MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ants_everywhere | 2025-07-19 13:30:59+00:00
My writing style is pretty labor intensive [0]. I go through a lot of drafts and read things out loud to make sure they work well etc. And I tend to have a high standard for making sure I source things.

I personally think an LLM could help with some of this, and this is something I've been thinking about the past few days. But I'd have to build a pipeline and figure out a way to make it amplify what I like about my voice rather than have me speak through its voice.

I used to have a sort of puritanical view of art. And I think a younger version of myself would have been low key horrified at the amount of work in great art that was delegated to assistants. E.g. a sculptor (say Michelangelo) would typically make a miniature to get approval from patrons and the final sculpture would be scaled up. Hopefully for major works, the master was closely involved in the scaling up. But I would bet that for minor works (or maybe even the typical work) assistants did a lot of the final piece.

The same happens (and has always happened) with successful authors. Having assistants do bits here or there. Maybe some research, maybe some corrections, maybe some drafts. Possibly relying on them increasingly as you get later in your career or if you're commercially successful enough to need to produce at greater scale.

I think LLMs will obviously fit into these existing processes. They'll also be used to generate content that is never checked by a human before shipping. I think the right balance is yet to be seen, and there will always be people who insist on more deliberate and slower practices over mass production.

[0] Aside from internet comments of course, which are mostly stream of consciousness.
by mprovost | 2025-07-19 13:31:07+00:00
Sure, at some point you have to let the abstraction leak. At the time Sun designed NFS, you could basically count on the fact that the server was some Solaris machine capable of multiple years of uptime on your LAN. Filesystems never made the transition to running over the internet because that was too unreliable and POSIX didn't really provide the right interfaces to expose that.

We're coming to the end of the road with that generation of OS design - MacOS is still Unix and thinks that it's running on a VAX. There's a reason why Macbooks don't come with a 5G modem: because programs would have to be aware of the underlying network. That's why it's inevitable that we'll move to something like IOS (or Android), because every program that uses the network has to handle not only failures but situations like being in flight mode or running on low-bandwidth mobile networks.
by threatripper | 2025-07-19 13:31:57+00:00
What AI currently lacks is mainly context. A well trained, experienced human knows their reader very well and knows what they don't need to write. And for what they write they know the tone they need to hit. I totally expect that in the future this will totally turn around, the Author will write the facts and framework with the help of AI and your AI will extract and condense it for your consumption. Your AI knows everything about you. Knows everything you ever consumed. Knows how you think and what it needs to tell you in which tone to give you the best experience. You will be informed better than ever before. The future in AI will be bright!
by inglor_cz | 2025-07-19 13:32:22+00:00
I remember Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize not even a year into his first term, with no concrete peace-related achievements under his belt. There are also Kissinger, Abiy Ahmed and Yasser Arafat on the list of laureates. Overall, it might be the weakest of the Prizes, in the "too dependent on momental popularity and political pressure" sense.

The scientific Nobels + Literature are usually awarded with a decent time gap after the relevant achievement, which helps. Maybe the Nobel Peace Prize should only be awarded to professionally retired people over 70. That would prevent it from being too politicized.
by hereonout2 | 2025-07-19 13:33:34+00:00
Yes, it is incredibly easy if those files have no external dependencies - say a go binary for example.

The format of the .deb package itself is also pretty simple and straightforward.

But historically and probably now even almost all packages were nothing like this.

When you need to target particular shared libs as dependencies and link against them, confirming that via build isolation, etc - which is what the vast majority of packages have to do - then all the other complex tools become a necessity.
by Joel_Mckay | 2025-07-19 13:33:41+00:00
>Why don't you show me 5 citations of renal failure from a confirmed psilocybe cubensis

Mostly, real doctors take "Primum non nocere" very seriously, and do not conflate therapeutic studies as proof organ damage isn't a risk. Fungal infection of those with compromised immune systems is harm.

People do experiment on the desperate, but it is rarely ethical gambling with someone's life. The squirrels seem to enjoy their trip, but also seem less invested in trying to justify its safety.

May you live an enjoyable life with authentic experiences. Have a glorious day. =3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNSHZG9blQQ
by bags43 | 2025-07-19 13:34:43+00:00
Among others:

- license change -> restricting features behind a paid tier (https://spring.io/blog/2025/04/21/spring-cloud-data-flow-com...)

- reducing headcount of people -> slow security patching + not following industry standards

- all eggs in one basket :)

- cut from major clouds (Azure Spring apps)
by sampl3username | 2025-07-19 13:34:49+00:00
>smart phones became a fixture because they were a key enabler for dozens of other things like fitness tracking fads, logging into key services, communication methods that were not available on desktop, etc. If AI becomes a key enabler of business, then yeah people won't have a choice.

This. I need access to banking , maps and 2FA. If I could use a dumb phone, with just a camera, GPS and whatsapp, I would use it.
by a5c11 | 2025-07-19 13:35:29+00:00
I had my journey of using Rust to implement a WinAPI-based app in which I did lots of unsafe (from Rust's point of view) operations. I spent more time on fighting with Rust's protections than on the actual implementation. The result code wasn't safe and looked horrible - totally opposite of what Rust code should look like. And yes, I followed "the Rust way" of doing things.

As much as I really like the mechanics of Rust and the language itself, I don't think I'm gonna use it for any of the device drivers I'm working on.

The problems you have quoted are due to developers being sloppy. I've gone through hundreds of source codes in Kernel, and most of them wouldn't pass code review in my company - cutting-corners everywhere, multipurpose functions, lack of documentation; those are issues which can't be fixed by just changing a language. Sure it will protect developers from missing "free()" here and there, but it's gonna bite from another side.
by constantcrying | 2025-07-19 13:36:02+00:00
>if OpenAI ran this 10000 times in parallel and cherry-picked the best one, this is a lot less exciting.

That entirely depends on who did the cherry picking. If the LLM had 10000 attempts and each time a human had to falsify it, this story means absolutely nothing. If the LLM itself did the cherry picking, then this is just akin to a human solving a hard problem. Attempting solutions and falsifying them until the desired result is achieved. Just that the LLM scales with compute, while humans operate only sequentially.
by 1970-01-01 | 2025-07-19 13:36:25+00:00
>There is no connection, you are without a leg to stand on except your own religious indoctrination.

Flagging my reply is gross (you state that, not me!) and grounds for ban. I'll just leave this 2nd rebuttal here as I take back both my legs to stand on and yours as well :P

https://www.pcmag.com/news/take-it-down-act-deepfake-revenge...
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF | 2025-07-19 13:36:34+00:00
So someone does not smoke in their room but they’re charged for cleaning anyway because a third party (Rest) told the hotel that they smoked in their room. What sort of evidence should one gather during their stay to make the strongest possible (defamation? fraud?) case against Rest? (Not that anyone wants to do that on their trip, just curious about the legal implications.)
by parsimo2010 | 2025-07-19 13:36:56+00:00
I am a professor in a math department (I teach statistics but there is a good complement of actual math PhDs) and there are only about 10% who care about these types of problems and definitely less than half who could get gold on an IMO test even if they didn’t care.

They are all outstanding mathematicians, but the IMO type questions are not something that mathematicians can universally solve without preparation.

There are of course some places that pride themselves on only taking “high scoring” mathematicians, and people will introduce themselves with their name and what they scored on the Putnam exam. I don’t like being around those places or people.
by deanc | 2025-07-19 13:38:25+00:00
Depends how convoluted your setup is. For some use cases releasing the location of passwords physically written down might help matters or maybe trigger a process to export all data and upload somewhere - somehow.

Seeing some of the discussions around home labs with server racks and k8s doesn’t fill me with confidence that for a majority of use cases a family member would be able to get the data if needed.
by jeswin | 2025-07-19 13:38:40+00:00
When you write 'mod foo;' in a Rust file (say, main.rs), Rust will look for the source code for the module named foo in one of two places: a file named foo.rs in the same directory as the file declaring the module, or a folder named foo/ with a file named mod.rs inside it.

That's great. Something like this is what C# can also aim for, while retaining full backward compatibility.
by rvz | 2025-07-19 13:39:21+00:00
> Many of them are posting marketing about AI without actually having AI. They are using OpenAI API's to say they have AI.

And somehow these companies are now "AI companies", just like in the 2010s your average food market down the street was a "tech company" or the bakery next to it is now a "blockchain company". This happens all the time with bubbles and mania.

These enterprises today appear even more confused about what they do to rebrand themselves and it's a sign they are desperate for survival.
by uludag | 2025-07-19 13:40:03+00:00
I avoided web3/crypto/bitcoin altogether when they came out. I'm happy I did and I don't see myself diving into this world anytime soon. I've also never used VR/AR, never owned a headset, never even tried one. Again, I don't see this changing any time soon.

Some technology is just capital trying to find growth in new markets and doesn't represent a fundamental value add.
by aniviacat | 2025-07-19 13:40:09+00:00
> Do you think they won't immediately figure out how to use a VPN to move to the "better" models

I think they don't even know the term "model" (in AI context), let alone which one's the best. They only know ChatGPT.

I do think it's possible that stories spread like "the new cool ChatGPT update is US-only: Here's how to access it in the EU".

However I don't think many will make use of that.

Anecdotally, most people around me (even CS colleagues) only use the standard model, ChatGPT 4o, and don't even take a look at the other options.

Additionally, AI companies could quickly get in trouble if they accept payments from EU credit cards.
by garciasn | 2025-07-19 13:40:20+00:00
Because I am not permitted to share my code nor client information/data with unapproved third parties; it’s a contractual obligation. So; we train our own models to do those things.

I use Claude Code for building products that don’t have these limitations. And fuck is it amazing. Even little things that would have taken days are done in a single line of text.
by pyman | 2025-07-19 13:40:43+00:00
The only real mistake the EU made was not regulating Facebook when it mattered. That site caused pain and damage to entire generations. Now it's too late. All they can do is try to stop Meta and the rest of the lunatics from stealing every book, song and photo ever created, just to train models that could leave half the population without a job.

Meta, OpenAI, Nvidia, Microsoft and Google don't care about people. They care about control: controlling influence, knowledge and universal income. That's the endgame.

Just like in the US, the EU has brilliant people working on regulations. The difference is, they're not always working for the same interests.

The world is asking for US big tech companies to be regulated more now than ever.
by SV_BubbleTime | 2025-07-19 13:41:17+00:00
Part of the coalition directing ESG which direct BlackRock and Vanguard which then threaten Visa/Mastercard… has been extremely successful in making people believe this is a crusade only by Visa/Mastercard.

It’s the S. And so very few people have any idea. Visa/MC doesn’t actually hate money.

They have better argument fiduciary defense accept porn money than deny it - unless they don’t and no one asks or thinks about it.
by gond | 2025-07-19 13:41:40+00:00
That possibly cannot be the common notion to frame this.

I agree with some parts it but also see two significant issues:

1. It is even statistically implausible that everyone working at the EU is tech-illiterate and stupid and everybody at HN is a body of enlightenment on two legs. This is a tech-heavy forum, but I would guess most here are bloody amateurs regarding theory and science of law and you need at least two disciplines at work here, probably more.

This is drifting too quickly into a territory of critique by platitudes for the sake of criticism.

2. The EU made an error of commission, not omission, and I think that that is a good thing. They need to make errors in order to learn from them and get better. Critique by using platitudes is not going to help the case. It is actually working against it. The next person initiating a EU procedure to correct the current error with the popups will have the burden of doing everything perfectly right, all at once, thought through front to back, or face the wrath of the all-knowing internet. So, how should that work out? Exactly like this: we will be stuck for half an eternity and no one will correct anything because if you don’t do anything you can’t do any wrong! We as a society mostly record the things that someone did wrong but almost never record something somebody should have done but didn’t. That’s an error of omission, and is usually magnitudes more significant than an error of commission. What is needed is an alternative way of handling and judging errors. Otherwise, the path of learning by error will be blocked by populism.

——- In my mind, the main issue is not that the EU made a mistake. The main issue is that it is not getting corrected in time and we will probably have to suffer another ten years or so until the error gets removed. The EU as a system needs to be accelerated by a margin so that it gets to an iterative approach if an error was made. I would argue with a cybernetic feedback loop approach here, but as we are on HN, this would translate to: move fast and break things.
by driscoll42 | 2025-07-19 13:41:49+00:00
It's not quite that specific, but close enough:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/01/business/dealbook/pornhub...

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/08/california-court...

>This week, US District Judge Cormac Carney of the US District Court of the Central District of California decided that there's reason to believe that Visa knowingly processed payments that allowed MindGeek to monetize "a substantial amount of child porn." To decide, the court wants to know much more about Visa's involvement, calling for more evidence of legal harms caused during a jurisdictional discovery process extended through December 30, 2022.

According to Court Listener, the case is still ongoing - https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/59992265/serena-fleites...
by a5c11 | 2025-07-19 13:42:17+00:00
Can't count in years because for my 9-5 work I use different languages. I started learning C when I was 15, now I'm over 30, and it constantly appears somewhere in my life, whether this is embedded or desktop development. Kernel - occasionally, when I must adapt or implement a device driver. Rust - I had three approaches, all of them related to WinAPI-based programs, but didn't suit my needs. I like it, I will come back to it at some point for sure, but definitely not in the context of Kernel.

You wanna hire me?
by altairprime | 2025-07-19 13:42:52+00:00
The U.S. consumer economy functions primarily on debt from start to end these days, complete with debt collectors who buy it pennies on the dollar and then con grieving relatives into voluntarily accepting duty towards those debts that would otherwise have been discharged by death. So there are quite a lot of people these days who couldn’t use the European debit methods because they don’t have the cash and likely never will, what with one quarter of the country’s households unable to afford housing on effectively poverty wages. The federal government can’t crack down on this because they’d have to replace that consumer debt with public assistance. The puritanical / religious orgs control majority voting blocs that haven’t aged out as they used to and so are a continued threat to elected officials. So the threat those groups are holding over Visa/MC is triple-pronged: not only will they boycott (they can afford to), they can also leverage politicians (enforce our will or get ejected from office) and threaten capitalism (better economic armageddon than unpalatable sexual expressions). Valve can’t hold a candle to that kind of leverage, not without giving up the neutral-apolitical stance that most tech corporations prefer. They would essentially have to promote a counter-bloc of voters to counter-pressure the U.S. House and Senate into passing payment provider neutrality laws through elections. Valve is vanishingly unlikely to do this, and so their only choice is to prostrate to Visa/MC (or stop accepting USD) until the puritan bloc ages out in two or three decades. They can certainly afford to wait, especially given that these incremental religious bans advance slower than their revenues.
by hombre_fatal | 2025-07-19 13:43:11+00:00
Well, surely the idea is that anyone can watch any video in any language. Especially enabling the non-English-speaking world to consume the much larger corpus of English-speaking content.

The idea is great. They just botched it at the UI level.

In practice it means clicking a video you think is in your native language but it's actually in English with low quality auto-subs, but there's no reason Youtube couldn't improve the UX here, like indicate that it's been auto-translated or let you easily filter out content that's not in your language.
by jsnell | 2025-07-19 13:43:31+00:00
> It is very likely OpenAI solved the IMO problems in a matter of minutes, maybe even seconds

Really? My expectation would have been the opposite, that time was a constraint for the AIs. OpenAI's highest end public reasoning models are slow, and there's only so much that you can do by parallelization.

Understanding how they dealt with time actually seems like the most important thing to put these results into context, and they said nothing about it. Like, I'd hope they gave the same total time allocation for a whole problem set as the human competitors. But how did they split that time? Did they work on multiple problems in parallel?
by lbotos | 2025-07-19 13:43:41+00:00
You gotta remember that "think of the average person, and then remember 50% are dumber than that".

By doing this, Youtube has probably 10x'd available content for "dumb" ppl to watch. Respectfully, my parents are in that cohort, and I suspect my father will happily watch AI translated and dubbed woodworking channels and not care at all. He "wins" here.

I have to acknowledge that there are probably more people like him then like me who want to have Japanese videos in Japanese in my US feed.

YT needs to make it configurable and I'm fine to turn it off, but the fact that I need an extension to do so is very much lame. As well as that I'm not sure uploaders are aware of their videos being displayed in this way.
by tekknik | 2025-07-19 13:44:00+00:00
> I'd be much happier crossing a bridge built by a structural engineer who has had certain rules (safety margins, etc.) drummed into him ad nauseam.

If the bridge passes inspection and is considered safe then your attitude would be a form of elitism no? The point from some of your parents is that they can do just a good of a job or better.
by lelanthran | 2025-07-19 13:44:16+00:00
> Personally, however, I would find it possibly even more depressing to spend my day doing a job that has economic value only because some regulation prevents it being done more efficiently.

That's true for many jobs. The only reason many people have a job is because of a variety of regulations preventing that job from being outsourced.

> At that point I'd rather get the money anyway and spend the day at the beach.

You won't get the money and spend the day at the beach; you'll starve to death.
by 0xEF | 2025-07-19 13:44:31+00:00
You are not wrong, but I pose the argument that too many people approach Gen AI as a replacement instead of a tool, and therein lies the root of the problem.

When I use Claude for code, for example, I am not asking it to write my code. I'm asking it to review what I have written and either suggest improvements or ways to troubleshoot a problem I am having. I also don't always follow its advice, either, but that depends on how much I understand the reply. Sometimes it outputs something that makes sense based on my current skill level, sometimes it proposes things that I know nothing about, in which case I ask it to break it down further so I can go search the Internet for more info and see if I can learn more, which pushes the limits of my skill level.

It works well, since my goal is to improve what I bring to the table and I have learned a lot, both about coding and about prompt engineering.

When I talk to other people, they accuse me of having the AI do all the work for me because that's how they approach their use of it. They want the AI to produce the whole project, as opposed to just using it as a second brain to offload some mental chunking. That's where Gen AI fails and the user spends all their time correcting convoluted mistakes caused by confabulation, unless they're making a simple monolithic program or script, but even then there's often hiccups.

Point is, Gen AI is a great tool, if you approach it with the right mindset. The hammer does not build the whole house, but it can certainly help.
by louthy | 2025-07-19 13:44:38+00:00
As the author of language-ext [1] (functional programming library for C#) -- these suggestions are a big "YES!!!!!" from me. I assume they're doing the first one due to the way they're using static interfaces like traits (which is what I also do to support Functor, Applicative, Monad, etc. traits). Being able to refine the type-checker based on constraints would be a huuuge win. Although, I'd prefer higher-kinds :)

The second one has been a big ballache when using pattern-matching. I think the leading `.` on the patterns isn't pretty, but I'd take it over handwriting the full type name every time.

[1] https://github.com/louthy/language-ext/