MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by exographicskip | 2025-07-22 04:02:52+00:00
Heard about this! Finally did something with it and I'm happy with how this tiny gist turned out:

https://gist.github.com/pythoninthegrass/e5b0e23041fe3352666...

tl;dr

Installs 3 deps into the uv cache, then does the following:

1. httpx to call get request from github api

2. sh (library) to run ls command for current directory

3. python-decouple to read an .env file or env var
by metadat | 2025-07-22 04:03:08+00:00
> In an essay titled “Machines of Loving Grace,” Amodei wrote: “Democracies need to be able to set the terms by which powerful AI is brought into the world, both to avoid being overpowered by authoritarians and to prevent human rights abuses within authoritarian countries.”

> “The basis of our opposition to large training clusters in the Middle East, or to shipping H20’s to China, is that the ‘supply chain’ of Al is dangerous to hand to authoritarian governments—since Al is likely to be the most powerful technology in the world, these governments can use it to gain military dominance or to gain leverage over democratic countries,” Amodei wrote in the memo, referring to Nvidia chips.

Rock <-> Hard Place.

The omnipresent attitude of "if we don't do it, someone else will" is really tough to resist when it comes to AI, as if the outcome is a foregone conclusion.

Exciting times, buckle up for Mr. Toad's Wild Rice.
by KK7NIL | 2025-07-22 04:05:09+00:00
I'm aware the Nakamura example is old, but the core issue (the horizon effect) is still there in any alpha/beta pruning engine, including the newest SF. But I will certainly grant you that it has become much harder to execute since then. MCTS engines (like Lc0) are far more immune to the horizon effect, but can instead suffer from missing very shallow tactics, especially in very fast time controls, as Andrew Tang showed in his match against an early version of Lc0 7 years ago: https://lichess.org/@/lichess/blog/gm-andrew-tang-defends-hu...

> Maybe you're right about correspondence chess. That interview is from 2018 and the machines have got distinctly stronger in that time, but 7 years isn't so long and it could be that human input still has some value for CC.

I've played on ICCF and I can say that the draw situation is much worse now, exactly because engines are so much stronger now, so it's much harder to find good opening novelties against a competent opponent. Engines were infamous for misjudging many closed openings like the KID, but even in the last few years that has really tightened up.

Still, the human element is useful in trying to steer clear of drawish openings and middlegame lines.
by tzury | 2025-07-22 04:06:44+00:00
thanks. I suspect those tuning take place in order to maintain cost/experience level, that is, keeping a "good enough" product while cutting cost of inference.

I also suspect it is tuned for ultimate experience upon release to grade well on benchmarks and online reports, then tuned back to a level they can bear as they burn investors money.

the need is clear, I am just expecting transparency.
by Iujia | 2025-07-22 04:07:08+00:00
Is this interpretation correct?

My original understanding was that asynchrony refers to a behavior — specifically, the non-blocking execution of code.

However, the article defines asynchrony as a capability — the ability to perform non-blocking operations, though it can also execute in a blocking manner depending on the I/O.

The new I/O design decouples the capability from the behavior of whether or not to use it, effectively addressing the function coloring problem.
by voidhorse | 2025-07-22 04:07:10+00:00
And he was right. Poets and bard used to memorize entire epics. Writing changed this not by augmenting their abilities, but by changing expectations: it became acceptable to read form a written record, rather than from memory.

My memory gets exercised a lot less frequently than it would need to without writing.

But memory is also not thinking. It is a component in thinking, but it is not thinking itself. Discourse, arguably, though, whether in natural or symbolic language is thinking. If we offload all of that onto machines, we'll do less of it, and yes our expectations will change, but I actually think the scenario here is different than the one Socrates faced and that the stakes are slightly higher—and Socrates wasn't wrong, we just needed internal memory less than we thought once external memory became feasible, as cool and badass as it may seem to "own" Socrates in retrospect.
by jillesvangurp | 2025-07-22 04:09:05+00:00
Reading long form text is a big commitment in time. In a business context that's simply not appropriate. I always joke about documentation as write only content. It's the type of thing you are asked to write that then doesn't get used or read. I've more than once gotten the question whether I could produce a diagram or some sort of documentation only to realize later that after the thumbs up I got on delivery, nobody was actually doing anything with the document.

Here on HN, short comments are more appreciated than longer comments. People are skimming, not reading. The ability to say a lot with very few words is what is appreciated the most.

That's nothing new btw. As Mark Twain once wrote: “I didn’t have time to write a short letter, so I wrote a long one instead.”

Using LLMs to rephrase things more efficiently is a good use of LLMs. People are getting used to better signal to noise ratios in written text and higher standards of writing. And they'll mercilessly use LLMs to deal with long form drivel produced by their colleagues.
by dlivingston | 2025-07-22 04:09:41+00:00
What a cool project. I looked through your repo and it's very well done. Your code is very pleasant to read [0]. I wish I had the background knowledge and bandwidth to help. What do you think of SwiftUI, by the way?

[0]: https://github.com/ThrudTheBarbarian/Azoth/blob/main/Azoth/C...
by dlcarrier | 2025-07-22 04:10:06+00:00
You're all using the same equipment, regardless of the tier you sign up for. The firmware in your modem or their router limits the maximum packet rate, but individual packets and small groups of packets are always traveling at gigabit speeds, regardless of the speed cap.

That difference in latency isn't even what matters; it's the latency from the various types of modems. With the direct connection of fiber providers, you can often get sub-millisecond latency from nearby collocations, and rarely do ISPs have more than a few milliseconds of latency.

With cable providers, DOCSIS adds ten to twenty milliseconds of latency. You'll get about double that latency With LTE providers and low-eath-orbit satellite providers that have nearby ground stations. With geosynchronous satellite providers, you'll get several hundred milliseconds of latencu.

A 50 Mbps fiber plan will get an order of magnitude lower latency than a gigabit plan from anyone else.
by joegibbs | 2025-07-22 04:13:16+00:00
I disagree that Tasmania is economically successful or has a competitive advantage. Out of all major states and territories Tasmania has the lowest GSP per capita, the second-lowest GSP overall and below-average economic growth for the country.

Also I don't really get the point of the piece - of course those artistic parts of the Tasmanian economy shouldn't replace all their business with AI but I don't think anyone is suggesting they do. But it would surely be a benefit for their economy if some Canva-level AI startup came out of Hobart.

I also very much doubt that study about AI slowing down developers. I know it speeds my own work up a lot, and if it was really so terrible why on earth would so many people be paying $200/month for Claude Code?
by stouset | 2025-07-22 04:13:42+00:00
I'll be honest, it's been so long at this point since I've used git that it's hard for me to remember the exact details of many of the challenges. I know that I avoided a lot of workflows I wanted to do because of the complexity and mental overhead, and the scenario I described was absolutely one of them. Maintaining a stack of changes that needed to be merged one after another was painful if there were any unexpected hiccups along the way. Now it is painless.

Arbitrarily-complicated rebases just happen automatically with jujutsu. Inserting, moving around, and directly editing commits are first-class operations, and descendants automatically rewrite themselves in-place to incorporate changes made to their parents. Rebase conflicts are also first-class citizens so they don't block you and force you to deal with them right now or in any particular order. Having to rebase seven related conflicts one-after-another is no longer a thing, nor is realizing you fucked something up halfway through and having to restart.

Coming from git it honestly feels like magic even if it strictly isn't. It genuinely hard to understand how much unnecessary toil git makes you put up with on a day to day basis until you suddenly don't need to deal with it any more.
by rpcope1 | 2025-07-22 04:13:45+00:00
Not to say something isn't broken, but I've come to view a lot of these types of articles as just a subtle form of advertising and lobbying for development firms, especially the ones that just build tons and tons of 3-4 level apartment blocks. It's reductionist to the point of absurdity to say "things just slowed down because of X" when so much has changed in the last 50+ years, it's hard to read that with a straight face.

Just allowing city hall to get their palms greased to build infinity "luxury" comblocks everywhere isn't going to change shit. Communities should have a strong say in what does or does not go, barring major critical infrastructure, and if you don't like and don't live there, tough shit. We'd be better served putting our thumb on the scale to make it possible for an average family to be able to live well off of one income and encourage resiliency by decentralizing and making it favorable to do more actual jobs locally ("efficiency" be damned).
by jesseendahl | 2025-07-22 04:14:12+00:00
No it doesn't — that's a totally different threat model.

Advanced Data Protection is mostly concerned with protecting data from attackers on the server and in transit.

If you're interested in protections when an attacker has physical access to your device, you should read the "Encryption and Data Protection" section of Apple's Platform Security Guide.

Web: https://support.apple.com/guide/security/welcome/web

PDF: https://help.apple.com/pdf/security/en_US/apple-platform-sec...
by scarface_74 | 2025-07-22 04:14:26+00:00
Joel Spolsky (founder of StackOverflow) talked about this almost 25 years ago.

https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/03/23/strategy-letter-iv...

Everyone needs a different 90%.

I’m not trying to wear “I worked at AWS” on my chest like a 22 year old posting on Blind. But my experience working at AWS ProServe before working at 3rd partner consulting company I’ve seen a lot of different implementations even though my focus was on cloud native applications.

These are all of AWS’s named specialties.

https://aws.amazon.com/professional-services/

Large companies aren’t going to go to a smaller provider. Yes I know about “hybrid cloud”. But modt companies don’t want to go that.
by HaZeust | 2025-07-22 04:14:51+00:00
>How many $bad_things has the CIA prevented? I don't have a clear answer for that

Well that's the problem for your steelman on a position being an unfalsifiable hypothesis, isn't it? We DON'T know - and neither you or I know if it's actually non-zero either. We can probably list 20 main atrocities committed by the CIA together, and with a few hours of research we can probably get it up to a few hundred. But we can't find the inverse, so why introduce is as support in your argument?
by Herring | 2025-07-22 04:16:05+00:00
That doesn't matter. It's like code syntax highlighting -- A good tool benefits everyone. You can pride yourself on doing it the hard way, like reading monochromatic code, but the world has already moved on.

FWIW I think there's a kernel of truth when you worry about reading skills, but 1) that's a longer trend involving all kinds of political and cultural issues, and 2) right now I'm happy with any improvement to technical communication. I think people might read more if books were better written & more respectful of their time.
by apparent | 2025-07-22 04:16:20+00:00
Do you find yourself learning from how AI structures your bullet points or rewrites messages?

I sort of feel like it would blunt the downsides of AI rewriting everything if it had to explain why it was making all the changes. Being told the rationale would allow users to make better decisions about whether to accept/reject a change, and also help the user avoid making the same writing mistakes in the future.
by Mindless2112 | 2025-07-22 04:16:28+00:00
When an optometrist chose to file a claim against my medical insurance (which did not pay) rather than my vision insurance (which would), the only way I was able to get them to fix it was by filing a complaint with the BBB. Multiple calls with customer service only resulted in "there is nothing we can do to change it", but somehow they figured out how to fix it when they got the BBB complaint letter.

How else can private citizens keep businesses honest? Complaining on the internet only works if you have lots of followers.
by voidhorse | 2025-07-22 04:17:21+00:00
> I always joke about documentation as write only content. It's the type of thing you are asked to write that then doesn't get used or read.

That's not actually true. It may be true now when everyone still has context, but if you built a sound system that will outlast your own contributions to it, the documentation becomes invaluable.

> People are skimming, not reading.

Yes. The cause of much suffering and misery in the modern world.

> And they'll mercilessly use LLMs to deal with long form drivel produced by their colleagues.

otoh, they also use them to generate more noise and drivel than we ever imagined possible. When it took human effort to pump out boring corp-speak, that at least put a cap on the amount of useless documentation and verbiage being emitted. Now the ceiling has been completely blown off. People who have been incapable of even crafting a single sentence their entire lives can now shovel volumes of AI-generated garbage down our throats.
by skissane | 2025-07-22 04:17:27+00:00
This is cool, but honestly I wish it was builtin language syntax not a magic comment, magic comments are kind of ugly. Maybe some day…

(I realise there are some architectural issues with making it built-in syntax-magic comments are easier for external tools to parse, whereas the Python core has very limited knowledge of packaging and dependencies… still, one of these days…)
by sothatsit | 2025-07-22 04:17:31+00:00
I agree, it feels like the value of text documents has gone up immensely with AI making it much easier to make use of them. Accurate reference documentation that AI can point to is really valuable.

Although, the next step on this ladder is going to be that people don't even double-check the facts in the original document, and just take what the LLM said as truth, which is perhaps scarier to me than people not reading the original documents in the first place...
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-07-22 04:18:03+00:00
> omnipresent attitude of "if we don't do it, someone else will" is really tough to resist when it comes to AI, as if the outcome is a foregone conclusion

It requires collective action. The President taking bribes from Qatar sends a clear message that such action won't be coördinated. In the absence of customer pressure, the choice is to play the game or not.
by jesseendahl | 2025-07-22 04:18:22+00:00
>all the encryption in the world does not matter if either end of the conversation is confiscated or pwned by adversaries.

Yes of course, but it's not so simple to bypass the hardware-enforced protections that exist both device side and server side. As far as I can tell, it seems effort was made to design/architect everything in such a way such that the protections can't be retroactively circumvented even under legal compulsion.

Disclosure: I previously worked for Apple, but not on the design/implementation of any of this stuff and this is all my own opinions, not those of Apple.
by HaZeust | 2025-07-22 04:19:45+00:00
>"Even if they prevented some terror attacks (and as we know they failed spectacularly to prevente several), that's not a price worth paying IMO."

What's always been funny to me about the CIA is if they didn't even do these things:

>"overthrow democratically elected leaders, torture innocents, run vile ph psychological experiments"

There probably would have been less - if any - of those terror attacks to worry about in the first place.

It always existed to provoke and to force varying degrees of military response from nations we antagonized. It was ALWAYS to justify a status quo propped by a military industrial complex - and to overstay the luxuries given to us by Pax Americana. We could have pulled off a peaceful era without bullying, I'm sure of it.
by runako | 2025-07-22 04:20:08+00:00
> how tech savvy someone is

> rare power users

I would expect a lot of overlap between these two groups! Extremely common things tech people do that benefit greatly from high-bandwidth connections:

- disk backup to the cloud

- use Docker

- have a household with multiple HD TVs (Netflix recommends 30Mbps per stream)

- software installs/updates as a brief interlude instead of an ordeal

Essentially, high-bandwidth connections let you use the Internet like it's functionally infinite instead of something rationed.
by bamboozled | 2025-07-22 04:20:56+00:00
But what's your solution to extreme amounts of disinformation and propaganda ? This is my issue, everyone is all free speech at all costs, but if you look at the USA, the cost is extreme, potentially even terminal. I don't really see anyway out of it at this stage, I hope I'm wrong and I hope free speech prevails, but right now, I can't see it's looking good.

I'm not saying your wrong, nor am I saying "free speech bad", I'm saying something needs to be done to at lest protect children from ideas like, "Winston Churchill started WW2 and Hitler was just a victim".

Personally, I'd be taking issue, serious issue, if the plan by the Australian government was to block access to libraries and history books, but that's not what I see happening here, they're to do something about foreign propaganda poising kids brains and because the companies would never regulate themselves, they're trying to do something but it seems futile.
by freddie_mercury | 2025-07-22 04:21:12+00:00
It IS built-in language syntax. It's defined in the PEP, that's built-in. It's syntax:

"Any Python script may have top-level comment blocks that MUST start with the line # /// TYPE where TYPE determines how to process the content. That is: a single #, followed by a single space, followed by three forward slashes, followed by a single space, followed by the type of metadata. Block MUST end with the line # ///. That is: a single #, followed by a single space, followed by three forward slashes. The TYPE MUST only consist of ASCII letters, numbers and hyphens."

That's the syntax.

Built-in language syntax.
by tsimionescu | 2025-07-22 04:22:19+00:00
I think you have a big disconnect with the Indie Hacker community. It sounds like you posted there hoping to get them as an audience and potential users of your project. But they assumed you are posting as a fellow founder trying to get feedback on your business. So they gave you advice about your business (which you didn't want) and didn't much care to check out the actual project (which they assumed is secondary).

You should probably try to clarify this, address them more directly and make it clear that you're trying to gain them as users of your project - if you want to pursue this path at all, of course.

Also, remember that no one owes you to try out your project. It's perfectly fine for many people to just not care about the problem you're trying to solve, even if to you it seems like a very important idea. Personally, I'm not vibe coding or using Ai much at all, so I would have no interest in trying out your product, even though it is free. This is not me being rude in any way: I'm just not your target audience. Perhaps the people on Indie Hackers are also not, though likely for other reasons. Or perhaps your pitch just wasn't attractive or clear enough.
by bjackman | 2025-07-22 04:22:33+00:00
Yeah I guess it confirms your point in a way too.

There's nothing keeping me from switching except the activation energy cost. Almost every aspect of working in my area (Linux kernel) is painful so I'm constantly investing in tooling and workflow stuff. So usually I just don't feel like investing EVEN MORE in the area of tooling that's probably least painful of all.

So yeah this is still basically a recommendation for people to try JJ!
by muzani | 2025-07-22 04:23:28+00:00
Job boards suck. Once, a company rejected me on a job board but had actually contacted me via HN - they quickly changed the status from failed to in interviews to avoid confusion. Another time, the job board rejected me half a month after I had been working at the place.

LinkedIn is a little better, but it's just flooded by busy recruiters who message literally everyone then remember two weeks later about that job they were talking to you about.

I tried scraping job postings but there's literally 0% response rate because I guess everyone else does this too.

Got my current job from HN's who wants a job. Just started this month, so it works.

Unfortunately with the AI spam you might have to go old school and cold DM/email people on LinkedIn or something.
by epicureanideal | 2025-07-22 04:24:40+00:00
Even if supersonic flight were 2.4x less fuel efficient than regular flights, based on Concorde vs other aircraft, if that translated into 2.4x ticket prices, a lot of people would still pay it.

$1000 vs $2400 to get to Europe in 6 hours instead of 12? A lot of people who just hate those long flights would pay for it, especially given that flights are only a portion of total vacation cost, together with hotels, etc.

Or for a flight inside the US, $1000 rather than $400, but to get from coast to coast in 3 hours rather than 6, may be very worth it for some people.

https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/107206/how-clos...
by voidhorse | 2025-07-22 04:25:06+00:00
I would say: sort of.

I think proving theorems is a better analogy than rote calculation—like the writing process, it is creative.

While mathematicians don't sit down and smash random symbols together to concoct proofs, many of them will stress the importance of good notation. Chewing on notation a bit can help reveal connections in the hunt for a proof.

When people claim that "writing is thinking" they mean something similar. The free-associative process of writing out our thoughts can help bring an initial clarity that is difficult to achieve without an external medium. Most of the time, we ought to polish those thoughts and connections just as mathematician ought to polish his proof sketch, but there is some extent to which the actual activity does in fact make up a significant portion of the thinking process. This is why offloading all of that activity to LLMs is dangerous. You can judge the string of propositions produced by an LLM, but you haven't thought them.
by komali2 | 2025-07-22 04:25:16+00:00
Reminds me when I mentioned to my friend's Grandpa that I get AAA just cause I need an IDP and he went onto this big tangent about how he's been a "proud card-carrying AAA member for 40 years" or some such, talked about it like it was a club, he'd meet other members for dinners and whatnot.

I think America was basically a different country before the 90s.