MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by protocolture | 2025-07-07 22:55:54+00:00
>clearly going against what copyright stands for.

Copyright isnt a digital moat. Its largely an agreement that the work is available to the public, but the creator has a limited amount of time to exploit it at market.

If you sell an AI model, or access to an AI model, theres usually around 0% of the training data redistributed with the model. You cant decompile it and find the book. As you aren't redistributing the original work copyright is barely relevant.

Imagine suggesting that because you own the design of a hammer, that all works created with the hammer belong to you and cant be sold?

That someone came up with a new method of using books as a tool to create a different work, does not entitle the original book author to a cut of the pie.
by dustingetz | 2025-07-07 22:56:46+00:00
in my opinion it is the events and state transitions that are where everything interesting and challenging happens, like server IO in mount/unmount/didUpdate lifecycle methods or event callbacks. For example, a typeahead component. You focus the input and start typing. The picklist unfolds and loads records from the server, we need to stream subsequent keystrokes to the server into the query for server filtering, we need to maintain the DOM gracefully as the query changes stream in, we need virtual scroll if the collection is large, the user then uses the arrow keys to select an item in the picklist and presses enter to submit, closing the picklist and returning the selection to the caller. It is a living, reactive process. Now "use the REPL" to get, like, any value at all?
by shermantanktop | 2025-07-07 22:57:20+00:00
Just saw a really interesting Nova centering on Crowther Labs at ETH (recently disbanded). https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aax0848 was held up as encouraging unsustainable reforestation for greenwashing PR.

But the most interesting part was a segment covering how tree roots engage in aggressive recruitment and exchange of resources with an underground biome of bacteria and fungi.
by alliegshow | 2025-07-07 22:57:25+00:00
Babs | Founding Engineer | SF / Remote | Full-Time | AI, Productivity, Early-Stage We're building Babs, an AI-powered family operating system — think “Command Center” operating system for the mental load of running a household. Our first product turns messy inputs (emails, texts) into clean workflows for calendars, carpools, and communication. Backed by Accel. Led by an ex-Uber team. PMF is clear.

Looking for a founding engineer to help us go 0→1. You’ll own architecture, ship fast, and build agent-based features with LLMs. Full-stack or backend-leaning ideal. You like product. You’ve built things. You want real ownership. You care about solving problems that actually matter.

Culture is low-ego, high-autonomy. Equity is meaningful.

Reach out: allison@hellobabs.ai
by RandomBacon | 2025-07-07 22:57:28+00:00
> From a security standpoint: When my data lands in the hands of Chinese interests and USA entities, only the latter is leveraging it against me. In the stack of data risks to be mitigated, China is at the bottom and everyone tied to the US is at the top.

I hope you don't work for a company or know anyone who works for a company or government that China might want to influence, steal secrets from, sabotage, etc; otherwise your information or information that you have about other people could be used against you, people you know, your company, your government, your interests, etc.

Foreign intelligence doesn't always go after people in "important" jobs, they sometimes go after janitors or other people who have access to either facilities or people.
by Detrytus | 2025-07-07 22:58:21+00:00
I disagree. It does not dwell on economy, or technology, but at least we have pretty good overview of social fabric and power structures: how kings get to power, how they make decisions, how they raise armies, how they deal with allies, etc.

Another thing: Bret Devereaux has some very detailed analysis on his blog ([1],[2]) of various LOTR battles/war campaings and it seems that Tolkien was meticulous about getting details of the warfare right, like how far and how fast can army move, what the commander can and cannot know at given time, and how medieval style battles are actually won/lost (including the impact of morale). Compare that with the mess that are two last seasons of Game of Thrones...

[1] https://acoup.blog/2019/05/10/collections-the-siege-of-gondo...

[2] https://acoup.blog/2020/05/01/collections-the-battle-of-helm...
by cmhernandez | 2025-07-07 23:00:00+00:00
Location: Sparks, Nevada

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: TypeScript, JavaScript, Express, React, Ruby, PostgreSQL, AWS, Docker, Kafka

Resume: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WexkTSZo0d-A0vi-YvDJDUkQLjo...

Email: cmhernandezdev@gmail.com

Hi I'm Cruz, an experienced full-stack software engineer. Most recently, I developed Tumbleweed, an open-source framework that uses Change Data Capture and the outbox pattern to monitor and capture database changes and sync that data to microservices in near real-time. Lets chat!
by tuesdaynight | 2025-07-07 23:00:55+00:00
I believe that solo founders will have way more leverage than today. At the same time, I find it paradoxical how the people that say these things have the most simple idea, that could be copied in a weekend, to show as example. Founders with great ideas, domain knowledge and money to do marketing will make a lot of difference. The diary that I created using AI to fit my taste? Everybody can copy that code in days.
by 0xOsprey | 2025-07-07 23:01:43+00:00
I use a blockchain wallet that lets me instantly switch between "USD in a Bank Account" to "self-custodial USDC on a blockchain" and so can you: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/fuse-solana-smart-wallet/id647...

I can also move the funds into a connected debit card so I can spend it in the real world.

This wallet is powered by Bridge.xyz which was acquired for $1B+ by Stripe in Fall 2024 - would encourage you to try the new stuff!
by thaumasiotes | 2025-07-07 23:02:46+00:00
> "zh" is actually one of the more reasonable pinyin digraphs because it follows the same pattern as "sh". If "s" + "h" results in [ʃ], then logically "z" + "h" should result in [ʒ].

Note that the sound [ʒ] is common in Mandarin, but its pinyin spelling is "r". "zh" isn't voiced and is affricated.
by echelon | 2025-07-07 23:03:37+00:00
I love the satire. (Did I really write "regret breathing air" before editing or something?)

Oxygen is an amazingly energy rich fuel and is super abundant for us. The oxygenation of earth was one of the key steps, and it might be a "hard step" for other civilizations.

Of course oxidation causes a lot of damage and byproducts, and is one of the causes of our aging and death. But without it, well...

I was primarily referring to particulate matter suspended within the air we breathe. High PPM / particulate measurably reduces lifespan in several population studies, and it also produces noticeable pulmonary and cardiac disease states.

Polluted air is bad.
by sunrunner | 2025-07-07 23:04:04+00:00
Thank you for these links!

> Pigment color is a real heavy-duty field

I'm not surprised. As $DAYJOB involves a reasonable amount of requirements for colour accurate previewing in a print context I still feel like I'm never as sure about all steps of the colour pipeline as I should be, and this adds a whole new area to know I'll never feel like I know enough about.
by godelski | 2025-07-07 23:04:07+00:00
I disagree. Anthropomorphization can be a very useful tool but I think it is currently over used and is a very tricky tool to use when communicating with a more general audience.

I think looking at physics might be a good example. We love our simplified examples and there's a big culture of trying to explain things to the lay person (mostly because the topics are incredibly complex). But how many people have misunderstood an observer of a quantum event with "a human" and do not consider "a photon" as an observer? How many people think in Schrodinger's Cat that the cat is both alive and dead?[0] Or believe in a multiverse. There's plenty of examples we can point to.

While these analogies *can* be extremely helpful, they *can* also be extremely harmful. This is especially true as information is usually passed through a game of telephone[1]. There is information loss and with it, interpretation becomes more difficult. Often a very subtle part can make a critical distinction.

I'm not against anthropomorphization[2], but I do think we should be cautious about how we use it. The imprecise nature of it is the exact reason we should be mindful of when and how to use it. We know that the anthropomorphized analogy is wrong. So we have to think about "how wrong" it is for a given setting. We should also be careful to think about how it may be misinterpreted. That's all I'm trying to say. And isn't this what we should be doing if we want to communicate effectively?

[0] It is not. It is either. The point of this thought experiment is that we cannot know the answer without looking inside. There is information loss and the event is not deterministic. It directly relates to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, Godel's Incompleteness, or the Halting Problem. All these things are (loosely) related around the inability to have absolute determinism.

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

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44494022
by snypher | 2025-07-07 23:05:42+00:00
Please, no more ding ding. You have a backpack on your passenger seat, ding ding, passenger seat belt alert. You're driving at 5mph on private roads, ding ding, driver seatbelt alert. Your TPMS hasn't worked for 3 years, ding ding, 'service tire pressure system'.

Please let the user decide how they want to use the vehicle instead of a one-size-fits-most model. Also, please give me the option to add a baby seat monitor - if I want one!
by caim | 2025-07-07 23:06:04+00:00
Funny thing is that you can get undefined behavior and segfaults using only "safe rust", and the rust compiler has subtle bugs that allow you to disable important checks (like type checking), which can leave your code completely broken.

But for some crazy propaganda, rust devs believes that any rust code is safe and sound no matter what.

https://github.com/Speykious/cve-rs/issues/49
by freejazz | 2025-07-07 23:06:04+00:00
>It's a four factor test because all of the factors are relevant, but if the use has negligible effect on the market for the work then it's pretty hard to get anywhere with the others. For example, for cases like classroom use, even making verbatim copies of the entire work is often still fair use. Buying a separate copy for each student to use for only a few minutes would make that use uneconomical.

All four factors are not equally relevant which is something described in pretty much every single fair use opinion. Educational uses are educational uses and considered fair because of their educational purpose (purpose is one of the factors), again, not because it's expensive. Maybe next time try googling or using ChatGPT "fair use educational".

>We're talking about the temporary copies they make during training. Those aren't being distributed to anyone else.

It's your argument. Not mine. You do not understand the market harm factor and it has nothing to do with Anthropic's transaction costs. That's just fully outright absolutely incorrect application of law.

>Making a copy of everything on the internet is a prerequisite to making a search engine. It's something you have to do as a step to making the index, which is the transformative step. Are you suggesting that doing the first step is illegal or what do you propose justifies it?

The transformative step is why it's a fair use, not the "market harm" (which you misunderstand) or the made up argument that it's "too expensive". In fact, I said this like every single turn in our conversation so it's a bit perplexing to me that you can now ask me "do you mean that it being transformative is what makes it legal" when that was my exact argument three times.

>Anything with unreasonably high transaction costs. Why is that ridiculous? It doesn't exempt any of the normal stuff like an individual person buying an individual book.

It's ridiculous because of the example I gave. Things being expensive is not a defense to copyright infringement and copyright law has no obligation to make expensive business models work. Copyright has an obligation to make transformative business models work because of the overall good they provide to society. Describing it as a "transaction cost" just kicks the can down the road even further and doesn't deal with the substance, either. They could have gone to the major publishers and licensed books from them. They didn't. That's generally who they are being sued by. When they are being sued by copyright owners in the fringe examples you pointed to, they will become relevant then.

>They need to get as many books as possible, with the platonic ideal being every book. Whether or not the ideal is feasible in practice, the question is whether it's socially beneficial to impose a situation with excessively high transaction costs in order to require something with only trivial benefit to authors (potentially selling one extra copy).

Lol dude, it was your example, not mine. They do not need every single book. They aren't being sued over every single book anyway, so it's totally besides the point.
by contravariant | 2025-07-07 23:06:49+00:00
Yeah I'd definitely explain that one as "I study ways to make wifi faster", doesn't cover all the nuance, but it's definitely better than the alternative.

Convex shapes, well, annoyingly it's too broad. It has way more applications than sphere packings but it's hard to pick a good example. It's like trying to explain you design screwdrivers to someone who doesn't know what a screw is.
by 999900000999 | 2025-07-07 23:06:51+00:00
I'm forced to guess your high income ?

I was making a solid 6 figure salary and found myself more or less barely making it in LA.

Everything you said about diversity and culture could be said about Chicago too.

I guess if I was at 250k LA wouldn't be that bad, but on a social level I found people much more pleasant in Chicago.

If you have a bad home life you can move out earlier in Chicago.

Back in LA half the time I went out with someone they'd complain about their Mom for 2 hours. I met a lot of people in very very bad situations with no real hope of escaping.

>For many people those things are invaluable, especially if they are non-white (which perhaps you're not, so that may be lost on you.)

I'm definitely not white. Chicago is liberal. It has one of the only Chinatowns in America that's actually growing. Boystown is one of the oldest LGBT communities in America.

I don't think I'm going to change your opinion here, but when it comes to numbers, LA is just a difficult city.

If you have the money, and LA is giving you something you can get elsewhere, great.

But that's not going to change the economics of the situation. I know I'd rather save money and strive in Chicago vs struggle in LA.
by rtpg | 2025-07-07 23:10:50+00:00
My belief is that the core part of a lot of programs where you want formal proofs are tricky enough to where you need hand holding but the higher up the stack you go the simpler your proofs get since you did the hard stuff in the core.

Though it really does feel like we're still scratching the surface of proof writing practices. A lot of proofs I've seen seem to rely only on very low level building blocks, but stronger practitioners more immediately grab tools that make stuff simpler.

I would say, though, that it feels likely that your proofs are always going to be at least within an order of magnitude of your code, because in theory the longer your code is the more decision points there are to bring up in your proof as well. Though automatic proof searches might play out well for you on simpler proofs.
by themadturk | 2025-07-07 23:10:55+00:00
This just went on forever and I quit caring, but he does have a point about the Sally Forth cartoonist not being any good at all at portraying emotion.

I also wonder, is it really plagiarism? What is anyone supposed to say and do when they discover a break-in, cartoon character or not? Nor are there any Sally Forth children worried about the fate of their stuffed tigers. This is the real point of the Calvin and Hobbes panel, and it's not even hinted at in the Sally Forth panel.
by handfuloflight | 2025-07-07 23:11:57+00:00
module Obirunda where

import Control.Monad.State

import Control.Monad.Writer

import Data.Functor.Identity

type Argument = String

type Evidence = Maybe String

type Competence = Int

data ObirundaState = ObirundaState {

arguments :: [Argument], evidence :: Evidence, competence :: Competence

} deriving (Show)

obirundaLoop :: StateT ObirundaState (Writer [String]) ()

obirundaLoop = do

modify $ \s -> s { arguments = ["tradition", "syntax sacred"] } tell ["demanding proof from others"] modify $ \s -> s { evidence = Nothing } tell ["providing none myself"] obirundaLoop

runObirunda :: ObirundaState -> ((), [String])

runObirunda = runWriter . execStateT obirundaLoop

-- ghci> runObirunda (ObirundaState [] Nothing 0)

-- Never terminates. Pattern recognition, anyone?
by nwienert | 2025-07-07 23:12:58+00:00
Its the law (for now, very early on this in the process of deciding the law, untested, appealable, likely to be appealed and tested many times in many ways).

Meanwhile other cases have been less friendly to it being fair use, AI companies are already paying vast sums to publishers who presumably they wouldn’t if they felt confident it was “the law”, and on and on.

I don’t like arguing from “it’s the law”. A lot of law is terrible. What’s right? It’s clear to me that if AI gets good enough, as it nearly is now, it sucks a lot of profit away from creators. That is unbalanced. The AI doesn’t exist without the creators, the creators need to exist for our society to be great (we want new creative works, more if anything). Law tends to start conservatively based on historical precedent, and when a new technology comes along it often errs on letting it do some damage to avoid setting a bad precedent. In time it catches up as society gets a better view of things.

The right thing is likely not to let our creative class be decimated so a few tech companies become fantastically wealthy - in the long run, it’s the right thing even for the techies.
by randycupertino | 2025-07-07 23:13:20+00:00
For hairdryers particularly dyson is very trendy. People wait in line for limited edition hairdryer cases, it actually crashed sephora's website for one of the limited edition case colors, I think it was rose gold. And the hot pink dryers are very statement making pieces for salons. They are definitely great at marketing and partnering with influencers. Per my hairdresser they aren't the best products on the market but they have great branding.
by duxup | 2025-07-07 23:13:42+00:00
Is there any real data that shows Remote Workers are actually moving in at a high enough rate to impact the locals / rent / etc?

The article seemed to report on the protestors, but there's no data in the article showing remote workers are the folks impacting things in the way the protestors describe.

Mexico City isn't some backwater that would be easily influenced by a few remote workers... it has been a destination of all sorts for a long time.
by grogenaut | 2025-07-07 23:14:25+00:00
Help me that you're not a doctor a lawyer accountants software engineer working for a large company. It tells me you're a small business owner and you work on advanced things. You're not manufacturing knick knacks or toys.

Really if we're at a party that's more than enough unless I want to ask you more and you want to talk more about it. If you were a lawyer I'd probably ask what area of law that I probably stop and talk about something else. So I agree with others that you said was a very good distillation of what you do to the level that most people probably care about
by lelanthran | 2025-07-07 23:14:47+00:00
> I think gwern gave a good hot take on this: it’s super rare for humans to do this; it might just be moving the chains to complain the ai can’t.

Super rare is still non-zero.

My understanding is that LLMs are currently at absolute zero on this metric.

The distance between tiny probability and zero probability is literally infinite!

It's the difference between "winning the lottery with a random pick" and "winning the lottery without even acquiring a ticket".
by muzani | 2025-07-07 23:15:04+00:00
Cursor is not merely a wrapper. There's a lot of optimization going on under the hood. At the very least, it indexes the whole codebase and can search it. That's not including the agent stuff, MCP, context management, etc.

Perplexity might have been a wrapper some time ago, but today, it's far more. I tried asking it for the meaning of the lyrics of a certain song in my head but only gave it the band name, not the song. It picked the wrong band-song at first, but noted that similar questions were asked for the exact song in my head. If I ask GPT/Gemini/etc, it will say, "I know the band, but which song?"

I think this sort of invalidates the rest of the question - most of the things that people just assume are wrappers are not. The things that are only wrappers die out pretty quick because people would just ask ChatGPT instead of Essay Writer 2025.
by valiant55 | 2025-07-07 23:15:17+00:00
If current events in America have taught us anything is that "most consumers" opinions is of no importance. I want to believe in democracy but when the public education system have been attacked for decades is hard to defer to the popular opion on most things. I think most people, given the time and unbiased information would arrive at the appropriate conclusion but time and access to unbiased information are both in short supply.
by purple-leafy | 2025-07-07 23:17:08+00:00
I go through periods of genuinely thinking I’m capable of greatness, and periods of not caring at all about greatness and just wanting to be happy.

Speaking of adversity the last 6 months I’ve: lost a job, split from fiancé of 7 years, got fat, lost a dog, lost an apartment, got diagnosed with adhd, faced strong suicidal ideation, sever depression and nihilism.

But fast forward to current day - I’ve got back to the gym and doubled all my lifts and genuinely starting to get strong again, lost fat, made friends, started rock climbing and road cycling, progressed in my career and doing well at my new job, planned greater international travels.

I’ve realised I’m unnaturally resilient and I can basically push through anything life throws at me. Even in my darkest days I still dragged my ass to the gym and hit personal bests.

I do not know where this resilience comes from. I’ve realised over the years as a 30 y/o male no one is going to help you get to where you want to be, no one is going to have much empathy for you no matter how shit your life is, and that you control your own destiny and can only play the cards you’ve been dealt, but you alone can push yourself to greatness (whatever that may be for you)
by jaredcwhite | 2025-07-07 23:17:53+00:00
Are you real?

Are you a human?

Is that real text you typed out?

Does anything you're saying have any meaning?

----

That is essentially what you are asking for. Every single online interaction immediately viewed as entirely suspect, with people having to go out of their way to prove they are…people.

Well perhaps you're right that this is where online culture is headed, but we don't have to like it. I hate it. I hate it so bad.
Poll: Interested in joining a "Founders over Fifty" group?
by sendos | 2025-07-07 23:17:54+00:00
I've been thinking that founders over the age of 50 (I'm one of them) have some unique challenges, experience, insights, etc and so would be good to have a forum to exchange tips, strategies, information.

We could meet in person or online video calls. If in-person, most likely the SF Bay Area would be the first area to test this idea.

If you're a Maybe, please mention in a comment what might push you to a Yes.