MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ACCount36 | 2025-07-15 11:37:35+00:00
This comment is absolute bullshit.

It starts off being wrong ("Opus 4 has maxed out LLM coding performance"), then keeps being wrong ("LLM inference is sold at a loss"), and tries to mask just how wrong it at any point in time is by pivoting from one flavor of bullshit to another on a dime, running laps a manic headless chicken.
by bonoboTP | 2025-07-15 11:37:43+00:00
It's a bit like pattern matching the Cold War fears of a nuclear exchange and nuclear winter to the flood myths or apocalyptic narratives across the ages, and hence dismissing it as "ah, seen this kind of talk before", totally ignoring that Hiroshima and Nagasaki actually happened, later tests actually happened, etc.

It's indeed a symptom of working in an environment where everything is just discourse about discourse, and prestige is given to some surprising novel packaging or merger of narratives, and all that is produced is words that argue with other words, and it's all about criticizing how one author undermines some other author too much or not enough and so on.

From that point of view, sure, nothing new under the sun.

It's all too well to complain about the boy crying wolf, but when you see the pack of wolves entering the village, it's no longer just about words.

Now, anyone is of course free to dispute the empirical arguments, but I see many very self-satisfied prestigious thinkers who think they don't have to stoop so low as to actually look at models and how people use them in reality, it can all just be dismissed based on ick factors and name calling like "slop".

Few are saying that these things are eschatological inevitabilities. They are saying that there are incentive gradients that point in a certain direction and it cannot be moved out from that groove without massive and fragile coordination, due to game theoretical reasonings, given a certain material state of the world right now out there, outside the page of the "text".
by bodge5000 | 2025-07-15 11:39:17+00:00
> This is the only way for me to create music. I do not have time to learn fruity loops, or something.

Maybe try physical instruments, I've got a few synths, an acoustic guitar, a few weird microtonal flutes, I don't know any music theory or how to properly play them (I don't even use the fretboard on the guitar, just the strings themselves) but I know what sounds good to me and can get some really interesting stuff just mucking around with them. No doubt you can achieve something similar with software instruments too, I've just never found any that feel as immediate as physical ones.

I'm a bit biased against AI music, but I still believe even if you enjoy it that actually making something yourself that sounds good is more satisfying than prompting an agent to do it. Maybe that's because you do learn something each time even if you don't intend to, or maybe it is just my bias about AI music, but might be worth a try
by HenryBemis | 2025-07-15 11:41:00+00:00
Books: Siddartha: to think about myself and my changes/voyage through life.

Half-time: to think what-the-hell-comes-next (only if you are 40+)(it won't resonate with a 20yo) Systemantics, Nexus: if you work in mega-big-corpos this will save your life Hold on to your kids, The anxious generation: if you got kids Strong Fathers Strong Daughters: (and mothers/sons) if you got kids (too Christian-y for my taste but an amazing 'manual' to manage the relationship with your kid(s)) 1984, Animal Farm, Gulag Archipelago: ... Light on Yoga: (also do practice yoga, it's good for most-if-not-all)

You asked for "one book"... but.. life.. is not 'one' thing. Systemantics (and Dilbert) have helped me stay afloat at work. Siddartha gave me a perspective in live about myself, the different 'people' I have been throughout my life.

All the listed ones are books I read and read again every few years. They shaped me the first time I read them, keep me 'grounded'/taking stock/thinking the 'change' in me and my life. I see them as a 'check-diff' and how I have changed/evolved/devolved since the last time I read it/them.
by uludag | 2025-07-15 11:41:03+00:00
While I accept this point completely, in a way it's not really different from someone saying that programming with IDEs is the future because look how much time it saved.

The inevitabilism isn't that we'll have some sleek dev tools that speed programmers hours a day (which high level languages, IDEs, etc. in fact do). It's about a change in the operation of our socio economic systems: who are the brokers of knowledge, how knowledge work is defined, a new relationship between employer and employee, new modes of surveillance, etc.

The peddlers of inevitabilism are not doing it to convince stubborn developers a newer, better way of writing software. They are trying to convince us to play on a new game board, one which better suits their hand and they'd be set up to win big. More likely than not you'd be at a disadvantage on this new board. Want to argue against it? Don't like the new rules? Well too bad, because this is inevitable, just the way things are (or so the argument goes).
by OkPin | 2025-07-15 11:41:25+00:00
This incident really underscores how AI-powered dev tools, which rely on open-source extension registries like Open VSX, can be weaponized via supply chain abuse. A $500k crypto heist via a bogus “syntax highlighter” signals a scary maturity in these attacks.

Ranking manipulation, using recency and inflated download counts, to outrank the legitimate Solidity package is a clever exploit of how developers search. It makes me wonder: should IDEs start validating package authorship or offer signed extensions as a default?

Also, the fact that this happened on a freshly imaged system with no antivirus suggests we need to rethink trust models for extension marketplaces. Not just for crypto devs, but for any industry sensitive to code integrity.
Looking for Resources on Agentic Coding for Game Development
by MrPhilGames | 2025-07-15 11:42:24+00:00
Hey fellow devs, I’ve been exploring Agentic Coding — the idea of giving AI agents goals rather than tasks — and I’m curious if anyone here has applied this to actual game development, either in tooling or gameplay. Think Claude, GPT, or similar LLMs acting less like autocomplete and more like a junior engineer that plans, reasons, tests, and even iterates based on broader goals you give it. I’m especially interested in: Resources, tools, or frameworks built around this approach Examples of devs using LLMs as autonomous assistants in codebases Ideas for games that simulate or incorporate agentic thinking (e.g., AI NPCs, empire managers, agents with goal hierarchies) Thoughts on integrating this into build pipelines, editors, or scripting languages I’m working on a sci-fi 4X game called Stellar Throne, and I’m experimenting with agentic workflows using Claude and ChatGPT (I’ve even built a custom CLAUDE.md spec to guide them). Would love to compare notes or find others deep in this rabbit hole. I’ll compile anything useful from this thread into a blog post. Thanks in advance! – MrPhil mrphilgames.com
by bombcar | 2025-07-15 11:42:36+00:00
There’s also the situation which is quite common-something low level occurs like a minor burglary, you report it, the cops know exactly who did it, but also know they won’t have the evidence needed to convict in court.

So they roll up on the guy and put him in the squad car and see if he’ll admit (or have the stuff on him) and when he doesn’t, release him hours or the next day.
by pron | 2025-07-15 11:42:44+00:00
> This is the future. It is inevitable.

"This" does a lot of unjustifiable work here. "This" refers to your successful experience which, I assume, involved a program no larger than a few tens of thousands lines of code, if that, and it saved you only a few hours of work. The future you're referring to, however, is an extrapolation of "this", where a program writes arbitrary programs for us. Is that future inevitable? Possibly, but it's not quite "this", as we can't yet do that, we don't know when we'll be able to, and we don't know that LLMs are what gets us there.

But If we're extrapolating from relatively minor things we can do today to big things we could do in the future, I would say that you're thinking too small. If program X could write program Y for us, for some arbitrary Y, why would we want Y in the first place? If we're dreaming about what may be possible, why would we need any program at all other than X? Saying that that is the inevitable future sounds to me like someone, at the advent of machines, saying that a future where machines automatically clean the streets after our horses is the inevitable future, or perhaps one where we're carried everywhere on conveyor belts. Focusing on LLMs is like such a person saying that in the future, everything will inevitably be powered by steam engines. In the end, horses were replaced wholesale, but not by conveyor belts, and while automation carried on, it wasn't the steam engine that powered most of it.
by bell-cot | 2025-07-15 11:42:51+00:00
Yes, the article's short. But, being on BSD Cafe, it really should have stated the generality:

If the platform (OS, framework, whatever) allows users to develop and install their own stuff (binaries, plugins, whatever), then the platform can't be secure in the face of user incompetence or inattention.

(Yeah, others have doubtless phrased that better.)
by GuB-42 | 2025-07-15 11:43:28+00:00
If you knew in advance the addresses of each function, it wouldn't be very dynamic. It would be akin to statically link the entire system, which makes sense in embedded systems, but probably not on a system where you would use ripgrep.

It seems that what you are suggesting is using position dependent code, which has performance benefits, especially on 32-bit x86, but it seems that we are moving away from it, one reason being that modern hardware supports position independent code better, and also for security.

Having fixed addresses means that hackers know exactly where functions are, making their life easier for writing their shellcodes. As a result, a common security feature we tend to see more and more is ASLR, where code is relocated at random addresses, even for statically-linked code, which is the exact opposite of what you are suggesting.

What you are suggesting could protect against things like DLL injection, which is something I consider more of a feature than a bug. For me, the small improvement in security is not worth it, especially since it would be incompatible with ASLR. Some of these benefits could be achieved by hardening the dynamic linker without changing the executables and libraries themselves.
by positron26 | 2025-07-15 11:43:33+00:00
> so I am going to ask them to explain their point of view

In times when people are being more honest. There's a huge amount of perverse incentive to chase internet points or investment or whatever right now. You don't get honest answers without reading between the lines in these situations.

It's important to do because after a few rounds of battleship, when people get angry, they slip something out like, "Elon Musk" or "big tech" etc and you can get a feel that they're angry that a Nazi was fiddling in government etc, that they're less concerned about overblown harm from LLMs and in fact more concerned that the tech will wind up excessively centralized, like they have seen other winner-take-all markets evolve.

Once you get people to say what they really believe, one way or another, you can fit actual solutions in place instead of just short-sighted reactions that tend to accomplish nothing beyond making a lot of noise along the way to the same conclusion.
by OkPin | 2025-07-15 11:43:35+00:00
Fascinating root cause: a missing CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() left pg_create_logical_replication_slot basically unkillable on hot standbys. Simple fix, but huge impact.

Makes me wonder how many other Postgres processes might ignore SIGTERM under edge conditions. Do folks here test signal handling during failovers or replica maintenance? Seems like something worth adding to chaos tests.
by nonvibecoding | 2025-07-15 11:44:27+00:00
Yeah, he knows. We just laughed about how cringe we are. For his last birthday I downloaded our entire chat history, ran it through Claude, and sent him a visual of our most used words. I also added a few of the funniest lines we’ve had (It wasn’t actually that funny by normal standards, just to be clear)

Honestly, I have no idea how that’s birthday-related but we both enjoy it
by gametorch | 2025-07-15 11:44:35+00:00
Yeah no that is how it works.

I want people to release cool software without the insane burden you describe. If they want to delegate that burden to users or ask them to pay for someone else to assume the burden, great.

I love Cursor. They haven't failed me. I'm not running arbitrary code and I suffer none of the consequences.

Furthermore, it probably literally says you're running random 3rd party code when you use extensions and Cursor is not liable. This is basic human responsibility 101. You are responsible for your own actions.
by keiferski | 2025-07-15 11:44:38+00:00
I think you’re missing the point of the blog post and the point of my grandparent comment, which is that there is a pervasive attitude amongst technologists that “it’s just gonna happen anyway and therefore whether I work on something negative for the world or not makes no difference, and therefore I have no role as an ethical agent.” It’s a way to avoid responsibility and freedom.

We are not discussing the likelihood of some particular scenario based on models and numbers and statistics and predictions by Very Smart Important People.
by tpxl | 2025-07-15 11:45:18+00:00
Legitimate question: At this point, what could a loyalty card possibly measure that isn't already measured on a bigger scale?

The cc/bank provider already gets an itemized bill, and they get it for everywhere you shop as opposed to a single store (so a superset of this data is already collected). This is in some (most?) cases already shared with stores, and even if it isn't, what can a store do with it the bank/cc provider can't do worse.
by PaulHoule | 2025-07-15 11:45:34+00:00
Using an xyz domain name is a way to give up your agency:

In 2023, the Anti-Phishing Working Group stated that the .xyz, and .shop domain names were in the top 5 for malicious domain registrations[7] Due to these instances of malware, scams, and phishing, multiple anti-malware vendors are blacklisting many or all .xyz domains

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

They are blocked where I work.
by esskay | 2025-07-15 11:45:43+00:00
By that logic you'd have to extend the same argument to Firefox, Chrome and Edge. All have a bunch of "evil" (which by your own definition evil = thing that makes a business money) things that can be disabled.

Once you've done that you're back to the same old question - why is <other browser> any better/safe/trustworth than Brave, which is arguably the only one that's gone out of their way to make sure its sustainable and not reliant on farming user data to the highest broker.
by petetnt | 2025-07-15 11:45:48+00:00
Personally looking at the documentation I would say that "no good documentation" is highly misleading, because the documentation that it provides is incredibly detailed from quick starts to detailed explanations, offers a lot of examples and has very high quality typings with inline documentation. Not to mention the code itself is documented thoroughly. Sure it doesn't have an API reference, but you get that from the typings, that what I usually do - just check the imports first and go from there.
by IAmGraydon | 2025-07-15 11:45:49+00:00
Things which are both powerful and possible become inevitable. We know that LLMs are powerful, but we aren't sure how powerful yet, and there's a large range this might eventually land in. We know they're possible in their current form, of course, but we don't know if actual GAI is possible.

At this time, humanity seems to be estimating that both power and possibility will be off the charts. Why? Because getting this wrong can be so negatively impactful that it makes sense to move forward as if GAI will inevitably exist. Imagine supposing that this will all turn out to be fluff and GAI will never work, so you stop investing in it. Now imagine what happens if you're wrong and your enemy gets it to work first.

This isn't some arguing device for AI-inevitabilists. It's knowledge of human nature, and it's been repeating itself for millennia. If the author believes that's going to suddenly change, they really should back that up with what, exactly, has changed in human nature.
by TheAceOfHearts | 2025-07-15 11:46:25+00:00
Suno is incredibly fun. I've realized there's ton of lyrical and topical niches that nobody is exploring in the music space, so AI generated tools are really good at helping you scratch your own itch. The iterative loop still feels like it has a lot of room for tightening up, especially when you want to start refining minor details to match more closely with the idea you have in your head.

Personally, I had some experience learning to compose music from a college course, and I've been trying to relearn some of what I'd forgotten by trying out this textbook: The Complete Musician, but progress is slow. And even if I'm able to put together a musical piece, I wouldn't be able to afford hiring the people needed to bring it to life.

I wonder how far we are from AI tools where you can just start describing and humming your idea out, and it'll give you samples that can be mixed in real time. Sort of like being in a studio with a full support staff of professionals with a lot of improvisational experience. Vibe mixing and composing in real time.
by AIPedant | 2025-07-15 11:46:31+00:00
Cursor does bear significant responsibility in the sense that OpenVSX transformed from a niche service used by free software nerds into a major component of many developers’ process. There were a few months were Cursor were the scrappy upstarts, but now they’re a $200M/year company and they have $200M/year responsibilities. They can’t just wash their hands of it and pretend OpenVSX is a public service.
by LongjumpingCat | 2025-07-15 11:46:52+00:00
Really intriguing use of Suno.ai, generating AI-backed demo tracks to accompany your album feels like a reverse collaboration.

What stands out is how this method reframes demos—not just rough pre-production but fully formed creative statements in themselves.

Curious: for anyone working with AI in music, does this shift in workflow change how you iterate creatively? And how do you balance AI-generated backbone with your own unique touches?
by benreesman | 2025-07-15 11:47:34+00:00
Chinchilla maxed out refers to the so-called "Chinchilla Scaling Law" from the famous DeepMind paper about how in this particular regime, scale seemed to just flow like the spice. That happens sometimes, until it doesn't.

I didn't say the coding performance was maxed out, I said the ability to pour NVIDIA in and have performance come out the other side is at it's tail end. We will need architectural innovations to make the next big discontinuous leap (e.g. `1106-preview`).

They're doing things they don't normally do right: letting loose on the safety alignment bullshit and operator-aligning it, fine-tuning it on things like nixpkgs (cough defense cough), and generally not pretending it's an "everything machine" anymore.

This is state of the art Google/StackOverflow/FAANG-megagrep in 2025, and it's powerful (though the difference between this and peak Google/SO might be less than many readers realize: pre-SEO Google also spit out working code for most any query).

But it's not going to get twice as good next month or the month after that. They'd still be selling the dream on the universal magic anything machine if it were. And NVIDIA wouldn't be heavily discounted at every provider that rents it.
by MrAlex94 | 2025-07-15 11:47:39+00:00
As it currently stands there should be over a billion devices that natively support JPEG-XL, as it was introduced in all Apple OSs since September 2023[1].

On the web alone it should be close to a billion users with support for JXL due to Safari’s market share.

[1]: https://cloudinary.com/blog/jpeg-xl-how-it-started-how-its-g...
by LongjumpingCat | 2025-07-15 11:49:05+00:00
Wild how one leaked xAI API key opened up access to 52 LLMs, including a brand-new Grok model, and they didn’t revoke it right away.

This shows how careless secret management can scale into a huge breach, especially when the same org handles sensitive data.

Shouldn’t teams building with LLMs have automated checks to catch exposed keys before they hit public repos?
by Luc | 2025-07-15 11:49:10+00:00
Here's the docs for the screen device: https://benbridle.com/projects/bedrock/user-manual/screen-de...

You set up a palette of 16 colours, then write 0-15 to the coordinates where you want to set a pixel, but you can also choose between an overlapping foreground and background layer (colour 0 on the foreground layer is transparent).

I guess it's no more weird than some hardware designs from the 80's...
by ryoshu | 2025-07-15 11:49:32+00:00
AI has the same vague hand-wavey problems of the metaverse. LLMs are not AI. Roblox is not the metaverse. Both are approaching parts of the promise of each of their potential, but only a small part of what they could be or are promised to be.

Hype cycles will hype. Builders will build.
by throwawayffffas | 2025-07-15 11:50:56+00:00
Probably not. Several evolutionary hypothesis, suggest that reliance on hunting is what made us different from the rest of the great apes[1][2]. There is literally an extinction event caused by our hunting[3]. Where early humans showed up megafauna quickly went extinct.[4]

[1]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunting_hypothesis [2]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endurance_running_hypothesis [3]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction [4]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megafauna#Megafaunal_mass_exti...
by rishabh16 | 2025-07-15 11:51:06+00:00
Location: India

Remote: Yes, full-remote (5+ years)

Willing to relocate: Yes, possibly

Technologies: Product Management, Growth Marketing (e-commerce, marketplace, fintech, saas)

Résumé/CV: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1920g_elqcSAYFKSHnS3-vkw4...

Email: rishunk16@gmail.com

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rishabh16/

Open to full-time, part-time & contract opportunities. Please reach out to rishabh@roasexpert.com
by ndiddy | 2025-07-15 11:51:12+00:00
I don't know about the others, but Zuckerberg can absolutely destroy Meta. He owns a special class of shares that have 10x voting power vs. normal shares, so he personally controls about 60% of the votes. If there was any way of Zuckerberg getting ousted by investors, there's no way they would have let the company lose so much money for so long trying to make VR a thing.
by apelapan | 2025-07-15 11:51:28+00:00
Influenza is not necessarily that bad, though it can be.

Most of the time influenza is not worse than a normal cold. You will have plenty of partial immunity via previous infections and vaccinations that takes the edge of most infections.

Same as COVID. Most of the infections are not even noticed by the ones infected. But sometimes it is/was extremely bad, if you had no previous exposure/vaccination, a large amount of bad luck and/or pre existing condition.
by rishabh16 | 2025-07-15 11:52:21+00:00
SEEKING WORK

Location: India

Remote: Yes, full-remote (5+ years)

Willing to relocate: Yes, possibly

Technologies: Product Management, Growth Marketing (e-commerce, marketplace, fintech, saas)

Résumé/CV: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1920g_elqcSAYFKSHnS3-vkw4...

Email: rishunk16@gmail.com

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rishabh16/

Open to full-time, part-time & contract opportunities. Please reach out to rishabh@roasexpert.com