MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by irthomasthomas | 2025-07-21 20:14:46+00:00
Woah they used parallel reasoning. An idea I opensourced about a month before GDMs first paper on it. Very cool. https://x.com/GoogleDeepMind/status/1947333836594946337 So you might be able to achieve similar performance at home today using llm-consortium https://github.com/irthomasthomas/llm-consortium
by Sol- | 2025-07-21 20:16:19+00:00
> all within the 4.5-hour competition time limit

Both OpenAI and Google pointed this out, but does that matter a lot? They could have spun up a million parallel reasoning processes to search for a proof that checks out - though of course some large amount of computation would have to be reserved for some kind of evaluator model to rank the proofs and decide which one to submit. Perhaps it was hundreds of years of GPU time.

Though of course it remains remarkable that this kind of process finds solutions at all and is even parallelizable to this degree, perhaps that is what they meant. And I also don't want to diminish the significance of the result, since in the end it doesn't matter if we get AGI with overwhelming compute or not. The human brain doesn't scale as nicely, even if it's more energy efficient.
by jonahx | 2025-07-21 20:16:22+00:00
As a side question, do you think using tools like Lean will become a staple of these "deep reasoning" LLM flavors?

It seems that LLMs excel (relative to other paradigms) in the kind of "loose" creative thinking humans do, but are also prone to the same kinds of mistakes humans make (hallucinations, etc). Just as Lean and other formal systems can help humans find subtle errors in their own thinking, they could do the same for LLMs.
by cwmoore | 2025-07-21 20:16:28+00:00
I do not know the motivation behind this post, but I like it and just want to use the opportunity to share[0] my solar system model where each planet forms an ouruboros through its orbit. Set "Jump Days" to 1 or another low number and it becomes a stylized orrery.

[0] https://www.ouruboroi.com/

EDIT: Ok, the context is of a cryptocurrency value pyramid...so let's call each frame an NFT.
by yial | 2025-07-21 20:16:52+00:00
I think what you’re describing is different than the slow motion fall. (Though it may be the same, or similar type of processing….)

The fan, I believe is similar to a clock ticking and a type of saccadic masking. (1)

Related to the optokinetic response. (2)

I’m sure someone with much more knowledge than I could better clarify however.

(1)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saccadic_masking

(2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optokinetic_response
by mrob | 2025-07-21 20:17:08+00:00
High-CRI LED lighting is about ten times as efficient as the old film-making standard of incandescent lighting. Inverse square law affects incandescent lighting in exactly the same way, but they still managed to shoot indoor scenes at 24fps using it. Switching incandescent lighting for LED, keeping light locations and power use the same, will make every point about 10 times brighter than it was before. Therefore LED lighting is enough to shoot at about 240fps.
by rayiner | 2025-07-21 20:17:09+00:00
The explanation seems superficial: “Because the state makes it impossible not to be.”

That suggests we could get Indians to become rule followers by having some McKinsey folks come over and write different rules. I’d put that into the same bucket of willful denial of reality as the folks who thought you could make Iraq and Afghanistan into democracies by giving them different rules and laws.

This is unfortunate, because the underlying issue is extremely important. Getting to the bottom of it would change billions of people’s lives for the better.
by troupo | 2025-07-21 20:17:45+00:00
Since then, Amazon kept growing and eating other markets (see AWS), or failing to eat markets (see Alexa) while still producing a shitton of money to finance all of that.

However, most of the rest of the industry simply collectively decided that profits don't matter. Most companies of past 10-15 years stopped caring about profits, and only talk about revenue. The are now only two goals in mind:

- survive long enough on unlimited investor money to be sold to the highest bidder and be immediately shutdown

- survive long enough on unlimited investor money to try and corner a market through investor-subdidized price dumping and near-illegal business practices, and then maybe look at how to get some of the lost money back, maybe
by potatolicious | 2025-07-21 20:17:52+00:00
Ditto, it took me years to figure out "dynamic programming". It sounded hard and complicated! When I finally figured out wtf it meant I felt anger instead of relief - what an absolutely asinine name for what is otherwise a simple (but valuable) concept.

Our industry has a bad habit of this, where we name things in such a way that make them harder to explain.

See for example one of my other pet peeves: "lambdas". Sounds fancy and difficult! Sounds like a concept you may read about in a research paper! The reality is that it's really quite simple, and we do ourselves a disservice when we name things like this.
by thinkcontext | 2025-07-21 20:18:54+00:00
That fusion reactions are so difficult to get started makes the reactors very safe because failure makes them stop. So, if you lose magnetic confinement the reaction stops. The reactor may be damaged but that's it.

This is unlike fission reactors, where a failure causes reactivity to increase. That causes meltdown and the possibility of explosion and all the nasty radioactive contamination.
by vouaobrasil | 2025-07-21 20:19:02+00:00
I think we already do, at least for many people. AI-generated stuff reduces the value that humans put on human creation because human-only creation is harder to find. AI takes the joy of discovery out of many processes and activities. It's of course harder to get jobs in creative fields now such as translation and graphic design. It's a devaluing of creativity and it's discouraging to quite a few creatives. The very fact that many artists already feel depressed about AI is already itself a huge negative impact on creativity.

I can't tell you how many people have told me how depressed they are about AI and how they have less impetus to create things. Although one can certainly do it still for joy, it's harder for many in an environment that is so ruthless.
by anon291 | 2025-07-21 20:19:20+00:00
India is not destined to be screwed, but it will be screwed if it continues to do what it does.

You've misidentified the problem though.

Everything in India is against the law. This allows Indian government officials to selectively prosecute and enforce the law. This leads to chaos.

You can talk about how this is due to voter politics, or whatever.

But it's not.

It's due to Indian parenting which broadly follows the same model of everything being wrong.

As someone whose parents migrated from India to America, believe me, I know exactly how this works. This cultural trait is so embedded in Indian culture, but it is possible to eliminate.
by ArnavAgrawal03 | 2025-07-21 20:19:35+00:00
Multimodal RAG is exactly what we argue for. In their original state, though, multivectors (that form the basis for multi-modal RAG) are very unwieldy - computing the similarity scores is very expensive and so scaling them up in this state is hard.

You need to apply things like quantization, single-vector conversions (using fixed dimensional encodings), and better indexing to ensure that multimodal RAG works at scale.

That is exactly what we're doing at Morphik :)
by Gravyt1 | 2025-07-21 20:21:01+00:00
Wow, thanks for your help! I'll definitely take a look after my vacation! If you're interested in the project, feel free to add me on LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/in/jules-esnault-b84b32373

This website is actually a small project aimed solely at acquiring new skills, as I'm a student. I don't think it will last long, but in any case, I'd like to start a new serious project after this one. As I said, I'm currently doing small tests to learn. I'm not even sure if I'll complete this project or continue, but I enjoy learning how project management works.

Thanks again (:
by dylan604 | 2025-07-21 20:21:02+00:00
So how does this work for someone to know what server to use the exploit? Do companies make their Sharepoint servers accessible to WWW? Do hackers need to use this on a network they've already pwnd? Finding out the FBI put something like this on a server open to the WWW would be classic. That much larger group just got a wee bit larger than they previously thought on their previously thought number.
by grues-dinner | 2025-07-21 20:21:07+00:00
MRI windows aren't leaded, that would do nothing for RF or magnetic interference. MRI windows contain copper mesh and are designed to integrate with the rest of the Faraday cage to both keep the RF generated by the machine in the room, and keep external radiation away from the sensors. Also keep the acoustic noise in the room.

This also doesn't do anything against the (static) magnetic field, which is really hard to block except with material like steel, which don't make very good windows. Newer machines have a counter-magnet to redirect the field to extend less far from the machine.
by montgomery_r | 2025-07-21 20:22:28+00:00
Salzberg states several times that one should browse in 'private' or 'incognito' mode to stop 3rd party tracking. This is false. Incognito mode stops data such as web history and cookies being stored on the computer you are using - it is good (enough) for obscuring what sites you have visited from other people who may have access to your computer. (It may not defeat a deep forensic search, it might save you from family embarrassment). Incognito mode does not hide any data at all from your ISP, your DNS server, or the web servers you visit - it does not do anything to defeat 3rd party tracking. An error of this magnitude does make me wonder whether any of his other propositions are true at all.
by satvikpendem | 2025-07-21 20:23:11+00:00
When you built your app, whom did you build it for? Presumably you built it for a specific customer segment in mind, so did you try searching for them on Google or elsewhere?

Or did you build it for no one? That is why you're struggling to get users, because if you actually had built it for a specific persona, then you'd know exactly where to find them. You're not actually doing anything different to the author of the OP, just building something and hoping people will come [0], which is one of the worst lies founders tell themselves.

> But I don't want to create a business right now

That's fine, you don't have to make money from your products, but my point fundamentally doesn't change, either you're building for yourself, in which case it's a hobby, or you're building for someone else, in which case you need to know who these people are before you build. Sounds like you fell into the exact same trap the person on IH warned you about, so if you don't want to feel demoralized in the future, you need to change your mindset, from building to understanding users' issues.

[0] https://samuelmullen.com/articles/startup-fallacies-if-you-b...
by mrbonner | 2025-07-21 20:23:23+00:00
He clearly made his point and got lucky with the payoff from his deep job devotion. But here's what hits differently for many of us: we pour our souls into our work—late nights, weekend debugging sessions, going above and beyond—only to watch promotions pass us by, raises get "deferred," and our contributions fade into corporate silence.

The aftermath? It's not just disappointment—it's emotional devastation that leads straight to burnout. And here's the kicker: once you're truly burnt out, you're looking at years of mental recovery. Years. Your relationship with work fundamentally changes, your confidence tanks, and that passionate developer who once stayed up until 3am solving problems? They might never fully return.

This industry has a serious problem with recognizing genuine effort versus just celebrating the success stories. We need to talk more about the psychological cost of unrecognized devotion and how it's quietly destroying talented people who just wanted their work to matter.
by mrkramer | 2025-07-21 20:23:27+00:00
In the last 10 years or so companies and news outlets stared gravitating towards subscription based business model but people can't or don't want to subscribe to multiple different services(subscription fatigue). My prediction is that a lot of subscription based services will collapse and get replaced by microtransactions unless you offer something exceptional like Netflix, Spotify or World of Warcraft.

Edit: Microtransactions as in micropayments.
by bitwize | 2025-07-21 20:23:54+00:00
> By the mid 90's there were tools (even fancy 'skins' to XT such as Xaw3D) and WM's which reduced the CPU usage a lot. Today Electron it's more bloated with every release.

For X11, sure (but even then there were systems that ran circles around X11 in half a meg of RAM).

But not for NeWS.
by worik | 2025-07-21 20:24:23+00:00
Incredibly unconvincing

The arguments boil down to "we're all fucked so letting 23&me fuck us more is no big deal"

> ...this is only a problem because of our disastrous insurance-based, for-profit healthcare system in the U.S.

That is the reality for the subjects of the USA. So it is a problem

>...far more concerned about all the data that various companies are hoovering up about you based on your online activity

No. I take active measures against sneaky surveillance (my browsers cannot be tracked as far as I can tell) and I use my real name lots of places. I am in control. If my siblings, parents, children submit "their" private data to these evil data horders, I am not in control

Deleting your, and yours, data from 23&me will be closing the stable door, I am unconvinced that these sorts of people will actually delete anything (they will remove it from your view and control) but it has performative value

Delete the data!
by philipkglass | 2025-07-21 20:25:10+00:00
China was a big solar exporter before it was a big solar installer. China had a small solar manufacturing capacity in 2003. By 2008 it was number one in the world for solar manufacturing and it has remained there since:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_China#/media/Fi...

But it didn't start installing large quantities of solar power domestically until 2013:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_China#Solar_PV_...

Before that, solar power was too expensive for large scale use inside China. Chinese renewable energy growth was mostly hydropower and wind before 2013. Now of course China is by far #1 in yearly solar power installations as well as solar manufacturing, and that in combination with electric vehicle adoption is helping to curb oil demand:

"China’s electric car revolution hammers demand for oil"

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/china-electric-car-revolution...
by Silhouette | 2025-07-21 20:25:20+00:00
That document appears to be over 4 years old, predating the availability of Apple's Advanced Data Protection system that claims to provide proper E2EE on most iCloud back-ups. The latter was controversially the subject of a specific legal attack by the British government using the Investigatory Powers Act resulting in Apple withdrawing the feature entirely from the UK market rather than compromise the security of their system - according to public reports anyway. Before ADP much of the data stored in iCloud backups was not fully end-to-end encrypted and Apple itself did not claim otherwise.
by rscho | 2025-07-21 20:25:50+00:00
That's not a fair assessment of our conversation, and it seems to me you've been aggressive from the start. Honestly, you reek of the typical US prejudice that 'all-docs-are-arrogant-and-speak-only-to-spite-others'. You can't imagine the relief when I got out of US healthcare and that kind of daily interaction with hospital staff and patients.
by ppqqrr | 2025-07-21 20:26:53+00:00
these are excellent questions, but imo the answer isn't "the old web lacked unnecessary friction designed to inflate the cost of basic storage operations" - the blockchain is a lie: it is obviously the most centralized form of computing (literally nothing can happen without global consensus?), being sold as "decentralization". It is a scheme to trap the web into a centralized ledger and sell it to the highest bidder.
by tolien | 2025-07-21 20:26:55+00:00
> You don't think this counts as "arrested for online posts"?

You've definitely missed some context. For example, and fairly significantly:

> Connolly previously admitted intending to stir up racial hatred.

If you plead guilty to a charge, there's not much defense left.

The offence she admitted to doesn't even take account of whether it's committed online - it's law that was passed in 1986. An aggravating factor that led to the sentence she got was that she had in fact posted multiple times in the same sort of way.

Details of her appealing the sentence as excessive, rejected by the appeals court https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Lucy-Con...
by shanktt | 2025-07-21 20:27:11+00:00
Hey, member of the benchmark team. We actually seeded the ledger with the company's chart of accounts and 8 months of historical transactions. For the Vercel example specifically, there were prior instances showing how to categorize hosting costs that the models could reference. The expectation wasn't for them to guess blindly, but to use the provided transaction history as guidance for similar categorizations (which they often, but not always, did).
by igouy | 2025-07-21 20:27:30+00:00
I've listen'd to just past:

24:50 -- "A lot of people talk about these things. They talk about those compile time hierarchies and all that sort-of stuff; and they say - like you know, here's the thing that you just don't understand, it's all about large teams …"

Is there some example that you can point me towards, where a lot of people are saying compile time hierarchies are all about large teams?

(I suppose Ada is an example of design for programming-in-the-large.)
by colinsane | 2025-07-21 20:27:45+00:00
what i hated about AI discourse a year ago was how far removed it was from anything concrete. nobody seemed to have a _purpose_ in building AI; no thing they wanted to use it _for_. it was a silly text or image generator, would someday become a "do everything" device, and the progression from here to there was unknowable: it was just a plot device for anyone suddenly interested in writing speculative fiction.

in my vicinity, the sci-fi discourse has died down the last few months. my coworkers will _show me_ how they use these tools when i ask them, and are building on/with them incrementally. the shift in tone is encouraging. there's space for actual practical discourse around this stuff now. chat about concrete things with your friends/coworkers -- if you're interested in it. ignore the media, CEO interviews and LinkedIn hype posts: they're playing a different sort of game that you're probably happier off not being a part of.
by derefr | 2025-07-21 20:28:51+00:00
I mean, in my case, I don't think what I want could be implemented via query hints. The types of things I would want to communicate to the server, are pragmas entirely divorced from the semantics of SQL: pragmas that only make sense if you can force the query's plan to take a specific shape to begin with, because you're trying to tune specific knobs on specific plan nodes, so if those plan nodes aren't part of the final query, then your tuning is meaningless.

And if you're pinning the query plan to a specific shape, then there's really no point in sending SQL + hints; you may as well just expose a lower-level "query-execution-engine abstract-machine bytecode" that the user can submit, to be translated in a very low-level — but contractual! — way into a query plan. Or, one step further, into the thing a query plan does, skipping the plan-node-graph abstraction entirely in favor of arbitrarily calling the same primitives the plan nodes call [in a sandboxed way, because such bytecode should be low-level enough that it can encode invalid operation sequences that will crash the PG connection backend — and this is fine, the user signed up for that; they just want to be assured that such a crash won't affect data integrity outside the current transaction.]

Such a bytecode wouldn't have to be used as the literal compiled internal representation of SQL within the server, mind you. (It'd be ideal if it was, but it doesn't need to be.) Just like e.g. the published and versioned JVM bytecode spec isn't 1:1 with the bytecode ISA the JVM actually uses as its in-memory representation for interpretation — there's module-load-time translation/compilation from the stable public format, to the current internal format.
by scarier | 2025-07-21 20:30:01+00:00
Sure, an engineering control for MRI room access would be implemented differently--that's just the canonical example that people are familiar with. One possible implementation for MRI access is the airlock method, where the inner access door would only be allowed to unlock with the outer door locked and no metal detected in the space between (also the outer door would be prohibited from unlocking when the inner door is unlocked, except for some kind of inner emergency override that might also be tied to the emergency quench).

Literally no one disagrees with you on this, and most (if not all) hospital administrators will say they already do it the way you suggest. I'm pointing out that the actual implementations I'm aware of are often ineffective because they use administrative rather than engineering controls, and this is a critical distinction people need to be more aware of when interacting with dangerous systems. Managers, at least in my experience, tend to wildly overestimate compliance rates with administrative controls, even ignoring any possibility of deliberate noncompliance.
by chimeracoder | 2025-07-21 20:30:18+00:00
> my understanding is that Visa/Mastercard police their perceived brand risk primarily through broad statements that are then interpreted by payment processors in detail. Visa aren't the ones saying "Women having sex on their period is an extreme sexual activity", they're just saying "no extreme sexual activity" and the payment processor has to figure out what that means leading to the former claim.

You're not wrong but that's only part of the story. What you're describing happens, which leads to overly-conservative interpretations of the unwritten policies. But the card brands do also have explicit rules that they expect downstream players to adhere to.

Confusingly - and this is where your impression (which is common) likely comes from - the card brands themselves provide different rules to different downstream providers, so it's not like there's one single, consistent list of rules for Visa globally (for example). It's not law and they are not bound by precedent or even an expectation of consistency.
by manithree | 2025-07-21 20:30:48+00:00
USPS, FedEx, UPS, and Amazon all do this, but USPS is by far the worst here.

There's a new (well, it was several years ago) townhome in the town to the west that has exactly the same street address as mine, just a different city and ZIP code (just one digit different). We got their mail, packages, etc. a LOT for years. The best was when we got home and FedEx had dropped of a set of 4 overnighted tires on our porch.

The townhome is a rental, and sometimes, even when Amazon sends me a photo of their front porch, the townhome tenants claim they didn't get anything of ours. Either they're theives or they have a lot of porch pirates.