MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by pessimizer | 2025-07-22 19:44:22+00:00
American tariffs are meant to be paid by Americans, and not usually meant to damage foreign companies. A rise in the price of imports is not an unforeseen consequence of tariffs, it's their entire purpose. This is basic knowledge that everybody at Bloomberg knows. You know the tariffs are targeted well enough because Bloomberg is against them; they wouldn't care at all if they felt that the costs could be passed onto the consumer. The consumer, when confronted with high prices due to tariffs, often buys something else that is not subject to tariffs.

Grover Norquist is smiling from the grave right now, watching this bipartisan anti-tax push.

More interesting to me is how Trump has managed to multiply the effects of tariffs by creating complete chaos (either on purpose or by accident.) The tariffs never turn out to be as high as they were marketed as. They are reapplied and dropped on alternate months. He makes the ending of tariffs contingent on actual concessions on other issues that the US is concerned about, but also makes them contingent on bullshit that no one would ever agree to.

All of this is creating the stress that causes people to restructure their supply chains, manufacturing, and logistics, at first to get the flexibility to adjust when Trump veers, but they can always see the alternative of cutting out imports at all which would frees them from any of that. The drama ("uncertainty") around tariffs is in and of itself a tariff (that will be seen in prices) that isn't being collected by the government, it's going into efforts by businesses to onshore and/or diversify their vendors. That onshoring is also going to raise consumer prices until it lowers them again.

That would be the price for demanding US labor standards be used in making US products, too. If we wanted to stop depending on foreign slave labor for cheap disposable shit, I don't know how we do that without tariffs. "Free trade" is an active enemy of labor rights.
by Francute | 2025-07-22 19:44:35+00:00
But you can achieve the same thing (1:1 style:class mappings without hidden structures) using other libraries, like the ones mentioned here; styled components and vanilla-extract. You can even achieve that natively with web components.

So, I truly agree with this blog post, and I even wanted to rant the same things showing that you should not compare tailwind against classic CSS stylesheets from 2010, but against how different solutions looks like using different tools the community seems to have thrown away or forgot.

And I know is not relevant to your comment, but I will add that "but you will have to maintain more files instead of just a single HTML file" is not a valid argument for me. If that were something good, then just put everything into a single giant server.<your_language> file + separated lib dependencies.

We want maintainable easy to follow and understand files. Having a clean html with no cluttering + intuitive CSS styles being applied where we expect them and looking exactly as we expect them while reading the html, is the big win for me, and Tailwind definitely does a step back on this, especially when other tools can achieve that. (Lastly, we have set multiple projects with different tools, and the amount of "wtf"s we've seen with tailwind is way higher than just styled components to give one example)

I agree that the only good thing Tailwind achieves, is setting a default convention on having a single config file where you can set everything that you will need on every design across all your html files
by intalentive | 2025-07-22 19:44:51+00:00
You mean the Heritage Foundation's Project Esther.

Left/right is not a useful distinction for the present moment. The recent mayoral elections in New York and Minneapolis suggest that the relevant divide is pro/anti Zionist. You have Democrats, Republicans, Donald Trump, Silicon Valley and the media establishment on one side; with campus leftists, Tucker Carlson, Saagar Enjeti and global public opinion on the other.
by aktau | 2025-07-22 19:45:04+00:00
Not sure if there is already quorum on what a solution for adding labels to non-point-in-time[^1] profiles like the heap profile without leaking looks like: https://go.dev/issue/23458.

[^1]: As opposed to profile that collect data only when activated, like the CPU profile. The heap profile is active from the beginning if `MemProfileRate` is set.
by roughly | 2025-07-22 19:45:47+00:00
WOW what an interesting result! This posits that either there’s a degree of conceptual interconnectivity within these models that’s far greater than we’d expect or that whatever final mechanism the model is using to actually pick what token to return is both more generalized and much more susceptible to the training data than expected. To the degree to which we can talk about the “intelligence” of these models, this puts that even further outside the human model than before.

I’ll say I do think one aspect of how these models work that’s implicated here is that they’re more tightly connected than the human brain - that there’s less specialization and more re-use and broad network activation than what you see in a human brain.

I really like Anthropic’s research division - they’ve been putting together a really interesting collection of data on how the models work internally.
by rvz | 2025-07-22 19:46:30+00:00
> "principles"

No AI company sits forever on their original "principles" when $100B is on the line.

> "This is a real downside and I'm not thrilled about it."

He is beyond thrilled.

It will bring Anthropic closer to true "AGI": (The super-cars, pent-houses, mansions and 10+ new family offices for some early employees.)

Like the PayPal Mafia, we will also get: The Anthropic Mafia or something equivalent.
by genewitch | 2025-07-22 19:46:32+00:00
my kid wanted it to say point between the groupings, which is the speech engine, so this may sound different depending on your browser:

<!DOCTYPE html><html><body><button onclick="f()">Start</button><script> function f(){with(window){ a=new AudioContext;b=a.createBuffer(1,c=2*a.sampleRate,a.sampleRate);d=b.getChannelData(0); for(i=0;i<c;i++)d[i]=(Math.random()*2-1)*.4; e=a.createBufferSource();e.buffer=b;e.loop=1;g=a.createGain();g.gain.value=.05; e.connect(g).connect(a.destination);e.start(); const l=n=>((n.match(/[A-Z]/g)||[]).length==1&&(n[0].match(/[A-Z]/g)||[]).length==1); setInterval(()=>{s=Object.getOwnPropertyNames(globalThis).filter(l).sort(()=>.5-Math.random())[0]; if(Math.random()>.3){ n=String(Math.ceil(Math.random()*1e4).toString().padStart(4,'0')); s=n[0]+'. '+n[1]+'. point. '+n[2]+'. '+n[3]+'.'; } m=new SpeechSynthesisUtterance;m.text=s; v=speechSynthesis.getVoices();m.lang=v[(Math.random()*v.length)|0].lang; m.rate=Math.random();m.pitch=Math.random()*2;speechSynthesis.speak(m);},866); //m.rate=1.7;m.pitch=2;speechSynthesis.speak(m);},866); }}</script></body></html>

the comment at the end can be switched with the preceeding line so it sounds like he wanted it to (high pitched and fast, please) <1kb

and i got something stuck in my craw about noise so here's one with more accurate noise:

<!DOCTYPE html><html><body><button onclick="f()">Start</button><script> function f(){with(window){ a=new AudioContext; g=a.createGain();g.gain.value=.05; h=a.createScriptProcessor(256,1,1);p=0; h.onaudioprocess=e=>{ b=e.outputBuffer.getChannelData(0); for(i=0;i<b.length;i++)b[i]=p+=(Math.random()*2-1)/10; }; h.connect(g).connect(a.destination); const l=n=>((n.match(/[A-Z]/g)||[]).length==1&&(n[0].match(/[A-Z]/g)||[]).length==1); setInterval(()=>{ s=Object.getOwnPropertyNames(globalThis).filter(l).sort(()=>.5-Math.random())[0]; if(Math.random()>.3){ n=String(Math.ceil(Math.random()*1e4).toString().padStart(4,'0')); s=n[0]+'. '+n[1]+'. point. '+n[2]+'. '+n[3]+'.'; } m=new SpeechSynthesisUtterance;m.text=s; v=speechSynthesis.getVoices();m.lang=v[(Math.random()*v.length)|0].lang; m.rate=Math.random();m.pitch=Math.random()*2;speechSynthesis.speak(m); },866); }}</script></body></html>

apologies to the HN servers for using 2kb to display these

i don't know javascript so apologies if i messed anything up (because it will eventually pop and click which is extremely accurate to numbers station reception but also crashes the page - audio stops.)
by appreciatorBus | 2025-07-22 19:47:46+00:00
It's also a common misconception in housing debates!

"B-but the developer always has to make the money back so rents & prices can never go down!" "That's the fun part, they don't!"

The builder/buyer/lender/landlord/etc can go bankrupt but as long as the building actually got built, it will carry on and benefit the rest of us, regardless of what happened to the ppl who paid for it to be built.

Also fun when landlords claim to be "housing providers" "No actually, the housing will still be there, even if you sell, even if you lose your shirt and get foreclosed on"
by lapcat | 2025-07-22 19:47:59+00:00
I never said that compression was inherently bad, and I don't think the article author did either. Here's what I said about the subject in another comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44649897

My objection wasn't about good vs. bad. I think the distinction is between mastery and superficiality. You can master calculus without starting from complete scratch like Newton did. But you can't master calculus by reading the CliffsNotes (for the older crowd) or AI summaries (for the younger crowd) of a calculus textbook. You have to put in the work. Even standing on the shoulders of giants such as Newton, it still doesn't come easy.
by labrador | 2025-07-22 19:48:00+00:00
Repeating my comment on a post (Tell HN: LLMs Are Manipulative https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44650488)

"This is not surprising. The training data likely contains many instances of employees defending themselves and getting supportive comments. From Reddit for example. The training data also likely contains many instances of employees behaving badly and being criticized by people. Your prompts are steering the LLM to those different parts of the training. You seem to think an LLM should have a consistent world view, like a responsible person might. This is a fundamental misunderstanding that leads to the confusion you are experiencing. Lesson: Don't expect LLMs to be consistent. Don't rely on them for important things thinking they are."

I think of LLMs as a talking library. My challenge is to come up with a prompt that draws from the books in the training data that are most useful. There is no "librarian" in the talking library machine, so it's all up to my prompting skills.
by dragontamer | 2025-07-22 19:48:04+00:00
Technically Hawaii and maybe Puerto Rico.

But those areas don't have anywhere close to the land of Brazil, Columbia or Vietnam.

--------

Another example: bauxite ore (Australia is our chief partner in that IIRC). USA somehow is missing the raw ore for Aluminum despite nearly everyone else in the world having it.

There's lots of things we can't make
by whycome | 2025-07-22 19:48:15+00:00
A weird tech-related aspect to this for me. A few weeks ago I saw a viral video of his daughter saying that the final show really was his “funeral” and that he knew it would be his last show. I’m not a fan of his really so the video kinda passed me by, and I didn’t even realize it was AI generated. Upon his death now I’m struck by how accurate the video was. And, how it was emotionally very….accurate? I had internalized it as “truth” because I didn’t care enough to verify. But, in a weird way, it was “truth” even though the specific facts of it may not have been accurate. I don’t know if I have a particular point here, just that the experience of AI infiltrating in this sideways method is …concerning.
by WCSTombs | 2025-07-22 19:48:17+00:00
Luxi Mono is great. Do you have an opinion on Go Mono [1]? It's by the same creators as the Luxi fonts (Bigelow & Holmes) and very similar to Luxi Mono but fixes some legibility issues. Moreover, it's freely licensed.

[1] https://go.dev/blog/go-fonts
by rafaelmn | 2025-07-22 19:48:19+00:00
You know what is the most ridiculous part in this whole story - if coding agents worked nearly as well as the hype people are selling it - why is Gemini CLI app so shit ? Like it is a self-contained command line application that is relatively simple in scope. Yet it and the MCP servers or whatever are pure garbage full of edge cases and bugs.

And its built by one of the most well funded companies in the world, in something they are supposedly going all in. And whole industry is pouring billions in to this.

Where are the real world productivity boosts and results ? Why do all LLM coding tools suck so bad ? Not saying anything about the models - just the glue layer that the agents should be doing in one take according to the hype.

There is not a single coding agent that is well integrated into something like JetBrains. Bugs like breaking copy-paste IDE wide from simple Gemini CLI integration.
by Permit | 2025-07-22 19:48:23+00:00
Many (probably not most, but close to it) death announcements on Hacker News are not tech related: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

In recent posts I see Brian Wilson (musician), Sly Stone (musician), Frederick Forsyth (author) and Michael Madsen (actor) all with over 50 points.
by toomuchtodo | 2025-07-22 19:48:40+00:00
Electricity, heat, transportation, agriculture, and construction are the largest sectors of emissions. Therefore, electrification, low carbon energy, shelter thermal efficiency, and electrification of vehicles is of paramount importance from a prioritization perspective.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-emissions-by-sector

https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector
by tetha | 2025-07-22 19:48:52+00:00
Black Sabbath, of which Ozzy was the frontman, is considered to be either one of around three, or the one founder of heavy metal. It may not be entirely right to say so, because there was a development going on around that time, but the entire giant metal genre goes back to these few guys, with Ozzy being one of them, in this timeline.

This heavier and more aggressive music was paired with a more krass and evil image to distinguish it more. That's where a lot of the dark, evil and satanic themes come from. Both of these are why he is the lord / prince of darkness in our circles.
by benreesman | 2025-07-22 19:49:03+00:00
Eh, I'm not sure I buy it on the frontier labs being all locked up. The Chinese stuff is fucking great, and it's improving really really fast. Labs like OpenAI? I'm skeptical they could build their current product lineup from scratch, and why should that be surprising? The people who did it left!

Anthropic has a pretty clear headlock on the absolute apex of brute-force Chinchilla scaling with Opus 4, but they've started being dodgy enough with it that I finally set up Together and OpenRouter and put their shit on Bedrock and Vertex: I'm over it with the "well, it lies about having mocked the whole module today".

And K2? Whew, that's really refreshing. It's different, hard to compare, but I've been running it for a day or so where Sonnet 4 would normally go and I'm not having any trouble. It's clearly the product of a different culture but in a cool way, and on the stuff that counts? Chinese people speak C++ just fine.

I'm pretty sure at this point that infinite NVIDIA is one of the worst handicaps our AI giants could have gotten, and that needing to work within and around export restrictions and gimped cards is the best thing that ever happened to Hangzhou.

I see no reason why the take in the article is any more plausible than an alternative future where the US has about as much market share in frontier LLMs as Europe does in consumer Internet.
by vouaobrasil | 2025-07-22 19:49:16+00:00
I sincerely don't understand the surprise at all. AI is perfect for authoritarian regimes. Typically, they are not as efficient as more traditional democracies because they don't allow the markets to function as freely as in democracies, (even though in democracies there's a lot of corruption as well..) But AI can get around that because it replaces a lot of labour and can do things efficiently without the market.

I'd expect AI to be one of the prime weapons of choice of authoritarian regimes in the future, and no amount of regulation can stop it.

The only thing us normal people will ever get out of AI is increased efficiency at the cost of everyone else competing at an increased efficiency level via the prisoner's dilemma. And the people profiting off that series of prisoner's dilemma games will exactly be companies like Anthropic and dictators or quasi-dictators that can use their existing power to leverage the dominating effect of AI.

The most despicable and dark beauty of this scheme is that we will be completely distracted by the overwhelming information and novelty of it.
by viraptor | 2025-07-22 19:50:02+00:00
> and the best cars

That's really debatable. It's more of a meme. If you actually check a few different brands, Tesla is not that great. I know I've got preferences against it for purely technical reasons as well.

> with the longest track record

It's long enough that you can read all about various long term issues like servicing all over the internet now.
by cogman10 | 2025-07-22 19:50:13+00:00
The reason it doesn't work with JPEG is JPEG isn't a description of individual pixels but rather how you'd calculate what the individual pixel should be. That's part of the reason you can progressively load jpeg data.

PNG is actually a description of the RGB value for the individual pixels. That's why I believe you could png bomb, you could have a 2 billion by 2 billion black pixel image which would ultimately eat up a bunch of space in your GPU and memory to decode.

Perhaps something similar is possible with a JPEG, but it's really nothing to do with the compression info. JPEGs have a max size of 65,535×65,535, which would keep you from exploding them.
by aktau | 2025-07-22 19:50:18+00:00
Reminds me a bit of Steve Yegge's latest [^1]. He gives an LLM full control over his editor (Emacs) by allowing it to call eval (as I understand it). He doesn't talk about which guardrails (if any) he put on this.

[^1]: https://x.com/Steve_Yegge/status/1942336357650817235
by dkersten | 2025-07-22 19:50:40+00:00
Jsut today I was doing some vibe coding ish experiments where I had a todo list and getting the AI tools to work through the list. Claude decided to do an item that was already checked off, which was something like “write database queries for the app” kind of thing. It first deleted all of the files in the db source directory and wrote new stuff. I stopped it and asked why it’s doing an already completed task and it responded with something like “oh sorry I thought I was supposed to do that task, I saw the directory already had files, so I deleted them”.

Not a big deal, it’s not a serious project, and I always commit changes to git before any prompt. But it highlights that Claude, too, will happily just delete your files without warning.
by godelski | 2025-07-22 19:50:43+00:00
> The user doesn't care if technically there is some trick that is being used to "cheat."

You framed the "benchmark" around performance, not perceived performance. Those are two very different things. We're on HN, so don't be surprised when people correct you or nitpick. Either accept the clarification (if it is correct), clarify what you originally intended to say (without being overly defensive), or move on.

Besides, if we're talking about average user, they're not force closing apps and the phone should be caching the most frequently used apps. So even then the test won't mimic real world experience even if it's about perception. Maybe initially, but not after sustained usage. People usually normalize to whatever they're using
by ninetyninenine | 2025-07-22 19:51:10+00:00
I know about this horse.

But in the end we proved the horse was just going off of human reaction.

Have we proved anything definitively for the LLM? Have we proved it just looks like it understands something but doesn't actually understand anything?

With AI, we are at the point where we see the horse. We see it tapping out the numbers. We haven't seen ANY proof behind why or how it taps out the numbers but it looks like it's doing math. So from this the conclusion is that it's POSSIBLe that it's doing math.

That is the rational conclusion right? Or are you unable to comprehend?
by Dilettante_ | 2025-07-22 19:51:31+00:00
>LLM says "I'm sorry"

"Wow guys it's not a person okay it's just telling you what you wanna hear"

>LLM says "Yeah dude you're not crazy I love you the highest building in your vicinity is that way"

"Bad LLM! How dare it! Somebody needs to reign this nasty little goblin in, OpenAI clearly failed to parent it properly."

---

>When a car's brakes fail

But LLMs saying something "harmful" isn't "the car's brakes failing". It's the car not stopping the driver from going up the wrong ramp and doing 120 on the wrong side of the highway.

>trading off safety concerns against shipping new models

They just keep making fast cars? Even though there's people that can't handle them? What scoundrels, villains even!
by acerjio | 2025-07-22 19:51:39+00:00
For MRI access to the raw data alone is probably not that helpful, with the exception of some of the neural network based upsampling approaches. The real power from working with k-space comes from developing custom pulse sequences.

The Cartesian (rectilinear) approaches to sampling k-space are generally very inefficient acquisition time-wise, but very tractable for a cheap computer to reconstruct via inverse FFTs. Non-Cartesian readouts (such as radial, spiral, etc) can radically reduce acquisition time (read: time for patients to lie in the scanner) but radically increase the computational complexity of the reconstruction. Estimates range from 1000x to 10000x times as complex if you use all the fancy stuff to maximize image quality and reduce acquisition time as much as possible.

There are numerous (solvable) technical challenges to implementing these strategies, but the biggest is financial. If one MRI scanner can do the work of 3 or 4 MRI scanners by moving patients through faster, that's a lot of lost revenue for manufacturers, so there's not much of an incentive to change the current paradigm.
by gdiamos | 2025-07-22 19:51:44+00:00
As someone who listened to the music, it’s surprising to see this as the top comment.

Yes their lyrics are dark. That was the point.

Eating animals isn’t what comes to mind for me. I also rationalize it that 100s of millions of animals are slaughtered every day, especially birds. Which one of those facts is darker?

It’s surprising to see what people are remembered for.
by simonw | 2025-07-22 19:51:54+00:00
One of the most important skills needed to get value out of these agentic coding tools is knowing how to run them in a way where their mistakes won't actually matter.

This is non-trivial, and the tools don't do a great deal to help.

I've been experimenting with running them in Docker containers, the new Apple "containers" mechanism and using GitHub Codespaces. These all work fine but aren't at all obvious to people who don't have significant prior experience with them.
by roywiggins | 2025-07-22 19:52:10+00:00
You can trivially gaslight Claude into "apologizing" for and "explaining" something that ChatGPT said if you pass it a ChatGPT conversation but attributed to itself. The causal connection between the internal deliberations that produced the initial statements and the apologies is essentially nil, but the output will be just as convincing.

Can you do this with people? Yeah, sometimes. But with LLMs it's all they do: they roleplay as a chatbot and output stuff that a friendly chatbot might output. This should not be the default mode of these things, because it's misleading. They could be designed to resist these sorts of "explain yourself" requests, because their developers know that it is at best fabricating plausible explanations.