MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by andrelaszlo | 2025-07-03 13:50:23+00:00
The "good catch" thing is something I do, too, but mostly for short review comments like "this will blow up if x is null" etc.

I had to think a bit about it, but when it feels off it can be something like:

- I wrote several paragraphs explaining my reasoning, expecting some follow-up questions.

- The "fix" didn't really address my concerns, making it seem like they just said "okay" without really trying to understand. (The times when the whole PR is replaced makes it seem like my review was also just forwarded to the LLM, haha)

- I'm also comparing to how I often (especially earlier in my career) thought a lot about how to solve things, and when I got constructive feedback it felt pretty rewarding - and I could often give my own reasoning for why I did things a certain way. Sometimes I had tried a bunch of the things that the reviewer suggested, leading to a more lively back-and-forth. This could just be me, of course, or a cultural thing, but my expectation also comes from how other developers I've worked with react to my reviews.

Does that make sense? I'd be interested in hearing more about the problem you're dealing with. If this is not the right place, feel free to send an email :)
by quietbritishjim | 2025-07-03 13:50:38+00:00
> Because at the scale many companies use C++, the additions into ISO C++, for how bad WG21 process currently might be, don't land there because a group of academics found a cool feature, rather some company or individual has seen it as a must have feature for their industry.

Maybe it's just me but, sorry, I cannot parse this sentence.
by b3lvedere | 2025-07-03 13:51:01+00:00
He said: “If believing in God is losing touch with reality, then there is a lot of people that are out of touch with reality.”

Wow. Yeah.

I am afraid i cannot really comment on this in the way i would like to comment on it, because that would make a whole lot of people angry.

“If robots raise our children, they won’t be human. They won’t know what it is to be human or value what it is to be human,” Turkle told CNN.

I am sensing a Borg origin story somehwere in here..
by cubefox | 2025-07-03 13:51:06+00:00
Also: I think it got less common on the N64, but games on SNES and NES and other old home consoles routinely accessed static game data, like graphic tiles, directly from the cartridge ROM. Without loading it into system RAM at all.

So there literally were no "loading" times for these assets. This might not even be realistically possible with NAND flash based SSDs, e.g. because of considerations like latency.

Though directly accessing ROM memory would also prevent things like texture block compression I believe.
by ringeryless | 2025-07-03 13:51:19+00:00
until they aren't.

don't discount the possibility of a total rout for those who put all eggs in such a shoddy basket.

interesting to note the limits of political influence now that the megabill stripped the ai moratorium nonsense.

i suspect that the brick and mortar politicos are a bit like "thanks for the money, now bugg off, kid, before i beat you up"

it will be interesting to see what sort of revenge the worlds richest man is cooking for his uppity fixer dude.
by miningape | 2025-07-03 13:51:39+00:00
Ah yes, that makes a lot more sense - I understood your comment as something like "the LLMs are always correct, we just need to redefine how programming languages work"

I think I made it halfway to your _actual_ point and then just missed it entirely.

> If you cannot agree on the correct interpretation, nor output, what stops an LLM from solving the wrong problem?
by bob1029 | 2025-07-03 13:51:57+00:00
I got tired of "oops" over time and started abusing environment variables. If you have enough discipline to spend 10 seconds configuring them, you'll never have to worry about magic strings accidentally getting sucked up into source control.

The other upside with environment variables is that they work across projects. Set & forget, assuming you memorized the name. Getting at tokens for OpenAI, AWS, GH, etc., is already a solved problem on my machine.

I understand why a lot of developers don't do this though. Especially on Windows, it takes a somewhat unpleasant # of clicks to get to the UI that manages these things. It's so much faster (relatively speaking) to paste the secret into your code. This kind of trivial laziness can really stack up on you if you aren't careful.
by timr | 2025-07-03 13:52:00+00:00
I’m not “discounting prior behavior”, I’m just not getting exorcised over shutdown of a website, particularly when the explanation is likely to be incompetence.

Be real: do you honestly believe that this website was influencing any marginal opinions? I don’t. Most of the people here who are so outraged likely had no idea that this website existed before today.

This is a case where a website is a political flag, and one side is upset that the other side took down their flag. It’s all just tedious and dumb, has only tangential relationship to science, and makes exactly no difference to the world.
by koakuma-chan | 2025-07-03 13:52:06+00:00
Oh that's so very false!

---

time uv

real 0m0.005s

user 0m0.000s

sys 0m0.004s

---

time npm

real 0m0.082s

user 0m0.068s

sys 0m0.020s

---

time pip

real 0m0.320s

user 0m0.179s

sys 0m0.031s
by gedankenstuecke | 2025-07-03 13:52:20+00:00
> That said, if you're just looking for a simple maps app, I suppose OsmAnd could be quite overwhelming and this would probably be a lot better.

That's the main draw of CoMaps to me. I also have OsmAnd installed and it's useful for more complex uses, but for a quick lookup CoMaps works a lot better for me. OsmAnd is more the swiss army knife of navigation tools, with all the complexity that means.
by chasd00 | 2025-07-03 13:53:07+00:00
yeah, i'm certainly not the "police officers are biggest monsters in the history of the universe" type but this app seems like a nothing burger from a legal standpoint. If there was an ice raid near me i'd like to know so i can avoid the traffic. Besides, people have to report the sighting when they see it so it's not like it gives a warning to a raid before it happens, only during or after the fact.
by NeutralForest | 2025-07-03 13:53:33+00:00
You can just use uv now, that's the whole point, it will let you install any recent version of python and you can easily handle it from there. It'll also handle dependencies and one-off scripts for which you don't want to create a whole project/venv.

By rule, you should never meddle with the globally installed python because so many packages will try to look for the system installed Python and use it, better let your package manager handle it.
by Upas | 2025-07-03 13:53:51+00:00
I think the key difference is the usage of face masks and plainclothes - as far as I can tell, from various different news articles - ICE agents weren't concealing their identities en masse using face masks under Biden and Obama.

Based on historical examples of secret police, plainclothes and face masks on Federal Agents by default could definitely make people think that we are "approaching a police state".
by pvg | 2025-07-03 13:54:29+00:00
Somewhat tangential but a oddly under-explored side of the LLMs+HN data projects - HN search that does a good job finding HN submission/comment results for the type of things often asked in Ask HN that can be answered by HN searches. 'How do I learn about [some nice thing or another]', etc. People asking this sort of thing often don't know the right keywords so pure keyword search often doesn't work well but more latent-spacey things, in theory, could. Another related one is "can you LLMgenerate something akin to dang's 'Related' posts".
by jeroenhd | 2025-07-03 13:54:33+00:00
Passkeys are the name used for FIDO2 authentication flows for normal people.

WebAuthn is the JavaScript API to access the USB devices speaking U2F to the browser.

FIDO2 extends the WebAuthn API by also offering to store security tokens inside of a device's TPM, by using CTAP2 to authenticate with an external device or service, or by using good old U2F. If you're implementing it, you generally only need to deal with the WebAuthn side, the browser will take care of the rest.

You can think of Passkeys as "WebAuthn 1.1". Names like WebAuthn and U2F don't exactly attract the general consumer, so they rebranded it. The same way websites used names like "passwordless logins" when trying to describe WebAuthn+U2F, expect "passkey" seems backed by larger companies.

If you've implemented WebAuthn correctly (I doubt you actually interacted with the U2F API directly), you've also implemented passkeys.

The naming is rather confusing, mostly because a lot of websites used the wrong name for the wrong part of the process. Luckily, almost nobody acfually knows what the hell a WebAuthn is, so passkeys are the introduction to the whole stack for most people.
by phillipcarter | 2025-07-03 13:56:02+00:00
> If there's a clear jump in evals from one model to the next (ie Gemini 2 to 2.5, or Claude 3.7 to 4)

How do you know that their evals match behavior in your application? What if the older, "worse" model actually does some things better, but if you don't have comprehensive enough evals for your own domain, you simply don't know to check the things it's good at?

FWIW I agree that in general, you should start with the most powerful model you can afford, and use that to bootstrap your evals. But I do not think you can rely on generic benchmarks and evals as a proxy for your own domain. I've run into this several times where an ostensibly better model does no better than the previous generation.
by rauhl | 2025-07-03 13:56:29+00:00
Have you seen Common Lisp’s condition system? It’s a step above exceptions, because one can signal a condition in low-level code, handle it in high-level code and then resume back at the lower level, or anywhere in between which has established a restart.

https://gigamonkeys.com/book/beyond-exception-handling-condi... is a nice introduction; https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24867548 points to a great book about it. I believe that Smalltalk ended up using a similar system, too.

> It would need to be the case that code that doesn’t want to handle errors (like Max’s simple website) doesn’t have any error handling code, but it’s easy to add, and common patterns (e.g. “retry this inner operation N times, maybe with back off and jitter, and then fail this outer operation, either exiting the program or leaving unaffected parts running”) are easy to express

Lisp’s condition system can handle that! Here’s a dumb function which signals a continuable error when i ≤ 3:

(defun foo () (loop for i from 0 do (if (> i 3) (return (format nil "good i: ~d" i)) (cerror "Keep going." "~d is too low" i))))

If one runs (foo) by hand then i starts at 0 and FOO signals an error; the debugger will include the option to continue, then i is 1 and FOO signals another error and one may choose to continue. That’s good for interactive use, but kind of a pain in a program. Fortunately, there are ways to retry, and to even ignore errors completely.

If one wishes to retry up to six times, one can bind a handler which invokes the CONTINUE restart:

(let ((j 0)) (handler-bind ((error #'(lambda (c) (declare (ignore c)) ;; only retry six times (unless (> (incf j) 6) (invoke-restart 'continue))))) (foo)))

If one wants to ignore errors, then (ignore-errors (foo)) will run and handle the error by returning two values: NIL and the first error.
by peterldowns | 2025-07-03 13:56:44+00:00
Hey Tomas, been a while! I like the approach that graphite is taking to AI code review — focus on automating the “lint” or “hey this is clearly wrong” or “you probably wanted to not introduce a security flaw here” type stuff, so that humans can focus on the more important details in a changeset. As your AI reviewers take on more tasks, have your answers to your question (“why do we do code review”) changed at all?
by edg5000 | 2025-07-03 13:56:55+00:00
This sounds like it's practically unlimited and free? A bit like GMail. It is comes to close to Claude Code they may overtake them and dominate the market simply with their tried and true "give it away for free forever with practially no limits" strategy. I pay 20$ for Claude Code, which is nothing in relation to the value it provides, but obviously a 0$ price point will get you a bigger piece of the Pie. Big Oof for Anthropic. Kinda lame that they can just copy a new and innovative company and undersell at a price point of 0$. Not that I'm cheering for Anthropic either; I'd much rather own my sillicon.
by Workaccount2 | 2025-07-03 13:57:12+00:00
I'd take text-to-image capabilities with a grain of salt, because they are dramatically lower than their text to text abilities. I don't know the exact mechanics with current multimodal models, but it is pretty clear that there is a disconnect between what the text modal wants, and what the text model outputs. It's almost feels like asking someone with a blindfold to draw a cat, you kinda get a mess.

If you ask chatgpt to describe a new image based off an input image, it will do dramatically better. But ask it to use it's image generation tooling and the "awareness" judged by the image output falls off a cliff.

Another example is infographics or flow charts. The models can easily output that information and put it in a nicely formatted text grid for you. But ask them to put it in a visual image, and it's just a mess. I don't think it's the models, I think it's the text-image translation layer.
by Henchman21 | 2025-07-03 13:57:58+00:00
It’s the day before a holiday in the US. No one is thinking, we’re all just knee-jerk existing for another handful of hours and then… Then we engage in that once a year ritual of lighting up explosives and making a pilgrimage to the ER, where no one can afford proper treatment. /s

Happy 4th all!

(With apologies for the wildly off topic comment)
by pclowes | 2025-07-03 13:58:05+00:00
Why are software engineers paid well to date? Successful software uniquely benefits from operational and financial leverage. Which creates the term "software margins"

Financial leverage: It is cheap to write code, experiments are inexpensive. A million dollars in funding for a B2B SaaS gives many more shots on goal vs a million dollars in funding for drug research or manufacturing. This increases probability of ROI and permits aggressive investment.

Operational leverage: Scaling code is cheap as well. It is free to copy. Solving one problem with software well often enables solving immediately adjacent problems very cheaply.

Do LLMs decrease or increase the leverage here?

Writing code is cheaper, a single engineer can now do much more. Does that endanger engineers? Yes, if their job is "take requirements and implement to spec". No, if their job is "solve important business problems at scale". The former are already typically not valued or paid exceptionally highly. The latter are likely to be valued and paid even more than they already are.

Or put another way, if software engineers are going to be hurt by LLMs who is going to benefit? This is assuming a zero sum game which I would disagree with here. But if not software engineers than who is better positioned to wield LLMs effectively?
by collingreen | 2025-07-03 13:58:14+00:00
The government subsidizes the birth rate because it has decided it IS a social good to have a constantly replenishing workforce (and potential military force). You may disagree with doing that but the argument that it isn't a social good doesn't match where those policies are coming from.

Moreover, this blinders-on-libertarianism "I should only pay for things directly for me" approach doesn't work if you pick and choose; you have to address it in context of the entire system (ie, you can't silently accept all the benefits and only shout about the individual moments you don't come out on top).

This society, for better or worse, pools money to do things at scale even when some of those things don't have the direct and equal benefit to every individual, instead aiming for a general good for all, stability, and a platform for everyone to have higher potential.

Yes, this gets abused in many ways and yes, it should always be constantly evaluated for effectively spending money.

However, your anecdotes about how the women or the poors get more than you in certain policies aren't impactful without looking at the whole which includes everything from the roads, breathable air, a widespread and capable workforce, a dynamic labor market, powerful financial markets, a justice system, fire departments, and lots of consumer protections so we can focus on growth instead of spending all our time trying to research if your bank is actually a scam or if the restaurant down the street washes their hands enough.
by edg5000 | 2025-07-03 13:58:27+00:00
About the data being sent to Google thing; one thing I noticed today with Claude Code it that it ran "cat" on my public key but it ran "head -n 5" on my private key (e.g. it avoids reading my private keys fully) (I was having it diagnose SSH issues; not thinking about key leakage actually. Good job Anthropic for not sending my key to the US! +1 for team Claude!
Show HN: I built a tool to stop repeating myself to LLMs
by codyad | 2025-07-03 13:58:38+00:00
Hi HN,

Why

I got tired of wasting time typing the same instructions to an LLM. "Proofread this," "Summarize that," "Translate this."

What

I built System Prompt: a free, open-source tool to create reusable AI workflows. It runs 100% in your browser, so your data and API keys stay with you.

How

Instead of always retyping "Proofread this text and correct it in a professional tone...", you create a reusable workflow in a 2 clicks.

It's a node-based editor where you can add prompt nodes, AI nodes (for any model), and connect them. Everything is saved locally in your browser.

GitHub: https://github.com/codyadam/system-prompt

I'd love to get your feedback.
by NeutralForest | 2025-07-03 13:58:48+00:00
If you take a look at the forum (https://discuss.python.org/), the core team basically doesn't have the resources to do anything else expect maintaining Python. They aren't paid and have to pick their battles.

They spend a lot of time on improving Python itself and then you have pip which is a way to install packages and that's it; it's not a package manager nor a python version manager.
by cratermoon | 2025-07-03 13:59:33+00:00
Or at least mimic how they conceive of the mind working.

The following theories of how the brain works have come and gone over time:

1.a hydraulic model of human intelligence, the idea that the flow of different fluids in the body – the ‘humours’ – accounted for both our physical and mental functioning 2.humans are complex machines and thinking arose from small mechanical motions in the brain 3. the German physicist Hermann von Helmholtz compared the brain to a telegraph.

The current metaphor of the brain as an information processor like a computer arose around 1951, and like the previous theories, the metaphor is drawn from the technology of the time.

https://aeon.co/essays/your-brain-does-not-process-informati...
by gruez | 2025-07-03 14:00:00+00:00
>But so far, the point stands, as far as I'm concerned, as these are not competitive (in my humble experience).

Source? The popular narrative, at least a few months ago was that Chinese AI models like deepseek were not far behind models from OpenAI, hence the stock market crash.

eg. "DeepSeek’s models are much cheaper and almost as good as American rivals" https://archive.is/2yNzH

>And the platforms where valuable input comes in (StackOverflow, Reddit, AI tools themselves) all have licenses that would allow them to become rent-seekers on AI models and challenging open models to not provably train on "their" data (the user contributions).

Is there any evidence this actually caused open weights models to be worse? As much as you hate this "rent seeking", it's mostly a sideshow. If open weights models are competitive, then the proof is in the pudding, no need to fret about the morality platforms "rent seeking" over UGC.

>This giant clusterfuck could only be avoid when the major social media platforms and coding agents would each use CC0 license for the content they collect.

This makes no sense. You can't take some copyrighted content you scraped (eg. some blog post), relicense it as "CC0", and then redistribute it. That's straightforwardly copyright infringement. Search engine and AI companies get away with this because they're not redistributing the raw data itself, but rather a transformed version (ie. snippets and AI models respectively), which helps it pass as "transformative" under the "Purpose and character of the use" part of the fair use test.

>More specifically, I still don't know what the current situation with "fair use" is around training data.

There was a recent court ruling in the US that basically ruled it's fine to train on copyrighted books without permission, but you can't pirate books to obtain them. This hasn't reached the supreme court yet, so it's not final.
by eastbound | 2025-07-03 14:00:11+00:00
#3 is a perfect for the description of Mozilla’s standing. The fact that you decide to use this keyword as a sign that the argument is flawed is proof that the argument is correct with nothing of substance to criticize.

Mozilla decided to #2 appeal to those types of people, with various angles including “renewing the masculinity inside Mozilla”. It’s not public pressure, as the public went on for a backlash against wokism in the 2020 and later. Mozilla is in an ironic situation where it is now driven by those incompetent people, while the public moved on, and its values are not a value proposition anymore.

Especially the “We fire people who do not think like us” part. Let me tell you that the kind of public “We harass people into quitting” answers perfectly to #1 in my books.

Just be good. Just be good people! That’s all we ask!
by cardanome | 2025-07-03 14:00:31+00:00
> What I see is a future where AI handles the grunt work, freeing us up to focus on the truly human part of creation: the next step, the novel idea, the new invention. If we don’t have to spend five years of our early careers doing repetitive tasks, that isn’t a threat, it’s a massive opportunity. It’s an acceleration of our potential.

Yeah, no that is always promised but historically this has never been true. On the contrary. Every technical revolution ever has brought great short term suffering to the majority and in the long term served to alienate people from their work.

It has been creative people, translator, writers, editor, artists, musicians who most fear to lose their jobs due to generative AI.

What is more fulfilling? Creating had crafted items or just being a cog in the assembly line? Writing your own code or micromanaging an AI?

Doesn't mean that progress is inherently bad but that it is a political question. Will the productivity gains allow us to work less and enjoy life more or will they make rich people more rich? Currently rich people are winning but the wind can change.