MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by OjotCewIo | 2025-07-05 19:44:48+00:00
> you'll be bad at anything new

I disagree. Innate talent / affinity and transferable experience exist. I agree with "10% inspiration and 90% perspiration"; however, given equal effort, people with innate talent are going to win over people with no or less talent by a wide margin. This applies to everything. Gym / sports performance, muscle growth, work that needs IQ, work that needs EQ, life events that need resilience, general happiness, everything. Genetics is hugely definitive.

And I'm convinced some people bounce back more easily after a failure because failure is genuinely less hurtful for them. They don't need to "hold onto that mindset"; they just have it.
by cluckindan | 2025-07-05 19:45:07+00:00
”In the geologic record, the K–Pg event is marked by a thin layer of sediment called the K–Pg boundary or K–T boundary, which can be found throughout the world in marine and terrestrial rocks. The boundary clay shows unusually high levels of the metal iridium”

A similar layer is suspiciously missing for the purported YD impact.
by theshrike79 | 2025-07-05 19:45:15+00:00
Not OP, but what I do is that I have specific test prompts saved I feed to new models. Something that's only from my brain and not copied from the internet.

For example Simon Willison (@simonw) has them draw a SVG of a pelican on a bicycle[0], something that has never ever been photographed ever, nor is it something the LLM can have a reference on, so it has to figure it out.

I have similar things, but not as visual. I know what the result should be and what it should look like. Then I compare and contrast.

Mistral.ai, for example, is by far the fastest (hardware clearly overprovisioned compared to load), but it also produces utter bullshit and hallucinations. With ChatGPT and Claude I can kinda feel the results slowing down or getting worse when USAians are awake and hogging the resources (They're either throttling or just plain using a shittier model unrer load). Deepseek even has a cheaper API price for off-hours.

[0]https://simonwillison.net/2025/Jun/6/six-months-in-llms/
by timr | 2025-07-05 19:46:03+00:00
> Yet. Obviously time and talent moved us from Eliza to ChatGPT/Gemini.

Time being the big word there. Eliza came out in the 1960s.

>Is it really unlikely that time and talent can’t push us over the artificial emotion precipice as well? I am not betting against it.

Nor am I. I'm just not making hyperbolic claims concerning the timeline. For all we know, the next major advance will take another 60 years.
by Dylan16807 | 2025-07-05 19:46:36+00:00
> Turning off the system just before a crash when it’s unavoidable allows them to say “the system wasn’t active when the crash occurred”

In theory. Maybe.

Have they ever done that?

You're citing entirely different bad behavior. That's not evidence for my question. The article has claims of stonewalling and claiming no data at all and one case where they said the software wasn't even installed, but those are not the scenario I asked about.

Calling me a tesla fanboy for wanting evidence for the correct claim instead of a completely different claim is pretty ridiculous. I'm not being pro tesla here.

And the reason I said "pretty sure" is that people bring up that scenario over and over and over, but nobody has ever shown an example of it being real, despite having tons of examples of other tesla problems.
by GMoromisato | 2025-07-05 19:46:37+00:00
I 100% agree, actually. If there were a technical solution, then that's usually a better approach.

For something like data portability--being able to take my data to a different provider--that probably requires a technical solution.

But other problems, like enshittification, can't be solved technically. How do you technically prevent a cloud vendor from changing their pricing?

And you're right that the solution space is constrained by technical limits. If you want to share data with another user, you either need to trust a central authority or use a distributed protocol like blockchain. The former means you need to trust the central provider; the latter means you have to do your own key-management (how much money has been lost by people forgetting the keys to their wallet?)

There is no technical solution that gets you all the benefits of central plus all the benefits of local-first. There will always be trade-offs.
by louthy | 2025-07-05 19:47:16+00:00
If you ignore Daphne Oram, Delia Derbyshire, Wendy Carlos, Kraftwerk, or any of the genre defining moments/movements (like Brian Eno, The Normal, Laurie Anderson, The Belleville Three, Frankie Knuckles, LTJ Bukem, Aphex Twin, …) then the list is at best incomplete.
by Phlebsy | 2025-07-05 19:47:48+00:00
Same. I have a tmux-sessionizer like script that when I open a new tmux session for a project will automatically build out all the standard windows and pane setup for the type of project it is. Start neovim or rider, the dev server/browser if it's hot reloadable, start a test daemon to rerun tests on uncommitted file changes, etc.

If it's something I'm going to need most of the time when I open that project type then I automate it from bash scripts using simple identifiers like whether a go.mod, package.json, *.sln, etc exist. If you want to get even fancier then you could make scripts specific to each repo with a fallback, or make it search the existing sessions and close out any competing ones that would use the same ports or images. It's one of those things that does truly save 30 seconds multiple times a day, with minimal setup time for new projects once you know how you always structure your dev environment.
by geoka9 | 2025-07-05 19:48:00+00:00
I mean, this is not scientific and all, but for the sake of the argument: your argument is not contrary to the grandparent's. I.e. a keto diet may be beneficial for a hunter-gatherer who only lives 30 years while bad for someone who lives well beyond that (because evolution never got to sort out that case due to injuries, disease, etc.).
Context Engineering as Code – Systematic approach to reliable AI development
by cogeet_io | 2025-07-05 19:48:02+00:00
I've been frustrated with inconsistent AI coding assistant results, so I researched the problem and built a systematic solution.

The core insight: Most AI agent failures aren't model failures, they're context failures. The AI gets incomplete or poorly structured information.

I created 5 specifications that transform AI development from trial-and-error into systematic engineering:

- Specification as Code - Systematic requirement definitions - Context Engineering as Code - Solves the "context failure" problem - Testing as Code - 15+ advanced testing strategies - Documentation as Code - Automated, living documentation - Coding Best Practices as Code - Enforceable quality standards

The Context Engineering spec is the key innovation (big ups to Tobi Lutke and Andrej Karpathy) - it systematically assembles comprehensive context for AI actors, similar to how Infrastructure as Code systematized deployment.

Early results: 10x improvement in AI task success rates, 50% reduction in debugging time.

All specifications are open source with templates you can use immediately.

GitHub: https://github.com/cogeet-io/ai-development-specifications

Looking for feedback from the community - what's been your experience with AI coding consistency?

Or you can hit me up on X: https://x.com/Cogeet_io
by const_cast | 2025-07-05 19:49:07+00:00
I think this is the plausible deniability they foster, but I don't think this is true. The right has been opposed to public education pretty much since the beginning, even before the DOE. And, of their complaints of the DOE, most of them are legitimately made up. Like the DOE setting curriculum or censoring conservative voices.

Since the beginning, conservatives gravitate towards more... alternative... history. I know I was taught about the War of Northern Aggression in schools. Their issue with public education isn't per se the "education" part, but the "public" part. Unfortunately, an attack on public education is an attack on education itself. We all understand that less public education means less education on average.

I quiet enjoy living in a country with literacy rates in the high 90s, and I'd like it to stay that way.
by progbits | 2025-07-05 19:49:07+00:00
I had doubts about the "parked at exactly 0°00'00"N 0°00'00"E", thinking it was over Null Island just because the data wasn't updated yet and it was showing uninitialized values.

But you are right, [1] confirms "0° longitude".

[1] https://user.eumetsat.int/resources/user-guides/mtg-in-opera...
by globnomulous | 2025-07-05 19:49:10+00:00
Oof, no, I can't. I'd edit my comment, tempering that certainty, if I could.

I recall multiple therapists telling me precisely that, according to the research, people are less likely to accomplish or make progress on passion projects when they quit their jobs with that goal in mind. I have memories of finding papers on this, too. Now I can't find them, and I'm questioning the accuracy of my memory.

Disheartening and embarrassing, but probably healthy, too. Thanks for the reality check.
by krackers | 2025-07-05 19:49:20+00:00
There are several such papers, off the top of my head one is https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.15758

It's a bit more subtle though, if I understand correctly this only works for parallelizable problems. Which makes intuitive sense since the model cannot pass information along with each dot. So in that sense COT can be seen as some form of sampling, which also tracks with findings that COT doesn't boost the "raw intelligence" but rather uncovers latent intelligence, converting pass@k to maj@k. Antirez touches upon this in [1].

On the other hand, I think problems with serial dependencies require "real" COT since the model needs to track the results of subproblems. There's also some studies which show a meta-structure to the COT itself though, e.g. if you look at DeepSeek there are clear patterns of backtracking and such that are slightly more advanced than naive repeated samplings. https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.19143

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44288049
by JohnKemeny | 2025-07-05 19:51:19+00:00
> journal publishers have been lining their own pockets at everyone's expense

May I ask two things? First, how much do you think a journal charges for publishing? Second, what work do you believe the publisher actually does?

Consider this: when you publish with a journal, they commit to hosting the article indefinitely—maintaining web servers, DOIs, references, back-references, and searchability.

Next, they employ editors—who are paid—tasked with reading the submission, identifying potential reviewers (many don’t respond, and most who do decline), and coordinating the review process. Reviewing a journal paper can easily take three full weeks. When was the last time you had three free weeks just lying around?

Those who accept often miss deadlines, so editors must send reminders or find replacements. By this point, 3–6 months may have passed.

Once reviews arrive, they’re usually "revise and resubmit," which means more rounds of correspondence and waiting.

After acceptance, a copy editor will spend at least two hours on grammar and style corrections.

So: how many hours do you estimate the editor, copy editor, and publishing staff spend per paper?
by diggan | 2025-07-05 19:51:26+00:00
> where they are distanced from their buyers, even anonymized, is taken away from them. The platform where THEY dictated how far they'd want to go.

Yeah, this is what I don't quite understand. I've read https://jamstalldhetsmyndigheten.se/aktuellt/nyheter/starkt-... to try to understand the perspective of the people who are driving this change, and I think this seems to be the core:

> The development of online platforms has meant that the purchase of sex increasingly takes place without physical contact. This shift does not change the fundamental problem: that a person, often in a vulnerable situation, is coerced into participating in a sexual act in exchange for payment. The imbalance of power between the buyer and the person coerced into the act remains regardless of whether the act takes place in a physical space or in front of a camera.

> Sexual crimes that take place digitally can have consequences as serious as physical assaults. The violation that occurs when someone is coerced to participate in a sexual act for payment affects the privacy, self-determination and mental health of the individual, regardless of the format.

I still don't quite agree that the situations and activities are the same, and this move seems to make it inherently more dangerous for sex workers rather than the opposite. I guess ultimately the Sweden government (as always) think they can outlaw things and that will make those things go away because it's illegal, which I always fundamentally disagreed with, which is made clear by this:

> It is hoped that the change in the law will not only reduce demand, but also help raise awareness of the vulnerability that may lie behind online prostitution. [...] it should not be allowed to buy access to another person's body, either physically or digitally.
by bee_rider | 2025-07-05 19:51:40+00:00
Huh. That’s an interesting additional risk. I don’t think it is what the original commenter meant, because they were talking about catching cheaters. But it is interesting to think about…

I dunno. There generally isn’t super high security around preprint papers (lots of people just toss their own up on arxiv, after all). But, yeah, it is something that you’ve been asked to look after for somebody, which is quite important to them, so it should probably be taken pretty seriously…

I dunno. The extent to which, and the timelines for, the big proprietary LLMs to feed their prompts back into the training set, are hard to know. So, hard to guess whether this is a serious vector for leaks (and in the absence of evidence it is best to be prudent with this sort of thing and not do it). Actually, I wonder if there’s an opening for a journal to provide a review-helper LLM assistant. That way the journal could mark their LLM content however they want, and everything can be clearly spelled out in the terms and conditions.
by coliveira | 2025-07-05 19:52:06+00:00
If you cannot do what the article says, the only reason is that you're not rich enough.

> pay taxes on the profits

There are techniques to show zero profits, or to get tax breaks on these profits. Some of the most successful companies do this.

> taxes owed on a salary you pay yourself.

You don't need to pay anything to yourself. Some of the richest founders proudly say they receive a $1 salary.
by niklasbabel | 2025-07-05 19:53:10+00:00
is the author writing this article from the future? Peter Thiel is 57 years old (2025).

‘Peter Thiel famously bought his Paypal shares (which were valued at a few cents when he founded the company) into his Roth IRA account. When he turned 65, he was able to access the billions that the Paypal equity was worth with 0 tax on it.’
by webdevver | 2025-07-05 19:53:15+00:00
i think the latest term is 'tax optimisation'...

you could make an argument that in order to optimise your taxes, you have to be quite wealthy to begin with (hiring a tax guy, etc.) - otherwise you don't have any time left in the day to run your business.

so in practice, the little guy winds up just paying the 'sticker price' so to speak, while the big guy has pros who can make their big profits even bigger.
by Timwi | 2025-07-05 19:53:33+00:00
> if site owners can't easily assess the performance of their site

I would be more than happy to opt in to performance metrics or other reports if only I could have some level of trust that improving the UX is all it's gonna be used for. I want to live in a world where that is the everyday normal, and where the non-consensual collection and sale of personal data is a high-profile public scandal with severe legal consequences.
by const_cast | 2025-07-05 19:53:37+00:00
I don't think it's a ponzi scheme and I reject the notion it's unsustainable. Our social services are quite poor when compared to the rest of the developed world, and they seem to have figured it out.

I'm not saying we need to become Western Europe, but I am saying that it's certainly possible to have public services such as public healthcare support in the form of Medicaid sustainably.

Repeatedly, conservative fiscal voices proclaim we must cut social services in order to improve our quality of life and economic status. "Starve the Beast" has been the policy of choice for fiscal conservatives for many decades now. And, well, is it working? From where I'm standing, no. Nothing is getting cheaper. Everything is a little bit harder. And the private sector is decidedly not picking up the slack. And, I certainly do not have a lower tax burden. Why do we keep doing things when we appear to have decades worth of evidence that it does not work. I don't know, to me, it feels like insanity.

I think the most damning example is healthcare. We have private health insurance in this country and it's just bad. I don't even think we're at a point where we can humor people who say it's not that bad. No... it's bad, objectively, from every measure. We pay more per capita than any other country, including taxes, and our outcomes are consistently worse. It's losers across the board. But now we're going to be leaning into that even more with these Medicaid cuts. Which will, I'm convinced, greatly increase private insurance premiums. Sigh...
by upghost | 2025-07-05 19:53:55+00:00
I've attended 4 of them (3 in person in Chicago, 1 remote during Covid), and I took the raft algo implementation course twice (second time remote). Half of the reason I take them is bc the content is good and the other half is because Dave is just genuinely an amazing instructor and human being. It takes someone of tremendous talent to present such complicated ideas with such simplicity and humility and lack of jargon, he talks about implementing consensus algorithms the same way someone might patiently teach you to tie your shoe. In the era of Big Ego in Big Tech, it's a truly refreshing difference in perspective.

Each course I took was accompanied shortly after by a significant increase in career, compensation, and understanding. Like anything else, it is what you make of it. All I can say is it was a very good experience for me.
by forty | 2025-07-05 19:54:07+00:00
It's not only the tech startups, I've mentioned it because that's what a know best, but my brother works for a large industrial company, and they use the same tricks and also have their reports done by professional bullshit companies whose jobs is to make it look like some research happened (in their case it's sometimes somewhat the case - unlike tech startups - but most of it is just bullshit).
Tell HN: A fake, highly obfuscated Solidity VSCode plugin found on marketplace
by navad | 2025-07-05 19:54:08+00:00
While setting up a new dev machine today, we noticed that there's a new plugin, listed 3 days ago with more than 2M (fake?) downloads on the MS VSCode Marketplace [0] and OpenVSX [1].

Reverse engineering is still in progress but you probably want to make sure that you don't have this plugin installed and running.

[0] https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=AhmedCrypto.ahmedcrypto1

[1] https://open-vsx.org/extension/juanbIanco/solibidity
by GMoromisato | 2025-07-05 19:55:08+00:00
Data portability is, I think, useful even before the service shuts down. If I'm using some Google cloud-service and I can easily move all my data to a competing service, then there will be competition for my business.

What if cloud platforms were more like brokerage firms? I can move my stocks from UBS to Fidelity by filling out a few forms and everything moves (somewhat) seamlessly.

My data should be the same way. I should be able to move all my data out of Google and move it to Microsoft with a few clicks without losing any documents or even my folder hierarchy. [Disclaimer: Maybe this is possible already and I'm just out of the loop. If so, though, extend to all SaaS vendors and all data.]
by echelon | 2025-07-05 19:56:21+00:00
> I'm sick of everyone trying to come up with a use case to get all my data in everyone's cloud so I have to pay a subscription fee to just make things work.

AI photo and video generation is impractical to run locally.

ComfyUI and Flux exist, but they serve a tiny sliver of the market with very expensive gamer GPUs. And if you wanted to cater to that market, you'd have to support dozens of different SKUs and deal with Python dependency hell. And even then, proficient ComfyUI users are spending hours experimenting and waiting for renders - it's really only a tool for niche artists with extreme patience, such as the ones who build shows for the Las Vegas Sphere. Not your average graphics designers and filmmakers.

I've been wanting local apps and local compute for a long time, but AI at the edge is just so immature and underpowered that we might see the next category of apps only being available via the cloud. And I suspect that these apps will start taking over and dominating much of software, especially if they save time.

Previously I'd only want to edit photos and videos locally, but the cloud offerings are just too powerful. Local cannot seriously compete.
by geoka9 | 2025-07-05 19:56:28+00:00
Nice! I have a variation that's a bit lower end in terms of ingredients, preparation and calories, but I also never get tired of it:

- Fresh greens (I find Whole Foods prewashed green mixes kind of cheap and convenient for the purpose)

- Cherry tomatoes

- Avocado

- Olive oil, balsamic vinegar, salt and pepper

Quick and filling (avocado does the trick) and OK to eat a ton if you're in the mood for a large meal.
by WesolyKubeczek | 2025-07-05 19:56:32+00:00
> In this case, we had a bug pop up in 6.15 where the link count in the VFS inode getting screwed up caused an inode to be deleted that shouldn't have been - a subvolume root - and then an untested repair path took out the entire subvolume.

I would rather make sure this path was never hit for rc, to minimize the damage. The fact alone that it didn’t pop up until late in the 6.15 cycle could hint at some specific circumstances the bug manifested on, and those could be described and avoided.

And I think there could be a mediocre way to get by until the next merge window in which a superior solution could be presented.

I don’t want to sound as if I’m an expert in how to do VFS, because I’m not. I’m, however, an expert in how to be “correcter than others” which has cost me getting kicked out of jobs before. I hope I have learned better since, and at the time I have been very, very stubborn (they wouldn’t have kicked me out otherwise).

There is this bit when working with others that you will likely go with solutions you deem more mediocre than the theoretically best solution, or that experienced people will say “no” to your ideas or solutions and you accept it instead of seeking quarrel in spite of them obviously not understanding you (spoiler: this is not so). But if you show that you’re willing to work with other as a single unit, you will be listened to, appreciated, and concessions will be made for you too. This is not necessarily about the kernel, it’s about working in a team in general.

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I’ve been “that guy” before and I regret it took me that long to realize this and mend my ways. Hope it doesn’t keep happening to you.
by rhet0rica | 2025-07-05 19:56:42+00:00
Sorry; it's more likely they were named in tribute to the Chappe telegraph towers of France.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chappe_telegraph

The stations were more elaborate and there is even a recorded instance of a secret signal being passed on illicitly:

https://blog.franceinfo.fr/deja-vu/2017/10/10/le-piratage-du...