MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by threecheese | 2025-07-12 16:44:55+00:00
My intuition is that their fundamental business is executing on the models, and any other products are secondary and exist to drive revenue that they can use to compete against Google/OpenAI/Meta as well as to ensure - and demonstrate - that their models are performant in these new markets. Claude needs to be great at coding, but Anthropic doesn’t need to own Coding. Claude Code is growing their core business, just like a Claude Robotics or a Claude Scheduling might, but they cant focus on robotics or scheduling because that takes them away from the core business of models. A strategic relationship with Cursor might have been enough to accomplish this, but it wasn’t - maybe Cursor couldn’t execute fast enough, or didn’t align on priorities, or whatever. I’ve watched a bunch of interviews with the CC team and I very much get the impression that it was more “holy shit, this works great” than a product strategy.

You may be right about “they need to invest in and win” in order to have __enough__ revenue to outcompete the nation-state sized competition, but this stuff is moving way to fast for anyone know.
by AlotOfReading | 2025-07-12 16:45:20+00:00
The argument isn't wrong and people have been making it for decades that everything from Java to standard ML should be theoretically faster than C. I think it's telling that despite that, the comparison the author chose is a functional language running in parallel (after compiling to C) vs single threaded C. That comparison is obviously nonsense.

The argument is wrong because the best optimizer is the stuff between your ears, not a compiler. C and to a lesser extent C++ have always won because they allow you to spend those neurons thinking about the underlying machine with a thin(ner) abstraction layer instead of wrapping it in layers of conceptually elegant abstractions that get dissected by a sufficiently smart compiler.
by Zenst | 2025-07-12 16:45:55+00:00
Ones you can replace the storage with a screwdriver are a safe risk, the soldering upgrades are a void warranty and something you are always best getting somebody who can do it in their sleep to do for you. Soldering is not as easy as it used to be, even the pros will not have 100% success and need to reflow or rework.
by justsomehnguy | 2025-07-12 16:46:13+00:00
You are just trying to confirm your beliefs.

Thing is, the 'filter' box can work as a filter and as a search box. It's even a simple heuristic if it should behave as a filter or switch to the search - if there is no result for the text entered in the textbox then switch to the search.

There is zero need to have two search boxes, it's just Mozilla wanted to copy-paste the idiotic solution of MS Office with a top-most search function. That's all.
by pyman | 2025-07-12 16:46:31+00:00
Is this info correct?

- 2.4 million bitcoins are lost forever. Their owners, for one reason or another, can't access their wallets. No insurance, no guarantees, nothing.

- 1.1 million are owned by a mysterious person who sits at the top of the pyramid.

- 2.3 million belong to investors and speculators, who make money by pumping and dumping.

- 1 million are owned by banks, the same institutions the mysterious man said his system would replace.

- 1.6 million are held by whales: billionaires, money launderers, narcos, weapons dealers, and so on.

- 1.4 million are still left to be mined, but only a handful of rich people with servers worth millions can actually mine them.

- The rest are owned by individuals who see it as a long term investment.

- It's a digital currency most people don't use to buy or sell anything. The only ones making transactions are banks, investors, and the rich.

- And if you own even a tiny bit of bitcoin, and read something like this, you go ballistic and end up siding with the banks, investors, and the rich to keep the system going.

I can't think of a worse system to fight inequality.

The banks won.
by tzs | 2025-07-12 16:46:42+00:00
Dynamic pressure of wind is 1/2 p v^2 where p is the air density and v is the velocity.

At sea level p = 1.225 kg/m^3. It goes down as altitude goes up. At sea level the dynamic pressure at 800 km/hr would be about 4.4 PSI.

At 20000 ft the air density is about half that of sea level, so around 2.2 PSI wind pressure. It would be around 1.4 PSI at 35k ft.

At cruising altitude planes are typically about 8 PSI above the outside pressure.

It would be maybe an interesting project for someone more ambitious then me to get a speed vs altitude profile of a typical airline flight and an altitude vs cabin pressure profile and figure at what part of a typical flight the screws on a plug window are resisting the most force.
by marcosdumay | 2025-07-12 16:47:52+00:00
> Who wants to be that person?

Yep, preemptively destroying the reputation of whoever opposes you is a common and ancient tactic of bullies from all levels, from school patios to fascist governments.

Look at the people who are pushing for politicizing software development, and you'll see they are always getting money out of the deal.
by not_your_vase | 2025-07-12 16:49:17+00:00
I like the idea, but there are two things that jumps into my eyes:

1. It generates invoice - but for which country? While invoices look similar across countries, usually they have a strict minimal content, which can vary between places.

2. It's alpha software. Every software starts at alpha, that's a natural thing. But also I wouldn't trust my company on an alpha software to save a couple of hundred bucks. I wonder if the author has a company where he dogfoods it.
by lemoncookiechip | 2025-07-12 16:49:23+00:00
I find it odd that investors are still so motivated to drop money into AI, specifically LLMs, not because I don't see value in the technology, I do, but because it feels to me like it only takes a few months (if that) for your company which might currently dominate with the leading product, to be left behind by someone else who just came out with a better, cheaper, and faster product.

I guess this is true for most tech, but with LLMs it seems to be at a pace that just doesn't feel worth it to invest knowing someone else will just leap over your investment soon, and that in a year or two, when you want some return (maybe longer), that your tech might have completely stagnated and completely left behind by everyone else's. I dunno, just a weird thought.
by Joel_Mckay | 2025-07-12 16:50:09+00:00
Really? Lead test kits are $10 on amazon, and will include several dozen tests. The better kits will include paper to verify the tests still are working (short shelf life in the open.)

The sodium rhodizonate tests usually turn pink in the presence of traces of lead. These tests are intended for testing paints/ceramics, and may have false positives in the presence of zinc or copper etc.

Our local Griefers seem to have strong feelings about this information, but talk with your chemistry teacher if you want to understand the details about testing.

If a credible 3M brand test shows possible contamination, than consider sending a sample into a lab to figure out the details. =3
by interloxia | 2025-07-12 16:50:35+00:00
I read, but didn't verify, that it was refused because the federal money would have required the workers to be vaccinated.

"We'll be fine on our own" didn't work out unfortunately.

I would like to be wrong, and this is not the time to rehash vaccinations, but if true, it seems relevant to the strings attached to the funds.

Ideally id you happen to know one way or the other, plainly say so, or reference something reasonable, that this was a serious claim.
by Findecanor | 2025-07-12 16:50:37+00:00
The promo video [1] is on the new Commodore CEO's YouTube channel, so it must be.

The PCB looks like a rebranded "Ultimate 64" FPGA board [2], which has been out in a couple of iterations for a few years.

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2fGP59mJ5M

2. https://ultimate64.com/
by refulgentis | 2025-07-12 16:51:08+00:00
Think you're over-parsing a bit: adverse events ~= something we should mention, not Bad Things The Treatment Did. "What does it mean?" is a qualitative question, not a quantitative one. Taking that question more colloquially, in this case, I'd say it means "the vaccine did not prevent infections in 9 of 28 cases and / or they had an infection before the vaccine was taken"

I'm sure you mean well -- since your post, the thread got cluttered up with outright know-nothing-type comments. I am being very literal in order to help teach people in despair what we expect when we read these.
by yason | 2025-07-12 16:54:54+00:00
It is known that the switches cannot effectively be flipped by accident.

It is known that the switches were set to "cut-off" because they were then later restored to "run", so it was not an electrical fault (i.e. switches pointing to run but reporting cut-off).

Pilot dialogue and engine telemetry confirms the cause of power loss was fuel cut-off.

The question I can't help but think is how did the pilot realize it was the cut-off switches?

I'm sure there's a warning message for them somewhere but in the few seconds of time when you're losing thrust right after rotate, and you're bombarded by a lot of warnings and errors on the screen and in the speakers: how likely are you to notice the fuel cut-off switches have been flipped?

Those switches are something you never, ever think about during operation because you're trained to only operate them when starting up and parking (and yes, in an emergency where you need to shut down the engine quick).

How long would it take for an average pilot to realize it's not one of the dozens of memory items pointing to more likely scenarios causing loss of thrust, ones that they've been training to check in case of an imminent emergency? And why didn't the first pilot who was recorded to notice the fuel cut-off didn't immediately flip the switches to "run" position first instead of asking the other pilot about it?
by msla | 2025-07-12 16:55:15+00:00
From my post the mods buried:

> On July 5, as floodwaters were starting to recede, FEMA received 3,027 calls from disaster survivors and answered 3,018, or roughly 99.7 percent, the documents show. Contractors with four call center companies answered the vast majority of the calls.

> That evening, however, Ms. Noem did not renew the contracts with the four companies and hundreds of contractors were fired, according to the documents and the person briefed on the matter.

> The next day, July 6, FEMA received 2,363 calls and answered 846, or roughly 35.8 percent, according to the documents. And on Monday, July 7, the agency fielded 16,419 calls and answered 2,613, or around 15.9 percent, the documents show.
by dietrichepp | 2025-07-12 16:55:28+00:00
Taking this moment to promote 1-bit art! I run a couple accounts which promote 1-bit art and I’m trying to figure out how to expand what artwork is included. These are just personal accounts that retweet art from 1-bit artists on BlueSky and Twitter.

https://bsky.app/profile/1bitdreams.bsky.social

https://x.com/1BitDreams
by citrin_ru | 2025-07-12 16:55:51+00:00
If you run a mail server it's good to have a local DNS cache, e. g. Unbound. And if you have Unbound adding an upstream is not that necessary - it can talk to root servers directly or use hoster's DNS as upstream. I rarely use services like Quad9 but IMHO the main use case is for home PC / notebooks: e. g. if an ISP neglected it's own DNS (and it doesn't work well) or if an ISP spoof NXDOMAIN to return ads; another use case is free Wi-Fi where DNS can also be misconfigured / unreliable.

For an ISP it's relatively easy to provide a DNS server which will be fast and reliable (and your ISP's DNS is close to you than some 3rd party DNS) if that's not the case they probably just don't care.
by api | 2025-07-12 16:57:33+00:00
Is there any work trying to apply transformers to compiler optimization? Seems like we have some new tools to potentially make compilers even better.

But yes, humans can still usually optimize better.

The other thing you see with high level languages is a death by a thousand cuts due to things like cache locality or instruction level parallelism. It’s very, very hard to write a VM with stuff going on like JIT and GC and a heap allocator that gives you good locality or ILP. A major problem is that yes you can optimize for that, including in real time, but that not only adds work but adds work that implies a cache flush.

The latter point — cache locality and ILP — is why some C/C++/Rust code is faster when compiled optimizing for space instead of for “speed.” Less code means it fits in cache.

All that being said, HLLs usually offer superior programmer productivity, especially for novice to mid career devs who aren’t quite up to things like comprehending the Rust borrow checker. Machine time has to be weighed against human time. The latter is usually more expensive (but not always at scale!).
by daxfohl | 2025-07-12 16:59:04+00:00
But lists and trees aren't really "built into" languages. They're part of the standard library, not the language itself. Maybe one could say "foreach" syntax builds lists into a language, but in many languages you can foreach non-lists, others have foreach as a method instead of syntax, and it still doesn't say anything about trees.

I do see your point, I'm just not so sure I think it'd be the right thing to do. It feels like too big and arbitrary to be a core language feature, better left to a library. If there are some core features that would make building such a library easier, I'd focus on those rather than the logic programming itself. Something like how Rust did async. (Though contrarily, I think Rust should have built async into the language, since it's pervasive and hard to interop different implementations. Unlike async, logic programming is typically self-contained, and there would rarely be a need to interop multiple implementations).

Anyway, great work so far. I look forward to seeing it progress.
I created a new training dataset for stale SOTA LLMs
by rileygersh | 2025-07-12 16:59:23+00:00
I ran into a common problem building with Apple's new iOS 26 Foundation Models framework. Every major LLM (GPT-4, Claude, Gemini) knows nothing about it due to training cutoffs.

Rather than wait months for model updates, I spent 2 hours building custom training data:

Research: Used Gemini's deep research to crawl all available docs, forums, GitHub repos, Reddit threads, YouTube transcripts. Looking for "iOS 26 Foundation Models Framework".

Optimization: Had Claude restructure everything into clean, hierarchical markdown optimized for LLM ingestion.

Implementation: Loaded into Claude Projects as a custom knowledge layer.

Result: Went from "I don't have information about that" to expert-level guidance on bleeding-edge APIs. My development workflow shifted from trial-and-error to smooth AI-assisted implementation.

The research was so thorough it even referenced my own Apple dev forum post from the day before—creating a weird recursive loop where I was training AI on knowledge I'd just contributed.

This approach works for any new framework or API. The pattern is predictable: every major release creates a temporary knowledge gap that custom training data can fill.

Technical writeup with methodology: https://rileygersh.medium.com/how-i-gave-claude-gemini-knowledge-of-ios-26s-foundation-models-03395d7e905c
by efecan0 | 2025-07-12 17:02:02+00:00
Hi everyone, thanks for checking out BinaryRPC!

I built this project because I needed a simple but fast WebSocket-based RPC layer for my own real-time side projects. Existing options felt heavy or JSON-only, so I wrote something binary-focused and plugin-friendly.

I’d really appreciate any feedback on:

• Overall architecture / design smells • Concurrency model (thread-pool vs async IO) • “Must-have” features before this is production-ready

Design notes and a 5-minute chat-server demo are in this short post: https://medium.com/@efecanerdem0907/building-a-chat-server-i...

Any comments, suggestions or PRs are welcome. Thanks again!
by caim | 2025-07-12 17:02:14+00:00
- lol people really say whatever comes to their mind around here don't they?

Apple literally hired Chris Lattner in 2005 and made a team to work on LLVM. After GNU refused to integrate LLVM into GCC,

But Apple saw an opportunity to have its own C/C++ compiler.

To this day, Apple still has one core team working on LLVM.

Anyone can come in, add a feature/target, and then leave the project. But a of lot LLVM maintainers are hired by or indirectly big tech companies.
by Clamchop | 2025-07-12 17:03:23+00:00
Good thing this scenario is entirely fictional. Even if it weren't completely made up, though, you'd still be ethically obligated to assess immigrants as individuals and not simply guilty by association, except perhaps under the most dire wartime circumstances.

You'd also be legally obligated, but to be lawful is not always the same thing as being ethical nor moral.

It would be challenging, I admit, considering the country will have doubled in size with half of them being infants that naturally don't speak English, or any language for that matter.

We really should close that loophole, though. And it definitely is a loophole and not the explicit intention of a constitutional amendment. An oversight to be sure.
by sgt | 2025-07-12 17:03:39+00:00
What does "older men" mean? Bunch of people got their start in computing with Commodore 64s in the early 80s yes, but also mid 80s, late 80s, early 90s and even mid 90s. So people who were kids in the mid 90s also fall into this group, and I don't think they are old.
by grace77 | 2025-07-12 17:04:16+00:00
Yes — great point. We originally waited for all model responses and randomized the vote order, but that made it a very bad user experience -- some models, especially open-source ones, took over 4 minutes to respond, leading to a high voter drop-off rate.

To preserve the voter experience without introducing bias, our current approach waits for the slowest model within each binary comparison — so even if one model is faster, we don’t display until both are ready. You're right that this does introduce some bias for the two smallest models, and we'd love to hear suggestions for how to make this better!

As for the 5th request: we actually kick off one reserve model alongside the four randomly selected for the tournament. This backup isn’t shown unless one of the four fails — it’s not the fastest or lowest-latency model, just a randomly selected fallback to keep the system robust without skewing results.
by efecan0 | 2025-07-12 17:04:28+00:00
I started with WebSocket over TCP for practical reasons:

* Works everywhere today (browsers, LB, PaaS) with zero extra setup. * One upgrade -> binary frames; no gRPC/proto toolchain or HTTP/3 infra needed. * Simple reliability: TCP handles ordering; I add optional QoS2 on top. * Lets me focus on session/room/middleware features first; transport is swappable later.

QUIC / gRPC-HTTP/3 is on the roadmap once the higher-level API stabilises.
by imiric | 2025-07-12 17:07:08+00:00
Hey, don't blame me for the fact that your sites are indistinguishable from hundreds of others that offer the same service. Everything I said is logical to assume, since all these sites look the same.

Good on you for learning how AI tools work, but there's no way for anyone to tell whether your backend is self-managed or not, and practically it doesn't really matter. I reckon your users would get better results from proprietary models that expose an API than self-hosted open source ones, but then your revenue would probably be lower.

> Also its easy to criticize from the sidelines but, do you have products that you made by yourself that are used by hundreds of thousands of people? I have 5 such sites, 2 of which I named above

That's a lazy defense considering anyone is free to criticize anyone else's work, especially if they're familiar with the industry. Just like food and film critics don't need to be chefs and movie producers.

But I'll give you credit for actually building and launching something that generates revenue. I admit that that is more than I have managed with my personal projects.
by pclmulqdq | 2025-07-12 17:07:18+00:00
If you want O($10 billion per year) of funding, those numbers can only come from having $10 billion a year of impact balanced against your chance of success. The only application of QC worth $100+ billion is breaking cryptography.

PQC is as much a tool to reduce funding for QC as it is a tool against an actual eventual quantum computer.
by alganet | 2025-07-12 17:08:52+00:00
This is most likely because you don't understand that I was approaching the subject from the foreign relations perspective.

I did gave a big hint though (mentioning the Itamaraty)! It was hard to miss, but somehow you missed it.

Of course it's weird. It is meant to bring this lesser known approach to a potential public that does not know much about it.
by pyman | 2025-07-12 17:09:03+00:00
"I think it's pretty likely the entire surface of the earth will be covered with solar panels and data centers." - Open AI Chief Scientist Ilya Sutskever

I'm surprised the future of technology is in the hands of a few people who have absolutely no clue what's happening outside their computers.

Building a large data center near a town can strain the power grid, drain local water supplies, generate constant noise, release excess heat, harm the environment, disrupt traffic during construction, raise security concerns, and offer very little long-term benefit to the local community.

So, yeah, the solution is to cover the earth with data centers, right?
by toomuchtodo | 2025-07-12 17:10:02+00:00
He’s just a bully who is going to bully until he expires. He doesn’t care about the law, he’ll say whatever makes him feel powerful and stokes his supporters. Nothing you can do except operate around it until he goes, and luckily, we all go eventually.

She’s far safer in Ireland than on US soil for the remainder of this administration, and can challenge any unconstitutional infringements on her citizenship from afar.
by battle-racket | 2025-07-12 17:10:50+00:00
> It acts like a dual construction to a tracing GC in many cases

yeah one of the most helpful realizations I’ve read is that tracing and ref counting are essentially two formulations of the same problem - one is finding objects that are alive (by tracing), and the other is finding things that are dead (i.e. their ref counts reach zero). and of course, every object is either dead or alive!
by inetknght | 2025-07-12 17:11:02+00:00
I'm not the author but off the top of my head:

- gRPC is not a library I would trust with safety or privacy. It's used a lot but isn't a great product. I have personally found several fuckups in gRPC and protobuf code resulting in application crashes or risks of remote code execution. Their release tagging is dogshit, their implementation makes you think the standard library and boost libraries are easy to read and understand, and neither takes SDLC lifecycles seriously since there aren't sanitizer builds nor fuzzing regime nor static analysis running against new commits last time I checked.

- http/3 using UDP sends performance into the crater, generally requiring _every_ packet to reach the CPU in userspace instead of being handled in the kernel or even directly by the network interface hardware

- multiplexing isn't needed by most websocket applications