MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Juliate | 2025-07-15 14:07:06+00:00
> leading AI pioneer

Citation needed.

> its cleverest individual

I am not sure the recent public displays of the quality of judgment of said individual are demonstrative of a particular high level of cleverness.

> "How do you derive fulfilment in life?’ Musk mused to Cruz. It’s a good question."

And he is quite the exemple of someone desperately looking for the answer...

> "and we’ve been planetary top dog, in terms of brains, for at least 50,000 of them"

From our (own limited) perspective, that is.

Fun read anyway. A fun question to add and discuss more often still, would be: if this type of AI takes over the world, what are the chances that those who are replaced (first) are the same rich/powerful ones that are funding its development and advent? What control do they have over it?
by virgildotcodes | 2025-07-15 14:07:49+00:00
I’m unaffiliated, but I’ve really been enjoying this - https://github.com/BeehiveInnovations/zen-mcp-server

It allows you to have CC shoot out requests to o3, 2.5 pro and more. I was previously bouncing around between different windows to achieve the same thing. With this I can pretty much live in CC with just an editor open to inspect / manually edit files.
by philipwhiuk | 2025-07-15 14:07:53+00:00
> AI was inevitable.

This is post hoc ergo propter hoc. AI exists thus it must have been inevitable.

You have no proof it was inevitable.

(Also AI means something wildly different than it meant a few years ago - I remember when AI meant AGI, the salesmen have persuaded you the emperor has clothes because they solved a single compelling test).
by nonameiguess | 2025-07-15 14:08:05+00:00
This doesn't reflect what the article says. It only includes unclassified systems, not systems up to secret. That means anything from IL2 to IL5 (secret is impact level 6). In practice, IL2 is basically open access anyway, so it's really IL4 and IL5 as those levels actually restrict access. IL5 can include controlled unclassified information, but that's the highest possible. Remote access to IL5 systems also requires either a common access card issued by the DoD or personal PKI issued by an approved CA that still has to verify your background and identity in person before issuing you a certificate pair.

Along with everyone else they interviewed apparently, I had no idea this program even existed, but there have always been similar programs for other kinds of maintenance and support personnel. The people who repair the toilets and refrigerators in a SCIF don't have clearances. They get an escort, and everyone else in the building gets a warning before anyone needing an escort comes in, telling them to put away any sensitive data and either work on something unclassified or turn off your monitors and stop working completely until these people are done and leave again.
by DoorOpen | 2025-07-15 14:08:09+00:00
Software engineering experiences in VC-funded startups and mid-stage companies, of which several were in the SF Bay Area. Also did machine learning and creation of labeled training data. Computer Science degree.

Looking for companies between early stage to mid stage. You can email me to ask for a resume. The email address can be found in the profile of this account.

Location: San Francisco / Bay Area / CA / US

Remote: Yes remote or hybrid or onsite

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: JavaScript, NodeJS, Deno, Shell, Python, TypeScript, Vite, React, React-Native, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, MariaDB, MySQL, GraphQL, Django, NumPy, Pandas, PyTorch, NLTK, Ruff, UV, Matlab

Resume: You can email me to ask for a resume.

Email: The email address can be found in the profile of this account.
by pjc50 | 2025-07-15 14:08:22+00:00
> It makes no sense to me why should the service care at how popular any single title is as long as we are subscribed to their service

I suspect that, like google's notorious killing of products with "only" tens of millions of users, this is a problem of internal structure. I bet that ranking of who gets into that row is a reflection of the social hierarchy between producers at Netflix whose compensation depends on it.

> They are hampering discoverability.

At some point Netflix really focused on this, then like google throwing away search, they lost it.
by stillpointlab | 2025-07-15 14:08:46+00:00
You are stating a contradictory position: A person who doesn't believe AI can possibly emerge but is actively working to prevent it from emerging. I suggest that such a person is confused beyond help.

edit As an aside, you might want to read Don Quixote [1]

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Quixote
by mountainb | 2025-07-15 14:09:01+00:00
To use John Adams' separation of republics into the categories of "the many, the few, and the one," the few in our current day are unusually conflict-adverse both among each other and with respect to the people.

When faced with the current crisis, they look at the options for investment and they see some that will involve a lot of conflict with the many (changing the industrial employment arrangement, rearranging state entitlements), and they see see some that avoid conflict or change. Our few as they are got that way by outsourcing anything physical and material as much as possible and making everything "into computer." So they promote a self serving spiritual belief that because overinvesting in computers got them to their elevated positions, that even more computer is what the world needs more than anything else.

This approach also mollifies the many in a way that would be easily recognizable in any century to any classically educated person. Our few do not really know what the many are there for, but they figure that they might as well extract from the many through e.g. sports gambling apps and LLM girlfriends.
by woolion | 2025-07-15 14:09:04+00:00
>No one in this world ... has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people...

I think you're disproving your own point. If you look the major flops in all industries (video-games, movies, ...) the general trend is contempt for the audience. This generally results in some form of uproar from the most involved fans, which is disregarded because of the assumption that the general public won't pick up on it. At the very least, I would say that for this to be true you need to have a very specific definition of intelligence that would exclude a lot of crowd behaviors.
by tkiolp4 | 2025-07-15 14:09:10+00:00
The problem is that such “tech leaders” get their mouths full of AI with one goal only: to reduce their workforce to the minimum and maximize their profits. Sure, they are companies and yada yada, but I would like to see a better argument on to why we all should embrace AI. So far, as much as AI is intrinsically amazing, it’s getting bad rep because its main and more lousy supporters are tech billionaires.
by crowcroft | 2025-07-15 14:09:26+00:00
Bubble or not these kinds of deals could put a chill on the tech startup sector as well.

Things move fast in tech because there isn't nearly as much red tape and litigation as there are in other mature industries. This is because there's an agreed 'way of doing things'. Take funding, grow like crazy, sell/merge or IPO. Everyone wins or loses together (even if things are stacked in favour for some over others).

Once trust in this process is broken and founders or VCs start stacking the deck in their favour the game becomes rigged to the point where other people don't want to play anymore. Once that trust is gone red tape and litigation appears.
by bsenftner | 2025-07-15 14:09:28+00:00
> I can't find a single open source codebase, actively used in production, and primarily maintained and developed with AI.

That's because using AI to write code is a poor application of LLM AIs. LLMs are better suited to summary, advice, and reflection than forced into a Rube Goldberg Machine. Use your favorite LLM as a Socratic advisor, but not as a coder, and certainly not as an unreliable worker.
by jfengel | 2025-07-15 14:09:35+00:00
Be wary of attempts to explain behavior via evolution. Not every trait is adaptive, so the right question is often not "What good does this do?" but "How did people survive despite this?"

Before attempting to apply such explanations, you'd need to have an extremely broad cultural perspective. Practically everybody you know is WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic). You can't really draw a pattern without including a lot of other cultures, both existing and extinct.
by miningape | 2025-07-15 14:09:52+00:00
While it's a fair criticism, just because someone doesn't believe in a god doesn't mean the religious hardware in their brain has been turned off. It's still there and operational - I don't think it's a surprise that this hardware's attention would then be automatically tuned to a different topic.

I think you can also see this in the intensification of political discussion, which has a similar intensity to religious discussions 100-200+ years ago (i.e. Protestant reformation). Indicating that this "religious hardware" has shifted domains to the realm of politics. I believe this shift can also be seen through the intense actions and rhetoric we saw in the mid-20th century.

You can also look at all of these new age "religions" (spiritualism, horoscopes, etc.) as that religious hardware searching for something to operate on in the absence of traditional religion.
by Cthulhu_ | 2025-07-15 14:09:59+00:00
2002 was also when broadband internet and movie piracy became more prolific - DivX was just out, DVD burners became a thing, etc. Streaming video was in its infancy, with TiVo and VOD slowly becoming a thing (although that only reached mainstream in 2007 when Netflix launched). DVDs and DVD players became mainstream, as well as flat TVs, HD video, etc.

Anyway. The tech in the movie theaters did improve by a lot since then, 3D was a fad but we get 4K, imax, Dolby Atmos, etc nowadays. But it's not as popular as back then, cost and convenience probably being important factors, but the lack of long exclusivity (it's now only weeks sometimes until a film is out on streaming) and the overflow of media nowadays isn't helping either. The last really popular film was the Marvel films and the last Avatar film, other than that it feels all a bit mediocre or unremarkable.

I wonder if that's the other factor. The 90's and early 2000s were for many people the highlight of filmmaking - this may be a generational thing. But there were years where multiple films would come out that were still remembered fondly for years or decades after.

Meanwhile, I couldn't name you a single good or standout film from the past year or years. Nothing I remember anyway. I think the combination of the LotR trilogy and the Star Wars prequels ruined films forever for a lot of people, in a good way for the former and a bad, cynical one in the latter, lol.
by e40 | 2025-07-15 14:10:06+00:00
I don't doubt that funds are available. The idea that a perishable commodity can be harvested in days by applying these funds is absolutely bonkers.

I'll turn it around: how long do you think the time to get those crops harvested is? People didn't show up for work, the clock is ticking.

I was responding to someone that seemed to imply that resources were on STANDBY to swoop in and harvest the crops. That is completely untrue and just dumb.
by abagee | 2025-07-15 14:10:24+00:00
I don't think that's the only difference - every "leap" in languages you mentioned was an increase in the level of abstraction, but no change in the fact that the medium was still deterministic.

Programming in natural languages breaks that mold by adding nondeterminism and multiple interpretations into the mix.

Not saying it will never happen - just saying that I don't think it's "only" because you're a computer scientist from the 2010s that you find natural languages to be a poor medium for programming.
by 4star3star | 2025-07-15 14:10:24+00:00
At the heart of it all is language. Logic gates to assembly to high level programming languages are a progression of turning human language into computed processes. LLMs need to be tuned to recognize ambiguity of intention in human language instructions, following up with clarifying questions. Perhaps quantum computing will facilitate the process, the AI holding many fuzzy possibilities simultaneously, seeking to "collapse" them into discrete pathways by asking for more input from a human.
by btown | 2025-07-15 14:10:48+00:00
If you run part of the software supply chain ecosystem, put it on the web without any kind of "alpha" or "insecure" language that's highly visible to end users on every package, and even distribute professional white papers and marketing-style landing pages to promote it (e.g. https://outreach.eclipse.foundation/openvsx), but create a deployment architecture that executes arbitrary third party code during every deploy (as was the case before https://github.com/EclipseFdn/publish-extensions/pull/881/fi... landed to fix the issue in the link above) - I do indeed think that the Eclipse Foundation bears some responsibility here.

And for sure, Cursor and others should have funded security hardening of their extension marketplace. The lion's share of the blame lies on that. But the Eclipse Foundation is in a position to incentivize that investment by making it clear to end users that open-vsx is still at an experimental level of stability and security, rather than promoting it as an enterprise-ready product with white papers and all.
by bigbadfeline | 2025-07-15 14:11:10+00:00
> I disagree. Its [tariffs] a pretty straightforward market force.

By themselves, tariffs do not and cannot provide assurance of any outcome, they can only amplify the effects of the other economic policies in force at the moment.

As for the current policies, the effects are clear - further monopolization, inflation, lower standard of living and asset trickle up (more like waterfall to the sky), combined with circus politics, phony heroics, wars and empty promises.

That might be positive for some but certainly not for the majority.
by bell-cot | 2025-07-15 14:11:13+00:00
Maybe I'm old, and admittedly I've never run out of a burning building...but I've heard a lot of stories where that's the very first thing the people did.

Also admittedly - the context often included "and tell them to call the Fire Dept.".

But I'd say that whether or not one does that goes back to the article's main point - do you see see those neighbors as fellow members of "your" community? Or as unconnected random strangers?
by mmaunder | 2025-07-15 14:12:46+00:00
You can't put an idea as compelling as AI back in the bottle. Once the knowledge of how to build a model, and what the reward is, permeated society, it became an inevitability. Protest all you want and frame it as a choice if you'd like, but the 8 billion people on this planet will simply go around you, much like the sick little boy that the zombies bypassed in World War Z. We've seen this with hand tools, the wheel, horses, steam engines and combustion engines, electricity, TCP/IP and now AI. It is not the manifestation of human preferences. It is instead the irreversible discovery by a species of what is possible in this lonely universe.
by alibasharat5 | 2025-07-15 14:13:32+00:00
Thanks, Yes, Exactl! RobinRelay reads directly from the Slack alert messages (from monitoring tools, custom bots, etc.) and builds memory from the messages and thread discussions around them or even discussions in the channel itself (not in thread) we build Semantic matcher algorithm to connect message with the alert..

The goal was to avoid needing any API keys or deep integrations - just install, select the alert channel, and it starts working by parsing alert messages and mapping patterns.

You’re totally right though, there is richer metadata inside tools like Datadog. But we think end users have better context of known issues, but we're intentionally starting frictionless and will expand further to provide insights on newly seen incidents and use API to pull all the data.

Glad to hear you’ve felt the pain too... that’s exactly why I built this!
by psychoslave | 2025-07-15 14:13:37+00:00
There is nothing like "the" system though. When a government launch some genocide, sure it's an expression of the system in a sense, but it didn't need to respect a majority of actor opinions, and it doesn't mean that "the behavior of the system" is a mere and direct outcome of all the social values at stake which would presumably have great safeguard against any significant deviation.

Virus can kill their hosts, and a bunch of individuals can have significant harmful impact on societies.
by M95D | 2025-07-15 14:13:58+00:00
It shoudn't be the website's responsibility to authenticate viewers of sexual content, not unless it's paid sexual content.

This proposed solution allows the parent to choose whatever authentication he/she wants for the device. Windows login, browser login, 3rd party filtering proxy in the router, etc.

I know what you're about to say: What if the child gains access to an unrestricted device? Well, if you put it that way, what if the child gains access to an old stash of porn magazines? What are you gonna do? Sue the publisher?
by beoberha | 2025-07-15 14:14:04+00:00
I work in azure and this is wildly mischaracterizing the risk, though it is news to me that there are non-US nationals doing escorts for the non-airgapped government clouds.

I assume it is OK to say this: Microsoft has a “China” cloud and a non-airgapped “US Government” cloud. It is standard practice that engineers making production touches in the clouds have to be “escorted” by vendors who make sure you’re not doing anything malicious. I assume the article is implying that these vendors for the US Gov cloud may be Chinese nationals.

As Jason mentions in another comment, anything actually requiring clearance is serviced by the airgapped clouds and only folks with clearance are able to operate there.

Edit: misread the article but the third paragraph stands. The government is totally aware of where the operator boundary lies and this is still wildly mischaracterized.
by bfeynman | 2025-07-15 14:14:08+00:00
Some devil's advocate- AWS receives many support requests that initially go to customer support engineers (in call center environments) who act as first defense for pointless simple issues. But you still have ones escalated to actual engineers and technical teams, costing hundreds or thousands of dollars. There are times when its like actual service issues and bugs etc but the number of times you have a long thread between a support engineer who does not even understand what the customer is misunderstanding (because of arrogance like this, and the customers continuing assertion they are not wrong) can go on for days/weeks and is just monumental waste of time when the answer is read the docs.
by delusional | 2025-07-15 14:14:15+00:00
> And the suggestion of "Jeg vil gerne handle i morgen" for "Jeg vil gerne go shopping i morgen", instead reads to me as "I would like to act tomorrow". A more idiomatic translation would be "Jeg vil gerne købe ind i morgen".

It's a little better, but I would never expect anyone to translate "shopping" to "købe ind". "købe ind" is about getting groceries for the week, shopping is about walking the strip and dreaming of buying random clothing. As a native speaker I'd be less surprised if the you just used the borrowed word "shopping" directly. Basically "Jeg vil gerne shoppe i morgen".
by Gualdrapo | 2025-07-15 14:14:41+00:00
> Wayland aside, which is going to be a disaster and neuter the Linux desktop

I can't recall where I said this some time ago but I feel like between all the FOSS "wars" (KDE vs GNOME, Vim vs Emacs, Ubuntu vs everyone else...) X11 vs Wayland is the most toxic of them all. It feels to me Wayland haters are the most noisy. For most people like me who are being using Wayland for years it is absolutely great right now so we can't complain. I'd go as far as to say people having issues with Wayland are having mostly a me problem rather than a Wayland problem - yes, it can't be absolutely perfect, but it is a mamooth of a project and if you want it to be better you can help in a lot of ways, not just coding.

Plus, blog posts like this are of little to no help at all about that "Wayland is going to be a disaster and neuter the Linux desktop", maybe even contributing to it - I can't help but feel for the KDE devs who nowadays seem to be really open to new ideas and feedback from users (everywhere from Reddit to the bugzilla tracker and their discourse instance), but some guy decides to make a blog post and torch the whole project.
by wch | 2025-07-15 14:15:26+00:00
I agree 100% with you. The author starts the essay with the very technique that he uses later on the essay: frame the conversation in his terms (that LLMs are _not_ inevitable), and then once that's done, anyone who disagrees can be dismissed.

The irony is that he's doing it, just in the opposite direction of those he disagrees with.

Some things _are_ economically inevitable, and it's wishful thinking to ignore them. For example, it is inevitable that solar will be the primary form of electricity generation in the coming decades (and I am thankful that this is the case). For those that were watching closely, this was clear several years ago, and it is even more clear today.

People whose fortunes are built on the fossil fuel industry might wish it were otherwise, and they might dismiss "solar inevitabilists" with the same technique as the author. But those people would be wrong.

If someone says that something is inevitable, they could be wrong. But they could also be right.
by ajmurmann | 2025-07-15 14:16:05+00:00
I wonder how much of that is because the movies themselves changed vs everything else that has changed. Back in 2002 most people still watched tv on CRT that were very small by today's standard and had very low resolution. You either had to go out and rent a movie, rewatch something you had recorded or bought or watch whatever was on and enjoy the ads. Now we have a huge choice of movies and tv shows at our finger tips any time. Yes, the screen is still much smaller than in the cinema but I also sit much closer. I can pause the movie when I need a bathroom break. I can eat and drink what I want. A movie has to be really good for me to want to spend $40-$50 on going to see a movie with my wife. No travel required, no sitting through ads, no risk of someone in the audience being obnoxious.

I used to go to the cinema quite a bit. Now I only go once every 1-2 years to see something on IMAX that I hope will really benefit from it. In recent years that was just the two Dune movies and most recently the F1 movie. Unfortunately, even the biggest IMAX theater in my area is still not what I'd consider a proper IMAX like the Metreon in SF so I'm always underwhelmed. Not sure if that's because this IMAX is too small or because even IMAX stopped being amazing due to growth and improvement of other screens.

I used to watch a lot of smaller movies in the cinema. That's stopped entirely. With any movie the question now is how long till we just can watch it at home. Smaller movies which I'd be more willing to support frequently even seem to skip the few months where you have to rent them and go straight to streaming. So unfortunately even less incentive to go to the cinema.

Culture around it doesn't help either. Friends used to recommend movies that they watched in the cinema. I can't even recall when that happened last.