MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Show HN: I made Instant Resume to make your resume in minutes
by tanveerulhoque | 2025-07-15 13:43:57+00:00
Hi HN! I’m Tanveer, a software engineer from Bangladesh. A few years ago, I needed to quickly create a resume after graduation. I searched online but found most resume builders either too complicated, paywalled, or bloated with upsells. I ended up using MS Word — and honestly, it was painful. It took me days to get it right. That frustration stayed with me for years.

I always had this idea in the back of my mind — to build something simple, fast, and affordable that anyone could use, no matter where they’re from or what device they’re on. So last year, I finally started working on Instant Resume. At first, I barely made progress while juggling a full-time job and freelancing. But a few months ago, I decided to go all in — nights, weekends, everything. Now it's live: https://www.instantresume.online/
by qn9n | 2025-07-15 13:43:59+00:00
I used to work tech support as well... For this case if I was on a user machine and needed to browse for apps I would open Finder.app and navigate to /Applications, this is what I did even with Launchpad existing because it's more convenient to navigate and search as it's just a standard window instead of some full screen thing. This would mean I could continue reading documentation alongside the finder window.

> sometimes with custom hackery to get different versions running in parallel and stuff.

Most users just aren't doing this, they open up their Mac, install a few applications and then just use it as intended; they don't need to customise things and wouldn't care to spend the time even if it benefited them. If they are capable of implementing these custom hacks and things they are likely intelligent enough to navigate via Finder and Spotlight for almost all use cases.

> If you can name the 20 apps you use the most often, you are the elite of the elite, the top 1% of 1% of computer users.

I don't think so, most people I know whether that's friends or colleagues (some technical, some not) use maybe 3–5 apps:

Browser Word Processer Spreadsheets Notes Task Management (reminders, asana, jira or something) Music Player (some just use the browser)

people don't have 20+ applications to remember day in day out.

Hell even as a power user I only really use:

Terminal Browser IDE Creative Tools (Logic, Final Cut, Compressor, etc.) Notes Reminders Music Player
by ceejayoz | 2025-07-15 13:44:00+00:00
> But cops throwing a tantrum causing a crime spike proves their worth.

If we pretend the spike didn't happen during COVID and in other countries, sure.

> You can’t advocate for abolishing cops and also complain about cops self abolishing.

Sure you can, for the same reason I can get mad at my neighbor if they demolish a shed with a nuke rather than a screwdriver.
by syndeo | 2025-07-15 13:44:02+00:00
This. Exactly this.

As a web dev, I happen to love some of the tech advancements in Chromium, and as a nerd, I'd be thrilled to see it on iOS, just for the fun technical novelty of it all. But allowing it on iOS will downright kill WebKit, as web devs will just code for Chrome (as they already do). The floodgates will be opened.

As a user, I value battery life, smooth performance, and system integration (technically and visually). It's great to use an Apple browser on an Apple OS, just as it is nice to use Chrome on Android—everything fits together.

Gosh, I miss the pre-Blink days when WebKit was able to benefit from Chromium, but alas…
by JohnFen | 2025-07-15 13:44:41+00:00
It's the enormous blind spot that Big Tech tends to have: it completely ignores the concept of a cost/benefit calculation and simply assumes that everything that it comes up with is all upside. In fact, a great deal of what it comes up with these days costs more than than the benefit can justify.

The one weird exception is with the genAI companies, who demonstrated their complete lack of ethics by being very clear that the cost they'll be imposing on society may be extreme (up to potentially extinction) but that they're willing to gamble all of our lives on it anyway.
by api | 2025-07-15 13:44:59+00:00
I don't like (most) Anime (I feel like it's one way I diverge from typical geek culture) but I do often like foreign movies and TV shows more than domestic ones. That's probably an effect too.

On the flip side, I've heard the blandness of larger ticket domestic US films in terms of things like sexual, religious, or political themes attributable to global distribution. Many culture are much more sexually conservative, and most overseas cultures outside maybe Canada and some of Europe would not get (or care about) US politics.
by antonvs | 2025-07-15 13:45:08+00:00
Probably the biggest Eliza-like program is ALICE[1], which used a more formalized rule representation called AIML. The size of ALICE distributions is in the single-digit megabytes.

Systems like that don't scale in a human effort sense - i.e. the amount of effort required compared to the value produced is not worthwhile.

Aside from that, models like that didn't have a true grammar model. They responded to keywords, which meant that their responses were often not relevant to the input.

> "Prior to the rise of LLMs, such a thing would be a waste of time by any respectable AI researcher because it obviously isn't related to intelligence."

You might imagine so, but that wasn't really the case. ALICE won the Loebner AI prize multiple times, for example. Before neural networks started "taking over", it wasn't obvious to everyone what direction AI progress might come from.

People even tried to extend ELIZA/ALICE style models, with one of the most prominent examples being MegaHAL[2], which also won a Loebner prize. MegaHAL used a Markov model, so wasn't purely based on hardcoded rules, but like ELIZA and ALICE it still didn't understand grammar.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_Linguistic_Internet...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MegaHAL
by jerf | 2025-07-15 13:45:33+00:00
The industry should be so lucky as to be plagued with something as well-defined as "literalism". Right now the industry is plagued with writers who would fail Writing 101. Which I mean fully literally. Failing grade, please retake the class, no credit.

And don't give me "oh, they know their craft so completely that they're breaking the rules they deeply understand". No. Hollywood is not putting out a whole bunch of Memento-caliber movies. They're putting out movies written by writers who would instantly experience a jump in quality if someone gave them an all-expenses paid trip to Los Angeles Community College for them to take Writing 101.

That said, I don't entirely blame the writers. I do blame them, because they really are terrible. But the real blame lies at the executive level. For decades Hollywood executives have used the terrible metrics we all made fun of them for, like thinking all we care about is which actor is in a movie or thinking that we like a legitimately good film because it was full of explosions or something. But the executives tended to get away with it, because sitting under them, however uncomfortably, was a studio system that still respected talent, and good talent could get good movies out even so. The executives could say "Give us lots of explosions and use Will Smith!" and the talent could at least sometimes make good movies under those constraints.

But the executives despised that system, failed to understand it, have now successfully disassembled that system, and what's left is disintegrating rapidly. It boggles my mind to see them pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into movies with catastrophically broken scripts, then pouring hundreds of millions more into reshoots, when any halfway decent TA grader from the aforementioned Writing 101 could have given a decent set of notes about the deficiencies of the original script. The execs seem to give no attention to the scripts, when they are by any measure one of the most foundational elements of a movie.

It's not literalism. The writers aren't good enough to be pursuing "literalism". It's just terrible writing, and executives too out-of-touch and ignorant to realize that's the problem, and if they did, too out-of-touch and ignorant to have any clue how to fix it.
by andai | 2025-07-15 13:46:35+00:00
Many people love games, and some of those even love making games, but few truly love to code.

I'm designing a simple game engine now and thinking, I shall have to integrate AI programming right into it, because the average user won't know how to code, and they'll try to use AI to code, and then the AI will frantically google for docs, and/or hallucinate, so I might as well set it up properly on my end.

In other words, I might as well design it so it's intuitive for the AI to use. And -- though I kind of hate to say this -- based on how the probabilistic LLMs work, the most reliable way to do that is to let the LLM design it itself. (With the temperature set to zero.)

i.e. design it so the system already matches how the LLM thinks such a system works. This minimizes the amount of prompting required to "correct" its behavior.

The passionate human programmer remains a primary target, and it's absolutely crucial that it remains pleasant for humans to code. It's just that most of them won't be in that category, they'll be using it "through" this new thing.
by mackid | 2025-07-15 13:46:44+00:00
Bill/MS acquired Connectix’s virtualization technology [1] in 2003. VirtualPC and Virtual Server went on to become Hyper-V and power Azure to this day. VPC was released in 1997 and VMW founded in 1998.

[1] https://news.microsoft.com/source/2003/02/19/microsoft-acqui...
by rchaud | 2025-07-15 13:46:47+00:00
It's the opposite. Episodes are lengthened with plot points being repeated through dialogue. Hour-long TV shows were really 40 minutes due to advertising, meanwhile on Netflix they are 50-plus minutes. Longer shows = more watch time recorded, which is Netflix's main KPI. Tiktok and others get long watch times because it's more like flipping through channels.
by reaperducer | 2025-07-15 13:47:15+00:00
What about DivX/XviD?

VCDs had broad hardware support, and were more mainstream.

I used to travel around Southeast Asia a bit, and whenever I was in Hong Kong, I'd load up on VCD movies at mainstream stores like HMV.

I still have VCD copies of The Incredibles and On Her Majesty's Secret Service I bought at HMV.
by viega | 2025-07-15 13:47:42+00:00
Well, the overhead of the stream API is in the noise. If the lexer / parser do not support incremental parsing, it doesn't really matter. But incremental parsing can be important in some situations. For instance, if you're parsing a 1GB json blob keeping the whole thing in memory at once can easily be an issue. Plus, if you stall waiting for the entire input string, you end up adding to latency, if that matters.
by andrepd | 2025-07-15 13:47:47+00:00
My grandma also uses saints for actual tasks (e.g. St Anthony for finding lost items), and they exibith those properties in observable ways (e.g. he found her sewing needles just last month). Perhaps the comparison is more appropriate than you realise.

> actually exhibit these properties in directly observable and measurable way

Well but do they? I don't mean your vibes, and I also don't mean cooked-up benchmarks. For example: https://metr.org/blog/2025-07-10-early-2025-ai-experienced-o...
by ceejayoz | 2025-07-15 13:47:54+00:00
> I guess it's possible someone did explain it to him, and David hasn't mentioned that in his diatribe.

Not just possible. Quite likely. It seems very clear the answer was "yes, that's how it works on Lambda, and it is not going to change" and this person said "but I want it to work the other way on Lambda".
by mapt | 2025-07-15 13:48:49+00:00
As a user not involved in android or linux development: I don't care. Fix it. You just don't break the entire ecosystem of unmaintained apps for a 3% performance improvement.

We maintained win32-x86 executable compatibility for decades. Keeping things working might require some sort of emulation layer, and it might impact performance substantially, and that's fine. I can accept that.

"Everything just stops working" is not an option for a real operating system. I don't expect to put my workshop tools away and wake up in the morning to find the toolchest manufacturer sent them to the landfill because they didn't efficiently fit their new drawers.

One of the areas that Android is common in that I couldn't possibly recommend is home automation. Your light switches are 50-year purchases. Odds that the app based light switches are working in five years are 50/50... Compound odds of longer are miniscule.
by nathan_douglas | 2025-07-15 13:49:31+00:00
I get a mixture of feelings from this.

On one hand, I respect the willfulness and wish I'd had that. I had ambition and hunger and brashness, but they really didn't get me as far as I might have thought.

On the other, I took a lot of classes, not because they were easy but because I wanted to explore some subject in good depth and wanted a guided tour. But I can't say I really put the effort into most of those classes that they deserved...

IDK. This was interesting, and a quick read. I'll send it to my kid, and I hope he'll read it, and I don't think I hope he'll follow the advice.
by darkwater | 2025-07-15 13:50:02+00:00
Looking from the perspective of other top tier European countries leagues (Spain & Italy), the English Premiere League is always seen as an example of more equal money distribution (beside having more absolute money in general, I think a newly promoted team there earns more from thei own league than the 5th club in Italy IIRC), so this article kind of surprised me. Is this a "point of view" issue or do we get factually wrong information outside England?
by JimmaDaRustla | 2025-07-15 13:50:04+00:00
The author seems to imply that the "framing" of an argument is done so in bad faith in order to win an argument but only provides one-line quotes where there is no contextual argument.

This tactic by the author is a straw-man argument - he's framing the position of tech leaders and our acceptance of it as the reason AI exists, instead of being honest, which is that they were simply right in their predictions: AI was inevitable.

The IT industry is full of pride and arrogance. We deny the power of AI and LLMs. I think that's fair, I welcome the pushback. But the real word the IT crowd needs to learn is "denialism" - if you still don't see how LLMs is changing our entire industry, you haven't been paying attention.

Edit: Lots of denialists using false dichotomy arguments that my opinion is invalid because I'm not producing examples and proof. I guess I'll just leave this: https://tools.simonwillison.net/
by jplusequalt | 2025-07-15 13:50:04+00:00
TBH, most of your points are a bit of a reach.

>They used 16 developers. The confidence intervals are wide and a few atypical issues per dev could swing the headline figure

This is reasonable, but there have been enough anecdotal evidence from developers over the last 3 years for me to believe the data is measuring something real.

>Veteran maintainers on projects they know inside-out. This is a bias

I think this is complete BS. The study was trying to measure the real world impact of these tools with experienced developers. I think having them try them out on greenfield work, or a code-base they are not familiar with, makes it harder to measure this.

Also, let's be honest--if the study showed that LLMs DID increase productivity on greenfield work, does that even matter? How many developers out there are starting greenfield projects on a weekly basis? I'd argue very few. So if the study is suggesting that experienced developers are better working on code they're already familiar with without the assistance of an LLM, then that means the vast majority of software development work could be better off without LLMs.

>Devs supplied the issue list (then randomized) which still leads to subtle self-selection bias. Maintainers may pick tasks they enjoy or that showcase deep repo knowledge—exactly where AI probably has least marginal value

Again, for MANY developers, they are going to have deep repo knowledge. If they're not faster with LLMs, despite the knowledge, why use them? You're trying to prop up this as bias against the study, but IMO you're missing the point.
by xpe | 2025-07-15 13:50:08+00:00
What technology? Agriculture? The steam engine? The automobile? Modern medicine? Cryptography? The Internet? LLMs? Nanotechnology?

Who are these people? Jonas Salk, widely credited as the inventor of the polio vaccine? Sam Altman, fundraiser extraordinaire? Peter Thiel, exalter of The World-Saving Founders? Ray Kurzweil? Technocrats? Other techno-optimists? Perhaps transhumanists? There are many variations, and they differ by quite a lot.

What kind of god? Carl Sagan has a nice interview where he asks a question-asker to define what they mean by “god”. A blind watchmaker? Someone who can hear your prayers? A wrathful smoter of the wicked and (sometimes) the loyal (sorry, Job!)? A very confusing 3-tuple, one element of which birthed another, who died somehow but was resurrected? The essence of nature? The laws of physics? An abstract notion of love? Yeah. These three letters are too vague to be useful unless unpacked or situated in a mutually understood context. It often fosters a flimsy consensus or a shallow disagreement.
by like_any_other | 2025-07-15 13:50:17+00:00
> Juries, widely trusted to impartially deliver justice, are the most familiar instance.

Trusted by those that have not looked into whether this is actually the case. The first prime minister of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, was famously against trial by jury, because of how easily lawyers can abuse biases in multiracial societies, based on his first-hand experience [1].

A UK study found his experience is the norm, not the exception - Black and minority ethnic (BME) jurors vote guilty 73% of the time against White defendants, but only 24% of the time against BME defendants [2]. (White jurors vote 39% and 32% for convicting White and BME defendants, respectively. You read that correctly - Whites are also biased against other Whites, but to a much lesser degree)

Edit: To answer what is the alternative to juries: Not all countries use juries, in some the decision is up to the judge, and in some, like France, they use a mixed system of judges and jurors on a panel [3]. The French system would be my personal preference, with the classic jury system coming in second, despite my jury-critical post. Like democracy, it's perhaps the least bad system that we have, but we shouldn't be under any illusions about how impartial and perceptive a group of 12 people selected at random is.

[1] https://postcolonialweb.org/singapore/government/leekuanyew/...

[2] https://www.ucl.ac.uk/judicial-institute/sites/judicial-inst... - page 165 (182 by pdf reader numbering), figure 6.4

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury
by jstummbillig | 2025-07-15 13:50:31+00:00
Fair enough! I would wager that shaping what we ask of it will become more important, remain non-trivial, and good software will integrate software design and company design beyond what it is today. Someone or something has to bring a vision and a reason why the thing is being done at all. I imagine as long as taste exists, that will involve humans at some level.
by JKCalhoun | 2025-07-15 13:50:51+00:00
I remember the Tylenol hysteria (in the 1980's?) when there were a few poisonings.

It may well be that the legitimate drug manufacturers benefit from tight regulation by the FDA. They can give them legitimacy when the public may otherwise overreact.

I'm not sure an anything-goes environment is going to be something they're going to enjoy. Oh well.
by dfxm12 | 2025-07-15 13:51:17+00:00
I think some films, especially movies that aspire to win academy awards, are meant to be played to the world wide lowest common denominator. Movies are made for USA and Chinese audiences first, but they are also made to be easily sold in Europe.

This isn't to say that Hollywood thinks everyone is dumb, but they recognize that all these different people who grew up in different places aren't going to understand the same idioms, or may miss subtle, cultural clues. The director has to spell things out. This explains a lot of what the author coins New Literalism.
by throwawayohio | 2025-07-15 13:52:05+00:00
I think the last few years (probably longer, it's just more pronounced now) have shown us the social impact of lowering the time kids spend together, particularly at school. This person thinks that they've hacked the system, but in reality this all could have been achieved in most high quality school systems in the US (they say they were socialized into the "college rat race" so I assume they were in an area where this was the case). Kids in Maryland and Virginia public school systems are regularly in community college classes by senior year.

Amusingly, they have other pro-natalism writing where they argue for social reintegration. What a mess.
by anton-c | 2025-07-15 13:52:06+00:00
I can't even understand how supernovae emit like "more energy than than the sun over it's entire lifetime"

Just... how? I get what happens with fusion but the numbers are so mind boggling. And it makes what seems like a terrifying ball of fire appear as a space heater in comparison. It's nuts. The GW thing you mention is near incomprehensible to me.
by ceejayoz | 2025-07-15 13:52:16+00:00
> You are not treating these issues with the same rigor. Can't you recognize that?

Sure. I have an opinion on the two issues. "Encryption good" is not something I personally feel needs a bunch of references. If someone else does, they can ask for it.

"License plate readers good" is something I'd want more evidence for, because the downsides seem much clearer to me, and the upsides of their widespread adoption over the last decade don't appear to show up in crime stats. I know they're everywhere in my town… and it doesn't seem to have done much?

If someone asserts "I am Chris" I will believe them. If they assert "I am the LORD, your God", I will require slightly more evidence. You may find both claims equally believable; that is your right.
Show HN: RAGsplain – What does your RAG model see before it answers?
by fredthedeve | 2025-07-15 13:52:50+00:00
Are your RAG models hallucinating? Maybe the issue isn't the LLM, but the retrieval phase.

I built RAGsplain (ragsplain.com) to help debug this. You upload documents (PDFs, audio, YouTube links), choose a retrieval method (semantic, keyword, or hybrid), and see the exact chunks of context passed to the model — match scores included.

Turns out: when retrieval is bad, even the best model can’t think straight.

It’s open and free to use. Would love feedback from folks building RAG pipelines.
by rpdillon | 2025-07-15 13:53:04+00:00
To be fair, after watching a bunch of Rick Beato's videos on YouTube, I'm realizing this is how the music industry actually works, regardless of whether or not AI is involved. Maybe 'create' isn't such a bad word for it!

Like, I didn't know the name Jack Antonoff before I watched those videos, but I sure do now. Gareth Emery and Ashley Wallbridge's song CVNT5 also talks about this.

What you're really complaining about is the ever downward price pressure on creating music. AI is just a useful way to facilitate that, but the process of making music more cheaply has been going on for decades. It's the reason that record labels don't really sign rock bands anymore, because they're much more expensive than single person acts.
by alibasharat5 | 2025-07-15 13:53:08+00:00
Thanks for checking it out! Tech-wise: RobinRelay is built using Slack Events API + Supabase for alert history and AI Agents. We wanted to avoid building another dashboard. So the product works entirely in Slackfrom setup to insights to summaries. Would love to hear how your teams manage alert noise and if memory around incident history would be useful to you.