MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by deaddodo | 2025-07-03 18:12:25+00:00
> The quote I recall reading about long ago summarized the semi-official guidance as "write C like you write ASM".

You could read that in pretty much any book about C, until the mid-00s. C was called "portable assembler" for the longest time because it went against the grain of ALGOL, Fortran, Pascal, etc by encouraging use of pointers and being direct to the machine. Thus why it only holds a viability in embedded development these days.

I've written C on the PSX, using contemporaneous SDKs and tooling, and I've reviewed source code from games at the time. There's nothing assembler about it, at least not more so than any systems development done then or today. If you don't believe me, there are plenty of retail PSX games that accidentally released their own source code that you can review yourself:

https://www.retroreversing.com/source-code/retail-console-so...

You're just arguing for the sake of arguing at this point and, I feel, being intellectually dishonest. Believe what you'd like to believe, or massage the facts how you like; I'm not interested in chasing goal (heh) posts.
by dopadelic | 2025-07-03 18:12:31+00:00
Why would we need to prove such a thing? Human vision has strong inductive biases, which is why you can perceive objects in abstract patterns. This is why you can lay down at a park and see a duck in a cloud. It's also why we can create abstracted representations of things with graphics. Having inductive biases makes it more relatable to the way we work.

And again, you're using the term LLMs again when vision based transformers in multimodal models aren't simply LLMs.
by vessenes | 2025-07-03 18:12:33+00:00
I like this. Not really because I feel modern media should have added grain, but because for older media this is a method to get closer to the original but at much lower bitrates without excessive smoothing. What’s not to like?

Also, the author had me at God of Gamblers 2. So good. I will take him up on his recommendation to rewatch.
by pj_mukh | 2025-07-03 18:13:08+00:00
That's fair, especially around firmware and things like OTA updates and lower level controls/safety you'd want to keep that closer to team.

But on the long-tail of autonomy options? Implementing the latest papers, trying cutting edge solutions, I bet a thriving open-source community could be very helpful ala PR2, given that the hardware is already open-source.

Nothing stopping you from picking and choosing from the various implementations to build into a streamlined product offering on the front end.
by vjbarone | 2025-07-03 18:13:50+00:00
Absolutely ridiculous I got one yesterday and another one today from the same person Lauren telling me that she’s offering me an opportunity to make a minimum of $800 for four days plus bonuses assuming this is a total scam. If there are any legitimate opportunities, I am recently retired from the banking finance management and solid Waste environmental industry for well over 45 years. Thx. Vincent vjbarone@outlook.com.

Hope your able to identify this hacker and destroy them

Hello, Vincent, it's a pleasure to connect with you. My name is Lauren, Recruitment Marketing Manager at Y Combinator. I'm reaching out to share an official online part-time job program that’s been getting a lot of attention recently. The role offers flexible hours you can set yourself. Daily income ranges from 200$ to 500$. The base salary is 800$, with bonuses paid every four days. After the internship, the monthly salary is 5,000$. Applicants must be 21 or older. If you're interested, please send a message to 6363177688 — we'll get back to you shortly. Spots are limited, so contact me as soon as possible!
by FergusArgyll | 2025-07-03 18:14:41+00:00
> Is this really what you think? That the people concerned about climate change > are really just interested in changing economic policy?

Yes, Here's some examples:

Environmental Justice and Economic Degrowth: An Alliance between Two Movements

https://doi.org/10.1080/10455752.2011.648839

You can read this wonderful socialist article

https://monthlyreview.org/2023/04/01/marxian-ecology-dialect...

Or from "International socialism"

https://isj.org.uk/degrowth-and-marxism/

Or you can get a degree!

Master's Degree in Political Ecology Degrowth and Environmental Justice

https://www.uab.cat/web/postgraduate/master-in-political-eco...
by breakyerself | 2025-07-03 18:15:03+00:00
As if that's the extent of things. As if the worst abuses of the Trump administration are just deporting people who were here illegally.

Don't worry about the mass revocations of legal status of previously legal residents. The deprivation of due process. The sending of people to a foreign prison where they endure all kinds of human rights abuses based on flimsy evidence, no due proceas and no expectations of ever getting out alive.

Fascist fucks
by cmogni1 | 2025-07-03 18:15:20+00:00
The article does a great job of highlighting the core disconnect in the LLM API economy: linear pricing for a service with non-linear, quadratic compute costs. The traffic analogy is an excellent framing.

One addition: the O(n^2) compute cost is most acute during the one-time prefill of the input prompt. I think the real bottleneck, however, is the KV cache during the decode phase.

For each new token generated, the model must access the intermediate state of all previous tokens. This state is held in the KV Cache, which grows linearly with sequence length and consumes an enormous amount of expensive GPU VRAM. The speed of generating a response is therefore more limited by memory bandwidth.

Viewed this way, Google's 2x price hike on input tokens is probably related to the KV Cache, which supports the article’s “workload shape” hypothesis. A long input prompt creates a huge memory footprint that must be held for the entire generation, even if the output is short.
by simonw | 2025-07-03 18:16:02+00:00
From the schema it looks like this is storing nodes and lines: https://github.com/osmzoso/pbf2sqlite/blob/main/doc/pbf2sqli...

There's an option to enable RTree indexes to speed up queries like this one:

SELECT way_id FROM rtree_way WHERE max_lon>= 7.851 AND min_lon<= 7.854 AND max_lat>=47.995 AND min_lat<=47.996;
by johnnyanmac | 2025-07-03 18:16:17+00:00
To be fair, this time is literally different. So many social contracts that were built In for boomers and Gen X were never a thing in gen Z.

I don't know if it will be different in a good way, but I doubt in 30 years, Gen Z is going to be telling their kids and grandkids to walk into an office and give a good handshake to the hiring manager. Norms and etiquette have completely shifted.
by nozzlegear | 2025-07-03 18:16:33+00:00
> One the one hand, they're trying to keep intelligent discourse from devolving into flamewars, and I very much agree with that. On the other hand, sometimes I want to hear what the crowd here, who I view as far more intelligent than the average internet forum crowd, thinks about these political issues.

Agree with you here. HN users can have some well thought-out and nuanced takes on political issues that span the political spectrum†, but the flamewars are often some of the worst I've seen as well. It's unfortunate because I can't think of anywhere on the internet that has better potential for reasoned political discourse. The only other place is Reddit, and the subreddits there are strictly echo chambers for your own preformed opinion.

† Funnily enough, I've seen flagged accusations that HN users are both too conservative and too liberal; too libertarian and too socialist.
by colinta | 2025-07-03 18:17:21+00:00
I agree about that specific patterns post being a bad example... but if you google for "react patterns" you won't be starved for examples of more terrible drivel. That's just what's out there, people repeat it ad nauseam. So _good luck_ to anyone who really does want to learn the right thing. From that standpoint, that article is as good or bad as most others out there (old man shakes fist at dev.to).

Even the venerable libraries like useQuery introduce as many surprises as they do benefits. The complexity cost of understanding what is going on under those 20 LOC is quite high – you need to understand "stable values" (which is only relevant to React components), re-renders and how they're triggered, maybe need to understand how graphql fragments are collated into one query document... maybe need to know when useRef is the right way to memoize over useMemo.

I agree with the author, that it feels insane. I would even add to the insanity the lack of quality when searching for help, and the weird rabbit holes that GPT can send you down if you don't already know what "good" looks like.
by fishtoaster | 2025-07-03 18:17:29+00:00
My take has always been:

1. D&D mechanics, like all games, are a simplification of the real world using primitives like "firing a bow" and "passing an item" and "downing a potion"

2. The real world is fractaly deep and uses primitives like "plank length" and "quark spin"

3. Therefore there will always be places where the real world and the simplification don't line up. Finding those gaps might be a fun meme, but it's not an exploit. We play with the simplification's primitives, not the real-world physics'.
by hugeBirb | 2025-07-03 18:18:03+00:00
I've been trying to tackle this exact problem. Current process is to use exa.ai to collect a wide breadth of research papers. Do a summarization pass and convert to markdown. Search for more specific terms then give the relevant papers/context to Gemini 2.5 pro and say give me a summary. Looking for very specific resources and to be honest it's been a terrible process :|
by lupusreal | 2025-07-03 18:18:10+00:00
We didn't learn any of that from the ISS which we didn't already know from Salyut 6 and 7, and Mir. The ISS, aka Mir 2, hasn't taught us anything new. The reason it exists is because decades ago, for a few years, manned space stations made sense for orbital reconnaissance because putting unmanned cameras in space was complicated. Salyut and MOL were born from this transient strategic necessity. Unmanned recon satellites soon became practical though, so MOL was canceled but the Soviets carried on with Salyut because if there was anything they were good at, it was continuing to make something long after anybody else would have canceled it. Even when they did get recon satellites they did it with Vostok capsules, they never stopped making those after launching Yuri Gragarin in one. They just kept on making them because they were already tooled up for it, finding new excuses to keep making the same old stuff. And so it was with Salyut, the program was obsolete for orbital reconnaissance but they were already making them so they kept at it, turning it into a national prestige program. Mir was a direct descendant of it, built around the DOS-7 module which was a Salyut module with 6 docking ports instead of the two on DOS-6. It never had a good reason for existing besides Soviet politics. (By the way, Skylab never had a good reason for existing either, just politics. NASA trying to hold onto their funding as Apollo was wound down.)

The ISS is nothing more than Mir 2, built around the DOS-8 module, it's a Salyut with American funding because this time America wanted to keep the Russian space program solvent to make it harder for Iran/etc to recruit that Soviet talent. And because NASA likes long term projects that require around the clock staffing because that's great for budgets and careers. That's why the ISS exists.

Also we aren't going to Mars. Sorry. A lot of individuals are passionate about that but at an organization level there is no drive for it. NASA likes to use the talk of it for fundraising but never makes progress on it and Congress won't ever greenlight it, and SpaceX uses it to keep their employee moral up but all they are demonstrably working towards is being the king of launching satellites. The only money to be made in space is with stuff pointed at Earth. There is no economic case for Mars colonization. It's not happening. I wish it weren't so because I'm a sci-fi junky, but it is what it is.
Mitchell Hashimoto (Creator of Ghostty)
by throwaway1482 | 2025-07-03 18:18:12+00:00
I just saw a talk that he gave, and during minute 40:52, he goes on a rant to say that input methods on Linux drive him crazy because they are made by different people and are nothing like macOS (therefore not as consistent).

I have seen this person complain several times like this about Linux, just to claim macOS is superior in some ways. It seems dishonest.

I'm not trying to claim that Linux is perfect, but this is the only person I know that complains and does nothing to improve the situation. Take, for example, the author of PipeWire, audio on Linux used to be worse, but the PipeWire developers actually solved the problem rather than just complaining.

Anyway, this is a small rant that I have. I wonder whether his complaints are actually valid because I don't hear a lot of complaints about the input method from other developers, just from this specific one.

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqC3tudPH6w
by drdaeman | 2025-07-03 18:18:27+00:00
> it's completely pointless on a aggregate scale, primairly because the majority aren't interested in the truth

No offense meant, but unless you know of an experiment that indicated an absence of statistically significant effect of education programs on collective behaviors; especially one that established a causality like you stated, I would dare to suspect that it's not an accurate portrayal of things, but more of an emotionally driven but not entirely factual response.

> mandatory identity verification like in Korea, i.e attaching real consequences to what happens in the internet

I'm not sure I understand the idea. Is it about making it easier for law enforcement to identify authors of online posts, or about real-name policies and peer pressure, or, possibly, something else?
by codekansas | 2025-07-03 18:18:38+00:00
Eh. I think we got a bit nerd-sniped on some things and we ended up trying to build most of our stack ourselves. The control loop is just a pretty simple Rust loop for running ML models. ROS is kind of annoying to work with and the control loop is pretty simple so we just wrote it ourselves.

For two legged - I think it will eventually be quite a bit cheaper, it's mostly a software problem to get them to be stable. RL based control has gotten much, much better. For example, I was talking to Trevor Blackwell a few weeks ago, and he was saying the IMU on the original Anybots robot was over $2k, whereas if you throw a noisy IMU into sim, you can get away with something basically from a cellphone. So yea, personally I'm a big believer in needing to solve the robotics intelligence problem, and once you solve that, humanoids will make the most sense as a form factor.
by ninetyninenine | 2025-07-03 18:19:10+00:00
I'm thinking from the shoes of Sam Altman. "I'm gay, I'd rather become rich and famous and build OpenAI then babysit my nephew"

I'm saying capitalism forces our hand to the maximum extent such that it eats away all time involving free favors to other people. The ladder is unlimited in height.

So if I have 8 hours or 16 hours available for productive work it doesn't matter, I'm going to allocate all of it to capitalism because that's a never ending hole.
by tome | 2025-07-03 18:19:13+00:00
> Those annotations create a compile-time enforced typological relationship between the input and output values of the function. Python doesn't have mandatory type-checking so it can't do that

Python doesn't have (mandatory) compile time type checking, no, but in principle a dynamically typed language could still be referentially transparent, and then it would (or at least could) still be the case that the only effects that a particular operation can perform are those arguments that are passed into it.

> But parent wasn't referring to type-checking. They claimed monads have expressive power unavailable in other languages.

That's true. But think of other syntax sugar like async/await. That comes for free in Haskell with monads and do notation.
by goosedragons | 2025-07-03 18:20:04+00:00
Strongly disagree. Windows 11 is EXACTLY what you describe and it's not a great tablet experience. IMO it's worse than 8, 8.1 or 10. I probably accidentally close a web browser about 5 times a day on my Surface from my palm brushing the X on the window controls while trying to enter something in the URL box or search bar or swapping tabs. Switching apps sucks. The gesture controls of 8/8.1 were really good and thought out for tablets (not desktops) and full screening apps made maximal use of space while making it hard to unintentionally quit something. Meanwhile on Windows 11 they have made gestures literally near useless and something I never want to trigger ever. Yeah, MS I want easy access to garbage tabloid news and some junk AI feature. Thanks.

What MS SHOULD have done is just left desktop Windows 8 be a lightly reskinned Windows 7 and only trigger the tablet UI in tablet mode on supported devices. But no, they had to make a bad mouse experience which soured everyone on 8's UI forcing them to backpedal.

Had the Surface RT launched at the same price with pen support I think it could have had serious legs as a device for students even with all the limitations. But no, another missed opportunity.
by zserge | 2025-07-03 18:20:22+00:00
You might be right, but the only place where regexps are applied in code is for validating resource text fields (which is optional). Those regexps are defined in read-only schemas by the developer (if needed). Schemas are immutable. There seems to be absolutely no connection between the data transmitted over the API (i.e. what user can inject) and regexps. I'm not dismissing the idea that there might be plenty of other possible vulnerabilities in other areas of this toy project.
by throw0101d | 2025-07-03 18:20:26+00:00
> They’re just strips that are applied to give the impressions that there are multiple smaller panes because people are used to that and it feels “correct”.

It is more than just 'feeling correct': windows and their various (sub-)elements that make them up (can) change the architectural proportions and how the building is perceived as a whole:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAMyUoDz4Og

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c8Ahs9Tcnc&t=49

It is similar with columns: they're not just 'tall-and-narrow', but rather have certain proportions and shapes depending on the style and aesthetic/feeling one wishes to convey:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_order

And these proportions can even be 'fractal': the window panes related to windows as a whole, related to the building as a whole:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-0XJpPnlrA&t=3m13s

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rectangle

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_works_designed_with_th...

* https://www.nngroup.com/articles/golden-ratio-ui-design/
by philip1209 | 2025-07-03 18:20:43+00:00
Well, this service has been live and maintained for almost 3 years. And, if you self-host, then you can guarantee longevity.

Github, Airbnb, Shopify, Stripe, Basecamp, Instacart, Zendesk, Square, and others seem to be staying online, too.

I've written more about my Ruby opinions here: https://www.contraption.co/rails-versus-nextjs/

(Discussed on HN here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43130546 )
by hellojesus | 2025-07-03 18:20:44+00:00
> First, clearly such people don't donate to families, making that a pointless argument, and second, even if they gave new parents money directly

Yes. That is my point. Theft is required to execute this policy, which defines the deadweight loss.

I argue that companies may offer better leave benefits in order to attract workers. My company provides six weeks for primary and two for secondary caretakers.

Amazon gives a month or something like that. Clearly I would have incentive to work there if I could, and by that I mean others better skilled than me fill those vacancies. The policy is effective.
by xianshou | 2025-07-03 18:20:45+00:00
Rug pulls from foundation labs are one thing, and I agree with the dangers of relying on future breakthroughs, but the open-source state of the art is already pretty amazing. Given the broad availability of open-weight models within under 6 months of SotA (DeepSeek, Qwen, previously Llama) and strong open-source tooling such as Roo and Codex, why would you expect AI-driven engineering to regress to a worse state than what we have today? If every AI company vanished tomorrow, we'd still have powerful automation and years of efficiency gains left from consolidation of tools and standards, all runnable on a single MacBook.
by Zambyte | 2025-07-03 18:20:55+00:00
Funnily enough, I would actually flip it to say this about Kagi. With Bluesky, everything they have built is available to continue to be useful for people completely independent of what the folks over at Bluesky decide to do. There is no vendor lock in at all.

Kagi, on the other hand, has released none of their technology publicly, meaning they have full power to boil the frog, with no actual assurance that their technology will be useful regardless of their future actions.
by rapind | 2025-07-03 18:20:57+00:00
Well my business doesn't rely on AI as a competitive advantage, at least not yet anyways. So as it stands, if claude got 100x as effective, but cost 100x more, I'm not sure I could justify the cost because my market might just not be large enough. Which means I can either ditch it (for an alternative if one exists) or expand into other markets... which is appealing but a huge change from what I'm currently doing.

As usual, the answer is "it depends". I guarantee though that I'll at least start looking at alternatives when there's a huge price hike.

Also I suspect that a 100x improvement (if even possible) wouldn't just cost 100 times as much, but probably 100,000+ times as much. I also suspect than an improvement of 100x will be hyped as an improvement of 1,000x at least :)

Regardless, AI is really looking like a commodity to me. While I'm thankful for all the investment that got us here, I doubt anyone investing this late in the game at these inflated numbers are going to see a long term return (other than ponzi selling).
by simonw | 2025-07-03 18:21:11+00:00
"In a move that at first went unnoticed, Google significantly increased the price of its popular Gemini 2.5 Flash model"

It's not quite that simple. Gemini 2.5 Flash previously had two prices, depending on if you enabled "thinking" mode or not. The new 2.5 Flash has just a single price, which is a lot more if you were using the non-thinking mode and may be slightly less for thinking mode.

Another way to think about this is that they retired their Gemini 2.5 Flash non-thinking model entirely, and changed the price of their Gemini 2.5 Flash thinking model from $0.15/m input, $3.50/m output to $0.30/m input (more expensive) and $2.50/m output (less expensive).

Another minor nit-pick:

> For LLM providers, API calls cost them quadratically in throughput as sequence length increases. However, API providers price their services linearly, meaning that there is a fixed cost to the end consumer for every unit of input or output token they use.

That's mostly true, but not entirely: Gemini 2.5 Pro (but oddly not Gemini 2.5 Flash) charges a higher rate for inputs over 200,000 tokens. Gemini 1.5 also had a higher rate for >128,000 tokens. As a result I treat those as separate models on my pricing table on https://www.llm-prices.com

One last one:

> o3 is a completely different class of model. It is at the frontier of intelligence, whereas Flash is meant to be a workhorse. Consequently, there is more room for optimization that isn’t available in Flash’s case, such as more room for pruning, distillation, etc.

OpenAI are on the record that the o3 optimizations were not through model changes such as pruning or distillation. This is backed up by independent benchmarks that find the performance of the new o3 matches the previous one: https://twitter.com/arcprize/status/1932836756791177316