MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bfm | 2025-07-16 18:42:06+00:00
TL;DR TOS

Summary of the KX Community Edition License Agreement:

Key Points:

What you get:

- Free license to use KX software for personal or internal business purposes only

- No support or maintenance services included

- Software provided "as is" without warranties

Major restrictions:

- NO commercial use

- Cannot sell, distribute, or monetize any product that uses or depends on this software

- Cannot bundle it with commercial products

- Cannot reverse engineer, modify, or create derivative works

- Cannot remove copyright notices or trademarks

- Software may phone home to verify valid license

Important limitations:

- KX's liability capped at $100

- They disclaim all warranties including fitness for purpose

- You must delete software if agreement terminates

- Subject to export control laws

- KX can audit your compliance

Legal terms:

- Governed by New York law

- You retain no IP rights in the software

- Confidentiality obligations for 5 years

- KX can terminate at any time

Bottom line:

This is a restrictive free license meant for evaluation/personal use only. Any commercial use or distribution is strictly prohibited. If you need commercial rights, you'll need a different license.
by tombert | 2025-07-16 18:42:08+00:00
Can't speak for anyone else, obviously, but part of the reason that I got into functional programming is specifically because I found the syntax very expressive. I felt like I was able to directly express my intent instead of describing a sequence of steps and hope that my intent comes to fruition.

Different strokes and whatnot, not everyone likes functional programming and of course there are valid enough criticisms against it, but I've always appreciated how terse and simple it feels compared to imperative stuff.

Even with regards to testability, if your function is pure and not mucking with IO or something, then even using a multi line lambda shouldn't affect that much. You would test function calling it.

Keep in mind, Haskell doesn't really have "loops" like you'd get in Python; in Python you might not necessarily need the lambda because you might do your one-off logic inside a for loop or something. In Haskell you have map and filter and reduce and recursion, that's basically it.
by colinwilyb | 2025-07-16 18:42:13+00:00
When I write, it comes out like this. Pulling your attention to and fro across a scene to construct "brain pictures", letting your imagination fill in the gaps as the fragments become a whole.

The mention of Megalosaurus was jarring. My imagination placed this within a gloomy late-Victorian period and the mention of giant lizard caused mental association to very unrelated content for the rest of paragraph. I think a Wooly Mammoth waddling up the hill would make for a better picture.

On another note: What are horse blinkers?
by trod1234 | 2025-07-16 18:42:37+00:00
Also, lets not forget the key concept of counter-party risk.

What assurances and real resolutions do you have that what they market is actually true; and the baby your gf is carrying isn't in fact a mini-musk with no related DNA from you. Like a cuckoo bird.

Interestingly the term cuckold, referring to a man whose wife was unfaithful, originates from the Cuckoo bird, where the bird is tricked into raising children biologically not their own; as happens with brood parasitism.

These advances bring into question long-term fitness and survivability. We know mono-cultures die out quite easily.

Before long we might have a "Surface" event, like what happened in that TV show. There are things that cannot be undone, and there are blind people more than willing to ensure those things are full steam ahead.
by nezaj | 2025-07-16 18:42:45+00:00
Thank you for the kind words on the rules/documentation! It was definitely an iterative process to figure out how to get good results.

We have an llms.txt and llms-full.txt (~9k lines) which contains all our documentation. Feeding these to the claude didn't get great results, it was just too much information.

We manually compressed our llms-full.txt into a rules file (~1.5k lines) which declared the API upfront and provided snippets of how to do different things with callouts to common examples. This condensed version did better but would cause Claude to make subtle mistakes.

Looking at the kind of mistakes Claude made, it seemed like a human could make those mistakes too (very useful feedback for us to improve our API ). We thought “what's one of the smallest fully contained examples we can make that packs a bunch of info on how to use Instant?” That would probably be useful for both a human and an agent. And indeed it seemed to be the case.
by rendall | 2025-07-16 18:42:53+00:00
From the community guidelines:

> In Comments

> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.

> Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.

> When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."

> Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
by taneq | 2025-07-16 18:43:21+00:00
If anyone here's thinking about logo designs, can I offer some related advice? Please make your logo fit more-or-less in a box, with the center of gravity in the middle of that box. Keep text nice and chunky so it can still be read even at low resolutions. Don't put a massive block of colour on one side and tiny spidery text on the other side because it makes your logo impossible to lay out next to anything else without looking lopsided.
by scarface_74 | 2025-07-16 18:43:55+00:00
I’m only 3 years younger than you. I also started with mainframes in the mid 90s, got into cloud a decade ago, spent the last 5+ years doing strategic + hands on consulting, etc at both AWS directly (ProServe) and now at third party companies.

Honestly both your post here and your LinkedIn page is just word salad and says “hire me because I’m old”. It’s really not a great sales pitch and doesn’t separate you from anyone else.

I’m not saying you don’t have outstanding skills. I’m saying your sales pitch isn’t great. You mentioned English is not your first language. I’m really interested how you would sell yourself in your native language, meaning it might be an ESL issue?

I’m not insulting your English proficiency at all - it’s perfectly understandable and grammatically correct.
by ffsm8 | 2025-07-16 18:45:52+00:00
All models hallucinate. The likelihood of hallucinations are however strongly influenced by the way you prompt and construct your context.

But even if a human went through the documents by hand and tried to make the analysis, they're still likely to make mistakes. That's why we usually define the scientific method as making falsifiable claims, which you then try to disprove in order to make sure they're correct.

And if you can't do that, then you're always walking on thin ice, whatever tool or methodology you choose to use for the analysis.
by tptacek | 2025-07-16 18:46:17+00:00
These aren't stories, they're random comments on random threads over the past two years. Some of them, had you flagged them and mailed hn@yc about them, likely would have gotten moderated (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41658850, for example). But moderators don't see all the comments, so if you want something done about them, you have to help make that happen.

Most of them, though, are simply comments you and I disagree with. It's an open-access site, people are going to write things you disagree with, and there isn't going to be a moderation rule saying, for instance, that only anti-carceral comments are allowed on the site.

I spend a weird amount of time watching for specific patterns of nasty shit on HN (use the search bar to see if I've missed a race/IQ in the last year) and my experience has been the moderators are as repulsed by toxicity as I am, and they're quick to act.

You're not the first of us to express concerns that the specific moderation principles HN uses are too accommodating to toxic edgelordism (another long-timer once noted that they appear to function as a kind of grooming academy for hateful rhetoric, allowing in almost any sentiment expressed coolly and without vitriol). But improvements aren't as easy as they look. A good exercise: if you think comment moderation is failing because the rules aren't right, propose the next guideline that would fix it.

I've been doing that for years, and some of my guideline proposals have made it in (can't see everyone else's comment scores: you're welcome). Most of the ones that haven't, though, I've come to see would have been unworkable.
by SamBam | 2025-07-16 18:46:43+00:00
They were given a dictionary, and also told they were allowed to look things up on their phone.

I suspect that the unfamiliarity with words like Michaelmas was part of the point.

I.e. What do the students do when reading a book and they come across a word they don't know? Look it up? Deduce it's rough meaning from context? Live with the uncertainty? Get mad and not finish the text?
by imiric | 2025-07-16 18:46:50+00:00
Hhmm good point.

I would say... yes. But with the strong caveat that when used within the context of AGI, the individual/system should be able to showcase that intelligence, and the results should be comparable to those of a neurotypical adult human. Both a dog and a toddler can show signs of intelligence when compared to individuals of their similar nature, but not to an adult human, which is the criteria for AGI.

This is why I don't think that a system that underperforms the average neurotypical adult human in "most" cognitive tasks would constitute AGI. It could certainly be considered a step in that direction, but not strictly AGI.

But again, I don't think that a strict definition of AGI is helpful or necessary. The impact of a system with such capabilities would be impossible to deny, so a clear definition doesn't really matter.
by floren | 2025-07-16 18:46:53+00:00
2019: Gemini introduced

2022-ish: Titan created (based on existed of https://web.archive.org/web/20220126075826/https://transjovi...).

The spec for Titan (https://portal.mozz.us/gemini/transjovian.org/titan/page/The...?) appears to be an implementation of PUT for Gemini, but since Gemini doesn't have verbs (GET is implied) it does it by creating a whole new "protocol" titan://

So you're right, they didn't extend the Gemini protocol, they created an entirely new protocol which many clients, servers, and libraries now implement because the functionality was desirable.

Wonder what they'll call the protocol that implements DELETE... maybe Deorbit?

Edit: oh there's also Spartan (2022), another protocol which is Gemini but if there are bytes after the request line, it's an implicit PUT: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/michael-lazar/spartan/refs...
by froh | 2025-07-16 18:47:00+00:00
thx for the typo fixes

indeed, it's exactly BCD arithmetics which are part of the standard, with fixed decimal size and comma position

and yes, Turbo Pascal had some limited support for them.

you needed them in the 1990s for data exchange with banks in Germany. "Datenträgeraustauschformat". data storage exchange format. one of my first coding gigs was automatic collection of membership fees. the checksum for the data file was the sum of all bank account numbers and the sum of all bank ID numbers (and the sum of all transferred amounts)... trivial in Cobol. not so much in Turbo C++ :-)

I wasn't aware of the BCD in turbo Pascal... those were the days :-D
by MintPaw | 2025-07-16 18:47:06+00:00
There's no way you'll see anything like that. Flash was dead simple, a 12 year old could throw a simple game together and upload it. WebGPU will require a skilled graphics programmer just to write (or more likely cross compile) these weird shaders.

And the SWF format had insane compatibility, literally unmatched by any other technology imo, we didn't even think about OS's, it really was "write once run anywhere" (pre-smartphone ofc). On the web, even basic CSS doesn't work the same from OS to OS, and WebGL apps still crash on 10% of devices randomly. It'll probably be 5 years before WebGPU is even remotely stable.

Not even to mention the fully integrated editor environment.

Or I guess maybe you're saying someone should build something like Flash targeting WebGPU? Probably the closest there is to that right now is Figma? But it feels weak too imo, and was already possible with WebGL. Maybe Unreal Engine is the bet.
by reverendsteveii | 2025-07-16 18:47:06+00:00
>Then why do I feel more energetic and alert during downtime when I am in general exercising regularly compared to when I am not?

Because feeling tired is a very complex interplay of emotional, hormonal and environmental signals and not simply a lack of fuel.

>Also my resting heart rate is a little higher when I am exercising a lot.

Weird, almost everyone else's goes down as the heart becomes stronger and more efficient during strenuous exercise, then that more efficient muscle is doing the same job the older, less efficient one did

>Also my muscles are rebuilding themselves between all my lifting exercises. All of this must be increasing my resting calorie burn rate I would think.

This part is true, and it's why serious bodybuilders trying to get as large as possible run a bulk/cut cycle. First they eat an excess of calories while working out very intensely, causing them to gain a lot of both muscle and fat, then they eat at a calorie deficit while keeping up as much of the intensity as possible. The calorie deficit leads to weight loss but the continued usage of the muscles causes the body to still try to prioritize maintaining their bulk. The way it was explained to me was "pack it on, then shrinkwrap it". This is also why serious bodybuilders take their sleep very seriously as well, as that's the part where your body actually does the repairing, rebuilding and increasing the mass of muscles that were damaged through strenuous use.
by smeej | 2025-07-16 18:47:08+00:00
I'm not sure what's happening, but I am sure it isn't new.

I had to learn the hard way 15 years ago that the average American adult cannot parse a full-page email in standard English. It seemed crazy to me at the time and seems crazy to me now, given that the average adult has completed elementary school, but most people are barely functionally literate at all.

I don't expect you to believe me. It's a weird claim. But walk into any average grocery store and hand someone a page out of a book and ask them to read it out loud to you. Many people are so aware they can't that they will refuse to try. Of the ones that do, you will struggle to find one who can read the text with anything like the fluidity or inflection they would use to speak the same words. If you give them time to prepare, they'll probably be able to get through it in a few minutes, but nobody's putting that kind of effort into a text-only email, even if it's important for work.

Reading is so difficult as to be a chore for the average person. They don't just see written words and know what they say. They really have to work to get meaning out of written text.

With the proliferation of other means of taking in information, many of which require no effort of any kind beyond hitting play and staying within earshot, why would people choose to read? They didn't want to do it before. And now they don't need to do it either.
by jodrellblank | 2025-07-16 18:47:19+00:00
> "Like... are you going to keep thinking about the ideals in Star Trek if you think you know more than Gene Roddenbury?"

This doesn't follow as a piece of logic at all; I often find some computer related comment on the internet by a beginner where I definitely do know more, and the comment is a trigger for me to keep thinking about the details long after the comment is over.

We could list some ideals in Star Trek, e.g. the multicultural bridge crew, and then think "I know more about that than Roddenberry so let's imagine about where Roddenberry could have done better". (I'm not claiming to know more, just spinning a thought experiment). Or you could say "look I've studied a lot of multicultural ideals and I knoww more about it than you, and you could learn something of it by watching more Star Trek and focusing on that point". The important part is that you can list specific ideals in the work, and then we can talk about those ideals.

We could imagine a movie about the killing fields of Cambodia. I don't want to watch it. You are saying "you don't think there is anything in there to understand!". But I am not saying that. This is not "the exact phenomenon" you were talking about because here I am accepting that there are things I don't understand, as I did with my example of James Joyce's writing.

However, what I do reject is the idea that there are films which you claim contain deep meaning that you understand - but you can't say what that meaning is, you can't demonstrate its presence, you can't demonstrate that you have the understanding which you claim to have, or demonstrate that I do not have it, but you are convinced that you understand it more deeply than I do and that elevates you to a higher status than me. That is the realm of every mystic, street corner preacher, megachurch pastor, cult leader, every psychoactive drug taker, every dreamer and philosopher, many artists, con-artists and scammers, and should be rejected under Hitchen's Razor ("What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence").

Am I going to think about what Lord of the Rings means? Probably not. I have read enough songs (one song is enough) about Bilbo Baggins hating it when people are careless while washing up plates. That's not because I claim to know more than Tolkien. But if you say "Tolkien made some deep commentary about the choice to suffer to protect those you love" that's different claim than "Tolkien made some deep commentary and it was like, whoa dude, you just had to be there, it was like - well, it was so profound words can't do it justice - but I understand it and if you don't agree then you must be a base simpleton philistine" and you say it in a magazine with a posh register. Yeah well the clouds were very deep and meaningful too and I saw Man's Inhumanity to Man in them, you'll just have to trust me. Why not spend a few hours contemplating it?
by beezlebroxxxxxx | 2025-07-16 18:48:20+00:00
I agree. I've met some very wealthy people before and when you're outside of the bubble you start to see how $$$ helps a lot to justify anything you do as helping people. A lot of wealthy people will say "look I contribute to this cause!" as an indulgence in the religious sense to "counteract" much of what they do in their day to day or the raison d'etre of their work.

It's weird to say, but some people simply are not tuned in to the long term ramifications of their work. The "fuck you I got mine" mentality is even at play in many outwardly appearing progressive communities where short term gain is a moral imperative above doing good.
by sparkie | 2025-07-16 18:48:35+00:00
Not being standardized doesn't necessarily rule out being a measuring tool. They could've each been crafted for a specific purpose, but using the same technique for measuring.

Would be nice if there were a database of precise measurements of those discovered so far. The paper suggesting they may have been a dioptron[1] has a small sample data, but not enough to make any conclusions.

[1]:https://arxiv.org/pdf/1206.0946
by FireBeyond | 2025-07-16 18:50:48+00:00
> Most police reports are never read even once, even though a large percentage result in convictions.

Watch the videos of Judge Fleischer on YouTube, dealing with probable cause.

It is OBVIOUS from these videos that the first time the prosecutor has EVER read the report (and bear in mind, this is THE report, the police report establishing probable cause for the arrest in the first place).

And most of them are entirely garbage. "Was observed in a vehicle" "Was he driving?" "Doesn't say"... "Initiated a traffic stop?" "Why?" "Doesn't say..."
by pstuart | 2025-07-16 18:50:50+00:00
The last thing I want to do is defend university bureaucrats.

The policies themselves should be the focal point of discussion, i.e., if there's merit to be had and how to deliver on that without making things worse.

Would you also call the strip-search incident I cited as dystopian? I would. I am stridently against The War on Drugs, but I also think keeping drugs out of schools is a good thing.

Using your approach the answer would be to not have any school policies about drugs on campus.
by slowcache | 2025-07-16 18:50:51+00:00
Odin has been really growing on me lately as a language that checks all of those boxes. String types, first class allocators, built in tests, a batteries included philosophy, and ease of use are some of the things that really drew me towards it.

I really wanted to like rust and I wrote a few different small toy projects in it. At some point knowledge of the language becomes a blocker rather than knowledge the problem space, but this is a skill issue that I'm sure would lessen the more I used it.

What really set me off was how every project turned into a grocery list of crates that you need to pull in in order to do anything. It started to feel embarrassing to say that I was doing systems programming when any topic I would google in rust would lead me to a stack overflow saying to install a crate and use that. There seemed to be an anti-DIY approach in the community that finally drew me away.
by everybodyknows | 2025-07-16 18:51:00+00:00
> nothing left but fighting to fight over

Toward the end of the story the fighting does stop when lawyer's fees, which they had been charging to the estate, at last empty it. This is announced publicly in court, and the attorneys respond by flinging their piles of paper into the air, one of a few comic scenes in the novel.

FYA, this modus vivendi is still being practiced -- see the litigation around the estate of O.J. Simpson.
by sabakhoj | 2025-07-16 18:51:33+00:00
This is interesting, but I wonder how reliable this type of monitoring is really going to be in the long run. There are fairly strong indications that CoT adherence can be trained out of models, and there's already research showing that they won't always reveal their thought process in certain topics.

See: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2305.04388

On a related note, if anyone here is also reading a lot of papers to keep up with AI safety, what tools have been helpful for you? I'm building https://openpaper.ai to help me read papers more effectively without losing accuracy, and looking for more feature tuning. It's also open source :)