through more direct direct means (e.g.: welfare).

Yes, this is done through the government. While the government as an institution should be scrutinized and not necessarily get blind faith, it at least has the pretense of looking after the needs of the population.
by 1718627440 | 2025-07-22 09:47:09+00:00
Fair enough, the implementation can be messy, which I know nothing about, while input and output data can still be clean and well defined.

It absolutely displays outgoing mails, that's what I was saying. It hasn't ocurred to me that it potentially couldn't, then it would be kind of worthless. Not sure why you have this bug, but that isn't normal, maybe you can report it?
by penguin_booze | 2025-07-22 09:47:46+00:00
> Seems they really want to revert everything that made the US a world leader.

Conservatives takes different names in different places. Calling the spade a spade, a more truthful name is 'Reggressives', no matter what the colour on the banner is. The signatures of regressivism is , among others, the yearning for the past, to bring back the old ways of life, the predisposition for worship (idolatry)--be that of imaginary creatures or very wealthy people.

Some of us would find it really hard to imagine why some others would say, "yes please, more oil. I really would love to inhale more toxic fumes". Yet, such people exist. I can't explain why.
by akimbostrawman | 2025-07-22 09:48:47+00:00
Because most people can't help but anthropomorphise anything vaguely human and would demand such characteristics which the provider use as a selling point. that's why we even consider current AI, AI despite the lack of any actual intelligence which would be closer to machine learning.

Just look at how people interact with small robots. They don't even need animal feature for most to interact with them like they are small animals.

It is very annoying and inefficient for anybody able to look below the surface and just wants to use the tool as a tool.
by turboponyy | 2025-07-22 09:50:18+00:00
Can you edit commits by adding on only parts of your "staging" area?

Because that's my workflow. I produce a few focused and semantically coherent commits that I'd like to apply to the codebase, where each keeps the codebase in a working state. I might be working on more than one thing at once, but I know which commit each set of changes should "live in."

An append-only log of commits is decidedly not something I want. Is jj amenable to this?
by mellosouls | 2025-07-22 09:50:55+00:00
Its not simply outsourcing. Its using offshoring to hypocritically, dishonestly and deliberately trash native jobs and salaries, while (normally) maintaining those of the decision-makers.

I'm not against realistic economics and open markets leading to a more balanced world, but this is just shark-toothed capitalism with contempt for individuals and the societies the organisations exist in.
by chiefalchemist | 2025-07-22 09:51:12+00:00
You missed the point. For all intents and purposes this is (data) cherry picking. Slice and dice enough and you can find whatever it is you’re trying to prove. Done properly, that’s not how it works.

An obvious and classic case of lies, damn lies and statistics. Also file under: there’s a sucker born everyday.

Again. Interesting and almost thought provoking but ultimately inconclusive cherry picking.

Re: “ They're trying to exclude participants who can introduce possible errors.”

Are they? How can we be sure? Or are they crafting the subset to get the conclusion they’re looking to “prove”?

I’m not saying they’ve been nefarious. I’m saying it’s painfully obvious we can’t be sure (due to all the heavy handed hand crafting of the subset).
by nchmy | 2025-07-22 09:51:14+00:00
Completely agreed. I've been evangelizing jjui even more than I do jj!

And, you're right, it's powers largely come from the underlying jj - it mostly just runs jj commands behind the scenes, parses the output, and displays it. But it's all so beautiful, seamless etc..

I can't wait to really dig into the big additions released yesterday in v0.9.0 - themes, vim-like leader key shortcuts, other shortcuts etc...
by adrian_b | 2025-07-22 09:52:14+00:00
This kind of unsafe union has already been present in the first FORTRAN version from 1956, as the statement EQUIVALENCE.

Presumably this was inspired by existing practices in the assembly-language programs.

Many early programming languages have followed the example of FORTRAN.

In October 1964, John McCarthy (which had not only been leading the development of the first LISP, but he had also been a major contributor to ALGOL) has proposed the keyword "union" and he had advocated for safer implementations of disjoint union types. The first such implementation has been in ALGOL 68, a few years later.

Unfortunately, the C language has taken the "union" keyword from ALGOL 68, but instead of implementing proper disjoint union types, the C "union" has been made essentially identical with the FORTRAN EQUIVALENCE from 1956.

The "variant record" of Pascal, was not really better, so that can also be counted as a failure to implement proper union types.

For a long time Pascal and C have been among the most popular programming languages, creating bad habits in the use of unions.
by aniforprez | 2025-07-22 09:52:22+00:00
I'm not sure if there's advanced commands that GitHub Desktop does more with but for the most part it's just a porcelain frontend that works great for doing simple operations but can't do things like interactive rebases, reflogs, blames and so on. It's a pretty simple frontend to get started if you're just learning git. There's not much it does that's GitHub specific. If you're logged in, it will easily checkout your upstream repos.
by WA | 2025-07-22 09:52:57+00:00
I think Pieter is actually legit, even though his bad takes on things started to increase in the last few years. But his products?

- Nomadlist solved a problem, especially back then: a social network for digital nomads. Nothing wrong with it.

- Remoteok is a job board, but niched down, which is completely ok

- photoai / interiorai: it pains me that an AI slop generator is obviously a viable business model, but apparently many people are willing to pay for this

The rest is indeed brand effect. That shitty flight simulator wouldn't have gotten any traction if it wasn't for being part of "a community".

But, and this is the most important thing I like about Pieter: he doesn't sell shovels in a gold rush. His products solve problems for quite different groups of people and X isn't necessarily the primary marketing platform for his stuff.

There are others in the indie hacker scene that are way more shady, because they make their money from products that sell that lifestyle first and foremost.
by pbmonster | 2025-07-22 09:53:00+00:00
It appears they have not been training on the official studio subtitle files, but on community transcriptions/translations commonly distributed with torrents.

So not only are they training on copyrighted material, but they didn't even pay for it once, and then they didn't even do minimal data cleaning before training. Which, by the way, is the type of cleaning their LLMs could have done.
by surgical_fire | 2025-07-22 09:53:29+00:00
Did you just come out of a coma?

The destructive and unchecked accumulation of wealth in SV is what allowed the creation of monstrosities such as the gig economy and massive surveillance.

At the present moment in time it even allowed some tech oligarchs to directly influence elections in their favor, gaining access direct access to the high levels of government to have nugde government actions inntheir favor, curb regulatory interference that might put checks in their companies, etc.

I am presuming younasked from a position of ignorance rather than finding all this desirable somehow.
by ivape | 2025-07-22 09:53:31+00:00
I’m trying to figure out the cost predictability angle here. It seems like they still have a cost per input/output tokens, so how is it any different? Also, do I have to assume one gpu instance will scale automatically as traffic goes up?

LLM pricing is pretty intense if you’re using anything beyond a 8b model, at least that’s what I’m noticing on OpenRouter. 3-4 calls can approach eating up a $1 with bigger models, and certainly on frontier ones.
by LeroyRaz | 2025-07-22 09:53:42+00:00
The article is misleading and badly written. None of the mentioned works seem to have used language or knowledge based models.

It looks like all the results were driven by optimization algorithms, and yet the writing describes AI 'using' concepts and "tricks". This type of language is entirely inappropriate and misleading when describing these more classical (if advanced) optimization algorithms.

Looking at the paper in the first example, they used an advanced gradient descent based optimization algorithm, yet the article describes "that the AI was probably using some esoteric theoretical principles that Russian physicists had identified decades ago to reduce quantum mechanical noise."

Ridiculous, and highly misleading. There is no conceptual manipulation or intuition being used by the AI algorithm! It's an optimization algorithm searching a human coded space using a human coded simulator.
by wongarsu | 2025-07-22 09:55:02+00:00
Your prayers have been (partially) heard. The EU Battery Regulation of 2023 demands that starting February 2027 batteries in all devices have to be user-replaceable with commercially available tools (or for watertight devices or some special device categories replaceable by an independent professional), that replacement batteries have to be available at reasonable prices and that use of third party batteries should not be prevented

Lobbyists have worked hard to weaken the regulation, but it should still be a major improvement over the status quo
by redhale | 2025-07-22 09:55:56+00:00
My second favorite show of all time (second only to Arrested Development). Many shows have memorable/quotable lines, but 30 Rock has more memorable lines per season than many shows do in their entire run. It is rapid fire on another level.

My favorite that I use on a regular basis, from Tracy: "I can't change! I'm like a chameleon -- always a lizard."
by anthelios | 2025-07-22 09:56:15+00:00
I was visiting the UK the other day, went to the supermarket and saw discounts for loyalty card owners. Didn't want to waste any money and a quick Google Image search gave me a barcode I could scan. Then I thought, why don't get charities / clubs / nice people to benefit from this so I built a little static site and now I need people to send me images of cards for others to scan.
by dspillett | 2025-07-22 09:56:27+00:00
I used to use WindowMaker back when I regularly used Linux on the desktop¹, and as I'm about to pave a Win10 desktop & laptop and Linux them rather than being forced down the Win11 route² I'm considering trying it again.

Is it currently maintained though? The main page for it states “Latest source of stable version is 0.96.0, released on 2023-08-05.”. The previous couple of releases where a few years apart so this could just be because it is largely (entirely?) feature complete but still actually supported, or not…

--------

[1] I still use Linux a lot, but mostly server-side via CLI rather than anything GUI. Those few occasions when I've found myself using something in the GUI fold it is usually via X remoting (via SSH) or where I'm working more offline such as with a LiveCD I just use whatever the default is for the distro I'm interacting with.

[2] It won't even officially run on this desktop, and I refuse to use hacky tools to get around that so that I can regrade to something I don't even want, and Win10 has had a couple of issues on the laptop (wrt waking from sleep, or not) for a couple of years (it used to be fine, the issues started immediately after one of the big updates, I forget which, various firmware and driver updates since have had no lasting effect).
by victorbjorklund | 2025-07-22 09:56:58+00:00
Remember a lot of large mulinational companies are larger than many small countries so if you have a very large multinational company you're gonna have the same type of corruption and inefficiency as in countries and governments. Of course if you have a small startup with 10 people and the owners are very involved in the day-to-day business they can probably spot when there is underperformance but in a multinational company where you can barely know who is responsible for what probably not.
by moontear | 2025-07-22 09:56:58+00:00
NYT is a good example though - I will not pay for a subscription, since I really don't consume it that much. But I would LOVE to pay for an article / a podcast here and there. Let me pay 50c for this one article and I'd gladly pay for it. Unfortunately this doesn't fit the subscription model and publishers are too afraid (I assume) to offer this additional model since there are a lot of subscribers also paying the full subscription fee and not using the service a lot (just like me).
by eulgro | 2025-07-22 09:57:41+00:00
I've never tried jj, but recently I discovered lazygit which in my opinion comes pretty close to perfection.

Rebasing can be done instantly (reorder commits, fixups, squash), I can extract and reverse custom patches from previous commits, I can partially stage files, undo.

One think I like is that it explains what it does in terms of git commands. So it helps a little to have a good git mental model, and as such I guess it doesn't solve the same thing as jj.
by darthrupert | 2025-07-22 09:57:44+00:00
You can consider your perfect conversion rate now broken; I tried jujutsu on a personal project and found it to be a hassle without any upsides.

I believe your perception is flawed because the people who just try it and throw it away don't tend to talk about it because it's not popular enough to warrant even a twitter comment. This is the first time I got the impulse to share this but only because you claimed a rather silly 100% conversion rate.
by pjmlp | 2025-07-22 09:58:22+00:00
Go only enjoys widespread adoption thanks to Docker and Kubernetes success in the industry, had it not been the case, we would be talking about it just like we talk about Limbo and Oberon-2, its influences.

The kind of folks that dropped Python and Java for Go, would not have picked up OCaml even if it had a better concurrency story 10-15 years ago.