MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by fc417fc802 | 2025-07-04 06:59:41+00:00
If LLMs had the necessary theory of mind to model context well enough to write the comment in question the world would be a very different place. Writing style and fitting in to the context are entirely different things.

LLM responses tend to give me the vibe of a disengaged office worker who isn't emotionally present and lacks a proper mental model of the topic. It's been shocking to me to witness how frequently people around me IRL fail to notice such writing.
by pjmlp | 2025-07-04 06:59:41+00:00
Looks like it, while at the same time still lacks any killer application that would make learning Zig a requirement, regardless of one's opinion on the language, like it already happened with many others now in mainstream.

So where is Zig's OS, browser, docker, engine, security, whatever XYZ, that would make having Zig on the toolbox a requirement?

I don't see Bun nor Tiger Beetle being that app.
by bryanrasmussen | 2025-07-04 06:59:52+00:00
>LLM isn't like calculator or microwave oven or other technology before. (Like OP's article) But it really is.

I would not buy a calculator that hallucinated wrong answers part of the time. Or a microwave oven that told you it grilled the chicken but it didn't and you have to die from Salmonella poisoning.
by ndsipa_pomu | 2025-07-04 06:59:57+00:00
I see the major problem isn't that there will be just warmer temperatures, but that the climate will become unpredictably changeable. For the moment, it can be beneficial for agriculture in some areas, but it's likely that our global food production will have to massively change to take into account times of drought and flooding that will destroy crops in some areas. Whereas now we can just grow crops in fields, we may have to grow food in greenhouses just to be able to provide the plants with consistent growing conditions.
by NitpickLawyer | 2025-07-04 07:00:03+00:00
> once LLMs get abandoned

See, you start making a good point in your rant, but then go too much and stop making sense. LLMs are not going to be abandoned. They've "solved" intent from natural language. They're here to stay.

Of course "AI" will get new things. And architectures might improve. And new things will be discovered and added to the tool box. But having the ability to use natural language as input is so invaluable that there's no way we'll just abandon it...
by audunw | 2025-07-04 07:00:09+00:00
This is a standard library change, not a syntax change

I think the main big thing that’s left for 1.0 is to resurrect async/await.. and that’s a huge thing because arguably very few if any language has gotten that truly right.

As the PR description mentions: “This is part of a series of changes leading up to "I/O as an Interface" and Async/Await Resurrection.”

So this work is partially related to getting async/await right. And getting IO right is a very important part of that.

I think it’s a good idea for Zig to try to avoid a Python 3 situation after they reach 1.0. The project seems fairly focused to me, but they’re trying to solve some difficult problems. And they spend more time working on the compiler and compiler infrastructure than other languages, which is also good. Working on their own backend is actually critical for the language itself, because part of what’s holding Zig back from doing async right is limitations and flaws in LLVM
by simonw | 2025-07-04 07:00:11+00:00
Looks like I was the inspiration for this post then. https://bsky.app/profile/simonwillison.net/post/3lt2xbayttk2...

> Quitting programming as a career right now because of LLMs would be like quitting carpentry as a career thanks to the invention of the table saw.

The reaction to that post has been interesting. It's mainly intended to be an argument against the LLM hype! I'm pushing back against all the people who are saying "LLMs are so incredible at programming that nobody should consider programming as a career any more" - I think that's total nonsense, like a carpenter quitting because someone invented the table saw.

Analogies like this will inevitably get people hung up on the details of the analogy though. Lots of people jumped straight to "a table saw does a single job reliably, unlike LLMs which are non-deterministic".

I picked table saws because they are actually really dangerous and can cut your thumb off if you don't know how to use them.
by a_tartaruga | 2025-07-04 07:00:23+00:00
The surprising part of STARKS and SNARKS comes down to the nature of polynomials. It's surprisingly easy to tell two polynomials apart with a small number of random checks (Schwartz Zippel lemma). In light of this it's not surprising there is good reading comparing them to erasure codes which rely on exactly this property of polynomials.

The non-interactive piece is pretty straightforward you just simulate challenge response conversation with unbiasible public randomness and show the transcript (Fiat Shamir transform).

Another area worth exploring is how some of these proof systems can have such incredibly small proofs (192 bytes for any computation in groth16 zk snarks). That relies on the much more difficult to intuit theory of elliptic curve pairing functions.
by kragen | 2025-07-04 07:01:23+00:00
Point source capture is net sequestration if the fuel is made by direct air capture. That sounds stupid but biomass fuel actually achieves this. It probably can't scale high enough, though.

I don't know enough about thermodynamics to calculate the fundamental limits. I suspect that low-temperature sorbents like triethanolamine can currently do direct air capture for less than the energy produced by the fuel, but the process is complicated, involving things like embodied energy in fan motors and hard-to-predict maintenance costs. In a cousin comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44461370) I did an upper-bound calculation with a very-well-understood atmospheric carbon capture process that people have been doing inadvertently in a no-net-sequestration fashion for thousands of years. It came up with burning no more than 2 kg of coal per kg of carbon dioxide removed, which is theoretically significant net sequestration (if you do point-source capture on the coal burning) but far too expensive to make a dent.

Sequestration processes like serpentinization are actually exothermic. The idea there is that you react carbon dioxide with olivine and get serpentine and heat. There's vastly more olivine available than any crustal rock such as limestone. You can do this in lots of ways; for example, you can pump concentrated carbon dioxide down a well into fracked olivine, where it reacts, or you can crush olivine from an olivine quarry into olivine sand and just dump it on beaches, or build artificial islands out of it in Dubai or disputed areas of the South China Sea. Crushing the olivine costs energy, though, and it's energy that's mostly not stored for the process; it just provides more surface area for the same reaction.

I don't actually favor this approach (what do you do if you decide the beaches are removing too much carbon dioxide? Beaches don't have emergency stop buttons) but it does show that in principle the effective energy consumption of direct air capture doesn't even have to be positive.
by NaOH | 2025-07-04 07:01:31+00:00
Dupe of a dupe of a dupe:

Tell HN: Google banned me for reporting CT vulns they fixed hours later - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44454141 - 3 July 2025 (1 comment)

Tell HN: Google says "not vuln", fixes hours later without attribution - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44456382 - 3 July 2025 (3 comments)
Show HN: Pinterest Video Downloader – Pinterest Image and Video Downloader
by qwikhost | 2025-07-04 07:02:06+00:00
Download Pinterest videos & images instantly. Perfect for creators & bloggers. Fast, simple, free Pinterest media saver tool.

Pinterest Video Downloader – Save Everything Instantly!

The Ultimate Chrome Extension for Fast Pinterest Downloads

Tired of saving Pinterest Pins one by one? Pinterest Video Downloader lets you grab entire boards, feeds, or collections in seconds! Save stunning images and engaging videos effortlessly. Perfect for building mood boards, curating inspiration, or collecting content for creative projects.
by oefrha | 2025-07-04 07:02:16+00:00
I'm too jaded to pointlessly debate all the misunderstandings about copyright and licenses. Bottom line is, this case is clearly not going to court, so there's no entity allowing or not allowing them to do anything, the only thing that matters is does this act of hiding enrages the original author even more? My answer to that is yes. Plus that old commit is still there, accessible after a couple of rather obscure clicks, so it's not even taken down if you want to debate technicalities.
by cousin_it | 2025-07-04 07:02:51+00:00
This reminds me of the normie/autistic/sociopath triangle. The idea is that sociopaths can see through normies, normies can see through autists, and autists can see through sociopaths - when there's a sociopath, often the normies in the group will be easily fooled by him, but the autists will be onto him right away. Don't know why that is, but it's true in my experience.

Same with AI. I'm notably more autistic (or more aspie, or whatever) than my friend group, and also I much more easily recognize AI text and images as uncanny slop, while my friends are more easily wowed by it. Maybe AI output has the same "superficially impressive but empty inside" quality as the stuff that sociopaths say.
by lovich | 2025-07-04 07:03:11+00:00
I read through the essay and really resonated with some parts and didn’t resonate with others, but I think they put some words to the feelings I have had on AI and its effect in the tech industry

> There are people who use these, apparently. And it just feels so… depressing. There are people I once respected who, apparently, don’t actually enjoy doing the thing. They would like to describe what they want and receive Whatever — some beige sludge that vaguely resembles it. That isn’t programming, though. That’s management, a fairly different job. I’m not interested in managing. I’m certainly not interested in managing this bizarre polite lying daydream machine. It feels like a vizier who has definitely been spending some time plotting my demise.

I was several minutes of reading before this paragraph when the idea hit me that this person hates managing. Because everyone I’ve met who hates using AI to produce software describes to me problems like the AI not being correct or lying to them if the model thought that would please you better, and that’s my experience with junior engineers as a manager.

And everyone I’ve met who loves AI at some point makes an analogy to it, that compares it to a team of eager juniors who can do a lot of work fast but can’t have their output trusted blindly, and that’s my experience with junior engineers as a manager.

And then anyone whose been trying to get an Engineering manager job over the past few months and tracking their applications metadata has seen the number of open postings for their requirements go down month after month unless you drop the manager part and keep all the same criteria but as IC

And then I read commentary from megacorps about their layoffs and read between the lines like here[1]

>… a Microsoft spokesperson said in a statement, adding that the company is reducing managerial layers …

I think our general consternation around this is coming from creators being forced into management instead of being able to outsource those tasks to their own managers.

I am not really sure what to do with this insight

[1] https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/02/tech/microsoft-layoffs-9000-e...
by rajnathani | 2025-07-04 07:04:13+00:00
Very interesting, thanks for sharing your experience. But maybe this is the case for carbon fiber based filaments only (i.e. this is likely <1% of carbon-fiber as the use-case of 3D printing carbon fiber based hybrid plastic filaments is a new thing), and that most real-world carbon fiber is in the form of flat sheets whereby I doubt there are strands coming out.
by vincnetas | 2025-07-04 07:04:33+00:00
After reading "...the press release and in the fine print it says that now it can count the number of letters in “Mississippi” correctly or whatever" tried to count letters in another word :)

You said: how many letters are in the lithuanian word "nebeprisikaspinaudamas"? Just give me one number. ChatGPT said: 23

You said: how many letters are in the lithuanian word 'nebeprisikaspinaudamas'. Just give me one number. ChatGPT said: 21

Both are incorrect by the way. It's 22
by seanhunter | 2025-07-04 07:05:44+00:00
I somewhat doubt they can since in the US the BusyBox lawsuits pretty much all ended with the infringers settling and paying out, and those that didn’t settle, busybox won[1]. I would think that, and the original artistic license lawsuits (which were decided on by the US court of appeals) established that infringing open source softwaree licenses is a copyright infringement.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BusyBox#GPL_lawsuits
by raczekk | 2025-07-04 07:05:57+00:00
We recently built a production-grade multi-agent system for document analysis using Anthropic’s Model Context Protocol (MCP). The system orchestrates 15+ agents with dynamic tool usage and task delegation.

Here's the deep dive: https://deepsense.ai/blog/standardizing-ai-agent-integration...

Key insights:

1. When MCP works best:

- Multiple agents sharing tools/resources

- Dynamic tool orchestration needs

- Rapid prototypes that must scale to production

2. When MCP is overkill:

- Simple static API integrations

- Performance-critical apps needing sub-ms latency

- When direct SDK calls are clearer

3. Practical takeaways:

- Design APIs for LLMs, not humans (strict typing = fewer errors)

- Limit tool access per agent (reduced hallucinations + ~50% token savings)

We also uncovered real security pitfalls in production and saw how model-task matching (e.g. Haiku vs Sonnet) affects performance and cost.

What are your experiences?
by polotics | 2025-07-04 07:06:15+00:00
Also maybe at one point accept that "Oil" with an EROEI dangerously getting to below the 1.0 mark is not the same "Oil" as was talked-about 30 years ago: if your shale sands have to get burnt with local coal or natgas to get a pipeline-able liquid, but the total energy spent on the process is about as much as will be dispersed by combustion engines down the line... then you're treading very murky waters indeed.
by ninetyninenine | 2025-07-04 07:07:25+00:00
You have to realize that we're only a couple years into wide spread adoption of LLMs as agentic coding partners. It's obvious too everyone, and you that LLMs currently cannot replace coders.

People are talking about the trendline, what AI was 5 years ago versus what AI is today points to a different AI 5 years down the line. Whatever AI will be 5 years from now it is immensely possible that LLMs may eliminate programming as a career. If not 5 years... give it 10. If not 10, give it 15. Maybe it happens in a day, a major break through in AI, or maybe it will be like what's currently happening, slow erosion and infiltration into our daily tasks where it takes on more and more responsibilities until one day, it's doing everything.

I mean do I even have to state the above? We all know it. What's baffling to me is how I get people saying shit like this:

>"LLMs are so incredible at programming that nobody should consider programming as a career any more" - I think that's total nonsense, like a carpenter quitting because someone invented the table saw.

I mean it's an obvious complete misrepresentation. People are talking about the future. Not the status quo and we ALL know this yet we still make comments like that.
by 0xfaded | 2025-07-04 07:07:31+00:00
There are straightforward immigration paths to most of the desirable countries within Europe if you can land a job that pays a standard deviation above the mean, which most tech workers can. However, you're still looking at 1/4 of a silicon valley salary.

The game plan should really be more centered around making your money in the US and then moving for the better quality of life or to do something that aligns with your values. I'd say it's the moving wealth part where people are more likely to fall into traps (ever heard of an exit tax?), but even then you're probably still better off hiring a local account (cost me 2k when I first moved to Denmark, and another 2k when I left :facepalm:).
by franciscop | 2025-07-04 07:08:30+00:00
I am learning Japanese (again) now and it's such a stark improvement vs when I first tried. When I don't understand something, LLMs explain it perfectly well, and with a bit of prompting they give me the right practice bits I need for my level.

For a specific example, when 2 grammar points seem to mean the same thing, teachers here in Japan would either not explain the difference, or make a confusing explanation in Japanese.

It's still private-ish/only for myself, but I generated all of this with LLMs and using it to learn (I'm around N4~N3) :

- Grammar: https://practice.cards/grammar

- Stories, with audio (takes a bit to load): https://practice.cards/stories

It's true though that you still need the motivation, but there are 2 sides of AI here and just wanted to give the other side.
by alt187 | 2025-07-04 07:08:41+00:00
> looks like they fixed it: https://github.com/pickle-com/glass/commit/5c462179acface889...

Not fixed, covered up.

> let's not freak out - you can't "steal" open-source code, they used an incompatible license. that was accidentally too free.

What a poetic formulation? In reality, they deleted history and they put a license that allows the "freedom" to let them monetize the code. I wonder how's the original author more free with this license? How is anyone more free? Sounds like the license was "accidentally" "too free" in a way that only made themselves more free.

> people monetizing something you open-source isn't stealing.

It's, in fact, the precise definition when the open-source project uses the GPLv3 license.
by lovich | 2025-07-04 07:08:48+00:00
A lot of your examples are fallacious arguments that are weak or just generally wrong but your first one is

>”list them”

If you are arguing that something exists, then being asked to prove its existence is table stakes, not poor arguments

You starting with a strong argument in your list of bad arguments and then ending with shit that mocks anyone calling you out makes me believe that you are not discussing this topic in good faith
by worldsayshi | 2025-07-04 07:09:20+00:00
> I shudder to think where we'll be if the corporate-media machine keeps hammering the message "you don't have to bother learning how to draw, drawing is hard, just get ChatGPT to draw pictures for you" to young people for years to come.

This should be comparable to how much fewer people in the west today know how to work a farm or build machinery. Each technological shift comes at a cost of population competence.

I do have a feeling that this time it could be different. Because this shift has this meta-quality to it. It has never been easier to acquire, at least theoretical, knowledge. But the incentives for learning are shifting in strange directions.
by Findecanor | 2025-07-04 07:09:32+00:00
The profile includes not just additional instructions but also architectural requirements that can't be emulated. The size of cache lines and reservation sets must be 64 bytes (there is no instruction to query it, like there is on ARM). Data-independent execution latency is important for protecting cryptography against timing attacks.

Those were already in RVA22, and the difference from that to RVA23 could probably be emulated with traps though.

However, I think that some of the new instructions in RVA23 may potentially become very common in some binaries later on and could possibly trap so often that they would slow down those programs considerably.
by bruce511 | 2025-07-04 07:10:40+00:00
Personally I think your basic premise is false, hence your conclusion is false.

>> We all need jobs to afford living

In many countries this is already not true. There is already enough wealth that there is enough for everyone.

Yes, the western mindset is kinda "you don't work, you don't get paid". The idea that people can "free load" on the system is offensive at a really deep emotional level. If I suggest that a third of the people can work, and the other 2 thirds do nothing, but get supported, most will get distressed [1]. The very essence of US society is that we are defined by our work.

And yet if 2% of the work force is in agriculture, and produce enough food for all, why is hunger a thing?

As jobs become ever more productive, perhaps just -considering- a world where worth is not linked to output is a useful thought exercise.

No country has figured this out perfectly yet. Norway is pretty close. Lots of Europe has endless unemployment benefits. Yes, there's still progress to be made there.

[1] of course, even in the US, already it's OK for only a 3rd to work. Children don't work. Neither do retirees. Both essentially live off the labor of those in-between. But imagine if we keep raising the start-working age, while reducing retirement benefits age....
by ninetyninenine | 2025-07-04 07:11:04+00:00
The things that were revolutionary in the past all eventually become common place and boring. It's happened to almost everything and continues to happen to anything new that comes out.

LLMs will accelerate the pace of this assimilation. New trends and new things will become popular and generic so fast that we'll have to get really inventive to stay ahead of the curve.
by resonious | 2025-07-04 07:11:17+00:00
I agree with a lot of this at the outset, but don't really like the gloomy outlook. I don't think there's much to gain by writing off all this unfortunate stuff as people being stupid and greedy. I mean sure, that may be true, but you can flip it around and say that it's impressive that we have it as good as we do despite having to co-exist with stupidity and greed. Better yet, you can see it as a challenge to overcome.

And I'm not the only one saying this but - the bit about LLMs is likely throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Yes the "AI-ification" of everything is horrible and people are shoehorning it into places where it's not useful. But to say that every single LLM interaction is wrong/not useful is just not true (though it might be true if you limit yourself to only freely available models!). Using LLMs effectively is a skill in itself, and not one to be underestimated. Just because you failed to get it to do something it's not well-suited to doesn't mean it can't do anything at all.

Though the conclusion (do things, make things) I do agree with anyway.
by fakedang | 2025-07-04 07:12:15+00:00
I'm Indian so that totally works out for me :)

> Maybe one day India will be able to afford the products we’re building for them!!!!

Actually they already do. Only there's so much glaring inequality in the country that wealth is concentrated in the hands of about 50 million people or so.

My point was that offshoring is inevitable. If it's not India, it will be Brazil or Poland or Africa. The best folks hired in these countries have zero interest in relocating to the West when they can live like royalty in their own home countries. They will gladly take 25% of the Western worker's paycheck and do an on par or better job. For the more mundane tasks, companies can hire Indian BPOs for cheap, who will then work their Indian employees to the bone for peanuts. At the end of the day, both results give a profitable outcome to the outsourcing company. The issues arise only when the company decides to outsource actual knowledge work to Indian sweatshops.