MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by amluto | 2025-07-06 19:37:20+00:00
The author didn’t say that they have a use for those 3200 updates per second other than as a workaround for some other issue. With a competently composited desktop and applications that pace input processing and frame generation well, and ignoring pointer acceleration, 1 correctly timed update per frame is enough. (As far as I know this does not exist from any vendor on a modern system other than for games, although really old Apple II-era software often got it right.). For acceleration, some pointer history is needed. And no one has a mouse that has an API that allows the host to pace the updates.

Presumably the 3200 Hz is needed for a combination of reasons:

- Under ideal conditions, if you want less than 10% variation in the number of samples per frame at 240Hz, you may need ~2400Hz. This effect is visible even by human eyeballs — you can see multiple cursor images across your field of view, and uneven spacing is noticeable.

- The mouse itself may work less well at a lower sampling rate.

- The OS and input stack may be poorly designed and work better at higher rates.

In any case, the application and cursor implementation are unlikely to ask for a mouse location more than once per frame, so the user is not really using 3200 updates per second, but that’s irrelevant.
by drdaeman | 2025-07-06 19:37:28+00:00
Nah, this is not for social anxiety people either. Or however we can call folks who don't normally feel like talking to others if they can.

All the recipes there are basically for people who don't have "natural" interpersonal skills and need to emulate it as a formal conscious process instead.

That's it - nothing in the article touches any aspects of willingness to engage with others, or ways to break out of maladaptive behaviors like social evasion.
by throwaway070625 | 2025-07-06 19:37:38+00:00
And the cattle farmers massively benefit from these things. There are now custom monitors being put on to cattle that constantly measure how much they eat, how much they walk, body temp, etc. If they fall out of expected range the system will call a vet automatically to come treat them as they're obviously sick. This is keeping the cattle healthier and the production numbers high.

Farmers are also really getting into things like drones for pesticide application as it's faster, more accurate, and has less waste.

It's happening whether or not people want to believe it, from Texas up to Illinois/Wisconsin and everywhere inbetween.

hey, if you want to get away from big tech and you're not scared of rural life -- farmers need IT folks. They have racks of Supermicro servers on premises that need maintaining because they can't trust the cloud // internet can be unreliable. They have sensors and repeaters on the field perimeters that need maintenance.

There's a lot of IT work to be done in rural America with a slower pace of life if you're not afraid of coexisting with country folk. For those of us that grew up there and migrated to the city for corporate IT jobs -- I expect we'll be going back to our roots and serving our communities with these skills instead so we don't have to deal with AI screened jobs and take-home programming tests
by waystand | 2025-07-06 19:37:47+00:00
Cool concept and great execution! Just tried a few rounds - the difficulty variation between images keeps it interesting, and the daily format definitely has that Wordle-like habit-forming appeal. I'm curious about a couple of technical aspects: how do you handle the 'ground truth' for scoring accuracy, and what's your image sourcing strategy? Also wondering if you've considered showing how individual guesses compare to the crowd's estimates - that could add another engaging layer to the game.
by kragen | 2025-07-06 19:38:20+00:00
Obviously you can do orders of magnitude better than 160 req/s! But if you only have tens of thousands of users or less, like all but the top thousand web sites in the world, there's at best very marginal benefit in doing so. It's spending effort to solve a problem that no longer exists.

I agree that the number I gave is erroneous, but not in the direction you imply. 400ms is extremely conservative, and it's not just starting an executable. I took my 100-millisecond estimate for the time to start up Python and `import cgi`, which loads 126 modules in the version I have here on my cellphone, and multiplied it by a safety factor of 4. Even on my cellphone it doesn't take that long, although `python3 -m cgi` does, because it loads all those modules and then runs a debug dump script. The time I measured for `python3 -m cgi` on my laptop is 90–150ms.

If all you are doing is starting a per-request executable, that will typically take more like 1 millisecond than 100 milliseconds.

Perhaps you meant to suggest that the actual logic triggered by the request would increase this 400ms number significantly.

Consider first the case where it would, for example because you do 200ms of computation in response to each request. In this case the best you could do by switching from CGI to a more efficient mechanism like FastCGI is a 3× increase in req/s. If that allows you to increase from 10 million requests per day on one server to 30 million, that could be worthwhile if you actually have tens of millions of requests per day. But it's kind of a marginal improvement; it saves you from needing two or three servers, probably.

Now consider the case—far more common, I think—where your computation per request is small compared to our hypothetical 400 ms Python CGI overhead. Maybe you do 20ms of computation: 80 million machine instructions or so, enough to tie an IBM PC up for a few minutes. In such a case, the total one-core request time has gone from 400ms to 420ms, so 400ms is a very good estimate, and your criticism is invalid.
by cameronleonard | 2025-07-06 19:38:36+00:00
We built PowerMeterAPI — a real-time carbon-aware router for API traffic. It routes requests to the cleanest electricity grid available (currently live for CAISO), helping infra teams reduce emissions and improve latency by avoiding over-stressed regions.

Use promo code POWERMETER30 at checkout for a free month on the Dev Tier.
by bgnn | 2025-07-06 19:39:16+00:00
I've not even seen one on the streets in NL. I think it makes a lot of sense for deliveries within the country considering the distances. There seems to be a subsidy of of max 115k [1] (In Dutch). I'm surprised that big companies aren't selling their old fleet to lower income countries and buy wlectric trucks.

[1] https://www.rabobank.nl/bedrijven/groei/duurzaamheid/elektri...
by ivm | 2025-07-06 19:39:24+00:00
I've been programming since 2009 and lately I've been also learning a ton from LLM output. When they review my code or architecture ideas, they sometimes suggest approaches I outright didn't know because my day-to-day "rut" has been different so far.

LLMs are like a map of everything, even it's a medieval map with distorted country sizes and dragons in every sea. Still, it can be used to get a general idea of where to go.
by ayaros | 2025-07-06 19:39:25+00:00
Yes.

Setting aside specifically places something on the desktop. Save-able documents have a "save and put away" option which "refiles" it back in its folder without putting it on the desktop.

You made me realize I still need to add a separate "put away" option on all windows regardless, so there's always a menu command that can be used to refile something.

The desktop isn't a normal directory - I discuss this in the readme a bit.
by dlcarrier | 2025-07-06 19:39:28+00:00
Touch screens built into cars are dangerous, too: https://newsroom.aaa.com/2017/10/new-vehicle-infotainment-sy...

We'd probably be better off if they were illegal, although regulations might not be necessary as customer backlash has been enough to get car makers to go back to safer buttons and knobs: https://www.wired.com/story/why-car-brands-are-finally-switc...
by maxglute | 2025-07-06 19:39:56+00:00
Writer somewhat naive. His Ascend team couldn't get comparable performance (gen1 910A NPUs) initially vs (I assume) Nvidia because obviously. Management supported teams that pivot to cloned alternatives that used GPUs that can be immediately commercialized. Internal office politics make this happen. Ascend team works out kinks (this is huge confirmation), but feel (are) mistreated, i.e. biased bureaucracy, lack of recognition. Many burnout / leave to other Chinese AI companies.

HW strategy/culture has been burning tier1 talent since forever. I remember in the 90s When HW and other domestic PRC telco started poaching from Nortel, Siemens, Lucent etc... the talent (most Chinese diaspora used to comfy western office culture) did not have a good time fitting into an actual Chinese company with Chinese culture (but got paid lots). Many burned out too... yet HW, a particularly extreme outlier of militant work culture, has become dominant..

LBH, both HW post sanctions, is a strategic company, overlapping with semi fabrication, domestic chips, and AI is cubing their strategic value. They can get away with doing anything under the current geopolitical environment to stay dominant. The worthwhile take away from this farewell letter is HW threw enough talent at Ascend that it kind of works now, and potentially can throw enough talent at it to be competitive with Nvidia. AKA how it has always operated, like massive wankers. The intuition from the author and most of us is... you need to reward employees right, cultivate proper workplace environment blah blah blah... but look at HW for the past 30 years. They pay a lot of smart people (including patriotic suckers) A LOT of money, throw them at problems until they break. And win.
by MPSFounder | 2025-07-06 19:40:25+00:00
Great question. I have a PhD. People forgot the purpose of a PhD. Hannah effectively achieved what many with a PhD fail to do, and that is contribute novel research. A PhD in the US (only place I can comment on) has lately been focused first and foremost on a) preparing for academia, which entails teaching and a lot of courses, and b) research for industry positions (many students in my cohort were from China or India and this was their segway into a job in the US). I agree a PhD should be purely focused on research and extending human knowledge. In practice, it is a business where students go to conferences to promote their PI's work, where Universities get cheap lecturers in the form of TAs, and where many mediocre students write incremental papers to secure an RnD position (change this by a little and see how it affects your results. This is your paper). I am very impressed by Hannah's work though and she embodies the selfless nature of research that is very much missing. I see too often people seeking to advance their own career and pick a PhD route of least resistance. While they are entitled to maximize profits, and oftentimes do not want to go to academia where solving the impossible is admired, we must remember discoveries often hinge on challenging problems and a selfless pursuit of the impossible. This is just my opinion based on what I saw in my cohort and at 30+ conferences
by ryandrake | 2025-07-06 19:40:31+00:00
Yea, I think some people are acting like these "licenses" are physical constants, found in nature and can't be modified! They are made by humans and can be unmade by humans. Regulation could deem those licenses unenforceable. Regulation could force permissive licensing. Regulation could add or remove IP protection. It's all conjured up by humans.

Yes, it is unlikely that legislators, bought and paid for by big corporations, will ever change the rules to reduce help to big corporations, but it's at least humanly possible.
by thundergolfer | 2025-07-06 19:41:42+00:00
I'm very sympathetic to those who want focus on the climate disaster, but I'm not convinced that genAI's carbon pollution is a major problem. Maybe I've missed a memo, but the biggest polluters and criminals in the climate story are still by far the fossil fuel industry (eg. Shell, Exxon) and the agricultural industry (eg. Cargill).

At some point I was even hearing the claim that digitization (e.g. GenAI) was finally divorcing the tight connection between economic growth and resource extraction. I'd bet it's incorrect, but it's much less fanciful than thinking that growth in oil or beef would help us grow without strip mining the earth.

Bray's first issue —the influence of GenAI on labour's (and also the democratic people's) decreasing power versus capital— is much more important and interesting.
by yupitsme123 | 2025-07-06 19:41:47+00:00
Lawmakers aren't informed enough to figure out a plan. Experts are needed to do that.

Scientists and industry work together all the time to enact sea changes in the world around us. The AI revolution is a recent example. No legislation or government was needed.

Most of the biggest changes in our lifetimes have happened due to private actors, not government getting involved.
by neuroplots | 2025-07-06 19:41:51+00:00
It’s something I realized a long time ago about humans. Resources and opportunities go where they are least needed. Want high social status? Your best bet is to need absolutely nothing from anyone.

Coolness, in its original sense, is about never caring too much because you will never need to. People are drawn to what doesn’t care about them; they assume the response they get will be objective.
by const_cast | 2025-07-06 19:42:46+00:00
The arguments against UBI are pretty much the same against rising minimum wages. That being, the baseline just moves, so everything gets more expensive, so the situation doesn't improve at all.

It intuitively makes sense, and like most economic reasoning it's horribly simple. But economics is comprised to two parts: theory, and practice.

Practice always trumps theory. If practice defies your theory, it doesn't mean that the market is broken, or that there's over-regulation, or that your theory will eventually come true. It means your theory is just wrong. All economic theory are predicated on thousands or millions of underlying assumptions. If even just a few of those are not true, or aren't true in the way you think they are, then the theory can be wrong while simultaneously being logically perfect.

When it comes to the arguments against minimum wage, the theory is just wrong. Rising minimum wages do help people making minimum wage. If it does raise the COL, it's slowly, and not in the same degree as the minimum wage shift. In addition, a flat minimum wage still results in a rising COL. You can't simply pin the COL like that.

So knowing what we know about minimum wage, I think it's arrogant to claim the UBI would just result in a rising COL to eat up all the UBI.
by potato3732842 | 2025-07-06 19:43:06+00:00
>This guy drives a Scania in the US, and it feels like he is more like a marketing stunt for Scania. He shows other truckers his one and they are all so surprised about the quality of this European truck, them getting the feeling that the US truck industry has been sleeping for decades in terms of evolution.

You're not nearly jaded enough. The dude isn't doing product placement for Scania. He's making trucker content for urban white collar demographics hence the direction of the spin to fit that niche.
by tsimionescu | 2025-07-06 19:44:59+00:00
> I see this a lot with math concepts as they begin to get more abstract: strange visualizations to try to build intuition. I think this is ultimately a dead-end approach which misleads rather than enlightens.

Isn't this how people arrived at most of these concepts historically, how the intuition arose that these are meaningful concepts at all?

For example, the notion of a continuous function arose from a desire to explicitly classify functions whose graph "looks smooth and unbroken". People started with the visual representation, and then started to build a formalism that explains it. Once they found a formalism that was satisfying for regular cases, they could now apply it to cases where the visual intuition fails, such as functions on infinite-dimensional spaces. But the concept of a continuous function remains tied to the visual idea, fundamentally that's where it comes from.

Similalrly with vectors, you have to first develop an intuition of the visual representation of what vector operations mean in a simple to understand vector space like Newtonian two-dimensional or three-dimensional space. Only after you build this clean and visual intuition can you really start understanding the formalization of vectors, and then start extending the same concepts to spaces that are much harder or impossible to visualize. But that doesn't mean that vector addition is an arbitrary operation labeled + - vector addition is a meaningful concept for spatial vectors, one that you can formally extend to other operations if they follow certain rules while retaining many properties of the two-dimensional case.
by LorenPechtel | 2025-07-06 19:45:06+00:00
Most people have the common sense to avoid using the stuff without very good reason. Availability isn't going to be a big factor.

And decriminalization of possession doesn't really do much. Cops don't focus on possession in the first place. It lets people be more open about possessing (which is a good thing for opiate users--much more likely to get Narcan if needed) but does nothing about the quality problems from the supply chain.

And if you get rid of the drug war you get rid of the insanity around prescribing controlled substances.
by xrd | 2025-07-06 19:45:53+00:00
Isn't it more appropriate to compare this to aider?

I prefer the command line tools to IDE integration, even though I don't feel like the contextual options are great. In other words, I don't always feel that I can see the changes fully. I like Claude Code's option to expand the result using ctrl-r, and I like the diffs it provides. But, it still feels like there is a way to get better than what I see inside Zed and what I see inside Claude and Aider.

Maybe an editor that can be controlled and modified on the fly using natural language?
by 9x39 | 2025-07-06 19:46:18+00:00
Work harder for more pay is limited to American full service gigs, and a weird employer-driven labor retention push elsewhere.

The tipping process works for servers who have the performative and service skills to work a crowd of tables, modulo peculiarities of the patron population. There can be a very strong connection between a server who works tables hard and their tip take-home versus one who merely gets the food to the table.
by gallier2 | 2025-07-06 19:47:09+00:00
What makes the choice of < > for template parameter bad appears when someone tries to nest templates.

a<b<arg>>

and now a means greater becomes a shift right. That's one of the reason that it you had a genious ideo to find domething else in D

a(template params)(runtime params) at declaration a!(template params)(runtime params) at invocation with the type deduction and parenthesis omission making often even disappear completely the template syntax.

thank you
by paulcole | 2025-07-06 19:47:13+00:00
> I have to keep up a facade in front of other people at all times.

This comes down to the idea of whether you believe that if you “keep up a facade at all times” that the facade becomes who you really are.

You don’t need an article convincing you why networking is important. You either need to be curious enough to want to see if your life can be better by doing something that goes against what you believe is your nature or not.
by martinald | 2025-07-06 19:47:21+00:00
Feels like we are incredibly early into pricing LLM usage. I suspect we are going to look back in the days these scripts were useful with some rose tinted glasses.

I assume they have very peaky demand, especially when Europe + N American office hours overlap (though I'm assuming b2b demand is higher than b2c). I'm also assuming Asian demand is significantly less than "the west", which I guess would be true given the reluctance to serve Chinese users (and Chinese users using locally hosted models?).

I know OpenAI and Anthropic have 'batch' pricing but that's slightly different as it's asynchronous and not well suited for a lot of code tasks. Think a more dynamic model for users would make a lot more sense - for example, a cheaper tier giving "Max" usage but you can only use it 8pm-6am Eastern time, otherwise you are on Pro limits.
by triclops200 | 2025-07-06 19:48:24+00:00
I like the point raised by the author here about the power of elisp in the shell. For context, I've used emacs for well over a decade and write a good bit of elisp most weeks. However, I ended up finding elisp to be the wrong language for replacing a shell: it removes a lot of simplicity/convention for not enough reward, imo: it's just the wrong abstraction because elisp's most natural transformations are very stateful and buffer based, and, additionally, it really doesn't provide that much expanded capability in the end (and this is despite the fact that I'm one of those people who would absolutely never leave my emacs environment even for web browsing if I could feasibly make it work consistently for the kinds of things I need).

However, despite disliking python, I found https://xon.sh/ to be really excellent and provides a lot of the benefits of eshell, but better, in my humble opinion: it has a well-enough structured base language that is essentially already built to be a library glue-code language, which works really well with the unix philosophy that traditional shells utilize (a good library is just a tool that does a thing really well). It's really nice to just do things like this example

from somelib import process_image #returns a file name that it saved to for f in $(some_executable_that_prints_a_file_list).strip().split("\n"): img = cv2.imread(f) cp @(process_image(img)) publish_dir make publish

It feels a lot like an extension of old shells to me rather than a complete replacement.
by RugnirViking | 2025-07-06 19:48:44+00:00
I do agree. I think it's most important point - that while yes, people rightfully point out that past automation in the long term and averaged across everyone did have probably a positive impact on income, that's not what is prompting the current investments in it. The investments only make sense in the context of and clearly are a bet on reduced payroll.

Reduced payroll to a large portion of the members of the already struggling and shrinking middle class. Thinking that some natural law says that jobs that will come back will automatically also be middle class
by userbinator | 2025-07-06 19:48:58+00:00
he'd simply learned by rote

That's a common problem. A lot of people don't realise that if you accept user input, you can get every single byte and sequence of bytes possible. Validating that a parameter is an integer ([0-9]+) is even easier than escaping.

his job title is "senior developer".

Likely that's purely because of how long he's worked there, not how much he actually knows.
by spauldo | 2025-07-06 19:49:07+00:00
There's a lot of good text editors out there, though. Vanilla Emacs with some tweaks is decent, sure, but if all you do is use the basic editing commands then you'll probably feel more at home with a different editor.

Look at the tutorial - it does everything it can to encourage you not to use the arrow keys or PGUP/PGDN. No, you're supposed to learn all kinds of whacky key combinations instead. That's all for a good reason but it's hardly encouraging for new users faced with the choice of doing things the "proper" way and building new muscle memory vs. using the keys they already know.

If all you want is a decent editor to get some work done without having to spend a fair amount of time learning the editor itself, Emacs probably isn't the best choice.

(To others reading this comment: Emacs editing commands have a hierarchy of sorts. It's powerful, and context-aware. But it requires you to internalize things like CTRL-f to move the cursor to the right. Unless you make the effort to learn them - or use evil-mode - you miss out on a good chunk of what makes Emacs so great for editing.)