MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by phatskat | 2025-07-25 03:33:48+00:00
For me, `class”btn btn-primary btn-primary—title”` says close to nothing about the underlying CSS - I have to go look that up. But `class=“rounded p-2 flex gap-2 items-center font-semibold bg-aqua-300 text-white”` actually tells me something: “this button has rounded corners, padding of 8px on all sides, it’s got flex display with a gap of 8px, items are aligned along the center of the cross axis, font weight is 500, the background is a lighter shade of aqua and the text is white.”

What shade of aqua, exactly? I couldn’t tell you, but my IDE sticks a color block right next to any Tailwind color class. Is that rounded corner a radius of 6px or 8px? I don’t remember off the top of my head, but again my IDE will tell me with a quick hover of the “rounded” class.

To me, the first set of classes is “incomprehensible” because those names, while semantically descriptive, tell me nothing about what the classes actually apply - they describe what they’re styling, not _how_ they’re styling it.

But the long list of Tailwind classes tells me exactly what they do and how they do it, and if for some reason I need to go beyond the LSP to figure out what a class does, the Tailwind docs are miles easier to search than grepping the codebase for “.btn-primary \{“, not that I’ve run into that. In fact, the Tailwind LSP will compute selectors like “[&>div]:hover:border-2” and show you the actual generated CSS selector right in the hover window so you can see what the eventual output will be - it’s not just a dumb lookup of “m-2 is the margin 8px class”
by codebje | 2025-07-25 03:34:00+00:00
If you want a function to be usable in both an async and a non-async environment, the monads in question are ones for async and identity, not IO. The choice between a true concurrent runtime and a single threaded cooperative coroutine runtime is up to you in GHC Haskell.

Monad-agnostic functions are exactly looking upwards to allow the calling context to determine behaviour.
by skydhash | 2025-07-25 03:34:16+00:00
> We still create software largely the same as we did in the 1980s. Developers sitting at keyboards writing code, line by line.

That's because the single dimension of code fits how the computer works and we can project any higher order dimension on it. If you go with 2 dimensions like pictures, it no longer fits the computer model, and everything becomes awkward with the higher dimensions of the domain. The only good 2d representation is the grid (spreadsheet, relation dbs, parallel programming..) and even they can be unwieldy.

The mental model is the higher dimension structure, that we project on line of codes. Having LLM generating it is like throwing painting on canvas and hoping for the Mona Lisa.
by mike1o1 | 2025-07-25 03:34:18+00:00
I use Tidewave which is a package for my Elixir app, and it allows the LLM to get access to some internals of my app. For example, Tidewave exposes tools to inspect the database schema, internal hex documentation for packages, introspection to see what functions are available on a module, etc.

While I’m not “vibe” coding, it is nice to be able to ask human language questions and have the LLM query the database to answer questions. Or while working on a feature, I can ask it to delete all the test records I created, etc. I can do that in a repl myself, but it’s sometimes a nice shortcut.

Note, this only runs in dev, so it’s not querying my production database or anything.

Basically, they can be a way to expose additional data or tools to the LLM.
by BeetleB | 2025-07-25 03:34:33+00:00
Indeed. I know someone who owns a gun and lives in a very sketchy area. The previous tenant in the apartment was a drug dealer, so sketchy people keep knocking on the door.

Making it very clear that he owns a gun effectively drives all of them away.

But that's where you make clear you have a gun. Concealed carry, by definition, is hiding that fact. There are pros and cons to open carry, but IMO, if you want the gun to act as a deterrent, open carry probably is a lot more effective than concealed carry.
by wibbily | 2025-07-25 03:35:51+00:00
You're in high school? This is pretty good considering. Couple of things :

1. I uploaded a picture that was clearly an iPad Mini - it said so in the image I believe - and the AI decided it was a Pro and could not be convinced otherwise

2. eBay does the same thing, having the AI write flowery prose for the description. It's more annoying than helpful. Would be nice if, instead of the AI filling out the character limit with generic details, it could recognize it was light on info and prompt the user for specific details.

Cheers though good luck with it
by crazygringo | 2025-07-25 03:36:47+00:00
Sure, but I'm not really clear on what that has to do with the situation described?

And he calls them vested shares though, not vested options, though maybe he's incorrect.

And it's not like you forfeit them instantly after leaving anyways. You usually have at least 90 days. And the fact that the value of the company is so much lower now is favorable, if you think the value will recover.

But again, none of this has anything to do with the "1% payout" here that is still totally unexplained.
by cowpig | 2025-07-25 03:37:19+00:00
I find it bizarre that this author wrote so much about information warfare, talking about China and corporate censorship, and a piece in propublica about algorithmic bias...

But never brings up the fact that a billionaire bought one of the largest social media platforms in the US and then used it plus at least another $250 million in donations to SuperPACs to influence the US election.

Or that two advertising giants have sucked up all of the advertising money online such that there now are almost no independent journalists left in US media.

It's as if the piece is written about modern China and the US of 15 years ago.
by hemloc_io | 2025-07-25 03:37:20+00:00
eh it’s bc you’re never fired for making the same mistakes as everyone else

imagine this approach fails and you have to go to your board? They’re going to flat you alive and call you an idiot who should’ve done what everyone else was doing since it was obvious

but if you do what everyone else is doing? Well the macro changed obviously!

EDIT: I’ve worked at big tech companies where this was a meme, where the execs would do whatever meta/google did but six months later
by hn_throwaway_99 | 2025-07-25 03:37:39+00:00
Agree and I really appreciate your comment, as it wasn't immediately clear to me from reading the letter.

It's not a "bizarre reference to agentic AI" - it's saying (as you point out) that Intel can't compete in the training (i.e. "compile time") race, but they can in the inference (i.e. "run time") race, which is likely where more spending is going to be anyway in the near/medium future as the scaling hype looks like a dead end.
by phatskat | 2025-07-25 03:37:54+00:00
> You can change the classes in the harder to read html, or override the single element. There is no longer the possibility to, for example, affect all .primary-btns.

Sure there is, the only thing is that instead of having 20 <button class=“primary”> tags, you have a <ButtonPrimary> component. Change the component once, and all instances get the update.

This applies regardless of Tailwind. But if you’re repeating classes on the same kind of element over and over, then the question is less about how you’re styling it and more about how you’re organizing things.
by crossroadsguy | 2025-07-25 03:40:18+00:00
> In fact, we're currently working with an OEM to have their devices have official GrapheneOS support

Oh god, yes. Please! I can't wait to leave the walled fruit garden, but can't tolerate Google sniffing everything I do or do not do on my phone either.

PS. I just hope it's an OEM that sells devices to a lot of countries including developing ones and not something like Fairphone.
by somenameforme | 2025-07-25 03:41:29+00:00
I think societies somewhat naturally wax and wane on most topics, probably because it seems we're simply unable to maintain a middle ground on anything. We always end up taking things to an extreme which, regardless of what that extreme may be, tends to lead to unpleasant scenarios which causes society to start bouncing back in the opposite direction only to repeat the cycle in the equal but opposite direction some time later.

You can see this playing out in real time with religion which went from societies that were highly religious to secular to militantly anti-religious, and now gen-z is suddenly some ~400% more religious than previous generations. [1] The most interesting thing is that that's also a global trend, probably owing to the relative global homogenization of societies in many ways.

[1] - https://www.axios.com/2025/05/10/religious-young-people-chri...
by healsdata | 2025-07-25 03:41:44+00:00
The title I submitted is exactly the one from the article, shortened to meet HN's limitations. I challenge you to explain how changing the word "cancellation" to "cancelled" is altering the meaning of the title.

Also, the article you linked is about the cancellation, not the merger approval that just happened today after what many see as actions to placate and/or bribe the government.
by syngrog66 | 2025-07-25 03:42:19+00:00
water in the list. yeah the author tried to imply all the tech related to those (air, water, food, etc) by citing a few examples (pipes, AC...)

eg. a microwave is an amazingly powerful tool. and pots/pans combined with fire and water? game over, other tech, game over

vi vs emacs: I shall overlook your heresy! sign of cross

vim > Gemini
by 123yawaworht456 | 2025-07-25 03:42:37+00:00
I'll make another ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

yes, naturally, almost every post I make on my throwaways is something political, in response to existing political comments or submissions, which are evidently allowed.

using throwaways to protect oneself from the terminally online crowd is pretty much a necessity in the current year, unless your values and opinions are firmly in the middle of the Overton window. and even then, there are many opinions that were universally okay 15 years ago can be used against you now. I've seen it happen time and time again.
by anal_reactor | 2025-07-25 03:43:02+00:00
I think when the guy mentioned he studied past failures it's prime example of crunching the numbers and applying theories without actual common sense. "Ah yes, I wouldn't buy a Gucci bag for $999 but for $995 it's a deal done" you don't need PhD in economics to realize this is stupid.

The fact that the second part of his comment is full of acronyms "we ASDFed the GHIJ over KLMN" suggest it's yet another case of a manager completely detached from reality of average consumer.
by orbisvicis | 2025-07-25 03:44:34+00:00
> Why do you think people with Down syndrome can’t “achieve independence and a life of their own”?

Based on the anecdotes here. 5 in support, 3 against as of now. I wasn't expecting such a spread, so I did a bit of research. The cognitive problems, though possibly quite severe are not so as frequently as I had assumed. Whereas the medical complications tend to be commonly nasty. As for independence there's a lot of advocacy material claiming so, but reading between the lines and in conjunction with reddit and quota testimony, I suspect very few qualify.

> And what makes you think they, or their families, see their existence as suffering?

I'm sorry, what? Those with Down's Syndrome are people, with all the emotions and experiences that entails. If they are supported, nurtured and loved then they'll lead correspondingly happy lives.
by rayiner | 2025-07-25 03:44:36+00:00
What’s the alternative to guessing what the founding fathers meant? Not even pretending to be bound by what the constitution means?

The “living constitution” is an oxymoron. Any interpretive method that purports to “update the constitution with the times” almost by definition cannot be invoked to overturn democratically-legitimated laws and executive actions. If the duly elected legislature votes to execute accused criminals without trial, then that reflects evolving social standards. The only thing that can overrule that is the dead hand of the founders.

You may have a point that originalism doesn’t work. But if you’re correct, then that’s just an argument for curtailing the jurisdiction of the courts.
by zozbot234 | 2025-07-25 03:45:24+00:00
> As with all uses of current AI (meaning generative AI LLMs) context is everything.

But that's the whole point. You can't fit an entire legal database into the context, it's not big enough. The fact that you have to rely on "context is everything" as a cope is precisely why I'm calling them a glorified autocomplete.
by zer00eyz | 2025-07-25 03:46:27+00:00
> If something happens to Taiwan,

This isn't really a workable argument any more. As examples:

https://apnews.com/article/north-carolina-quartz-hurricane-5...

https://archive.is/sM16Y

The global supply chain is now so deeply interwoven that a large geopolitical disruption is nearly impossible. It took explosives for the EU to curtail its Russian natural gas use. And there is still stiff trade with Russia today (not as much as pre war) and lots of folks exploiting the gaps in that system (Turkey, India, china).

If you have never read it I highly recommend I, Pencil: https://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/read-i-pencil-my-family-t...
by foobarbaz33 | 2025-07-25 03:46:34+00:00
I was coming here to say: "grep as IDE". It's dynamic language tooling 101.

Find defs and refs. Master a little bit of regex and you will reduce false positives.

Grep serves as a rudimentary autocomplete. find the definition, open in a buffer, observe fields. This is analogous to an autocomplete popup displayed inline. The buffer can now power your contextual completions, similar to an inline popup.
by Sytten | 2025-07-25 03:46:41+00:00
Been using it for the past two years and supporting the project. I personally love it but you do have to tinker a bit once in a while so I would hesitate to put it in the hands of my parents (though I bought them pixel just in case). Google Pay not working is mildly annoying (hoping to get PayPal or Curve eventually). Android Auto works but I didnt yet try to make voice commands work. Some app behave weird if you block access to the sensors (though it is nice to be able to do it). Sandboxed google play works great for the most part.
by tptacek | 2025-07-25 03:47:37+00:00
Take that to the Apple bounty program with your crasher bug and tell them they should pay out as if you'd confirmed RCE, see how it goes. This is an engineering question; it's not about vibes.

It's not even always the case that corrupted data structures (or even pointers) in C code are exploitable. You need attacker control of data and where it goes in memory. It's far less often the case in Python or Go --- in fact, it's basically never the case. As evidence for that claim: the zero memory corruption RCEs in all of shipping Go code, of which there is a lot.
by fc417fc802 | 2025-07-25 03:48:03+00:00
You didn't answer the question. What past solution was tried and actually worked and wasn't cruel or abusive to those who were "helped"?

People adopt this attitude that "obviously we just need to fix the problem using tried and true methods" but they can't actually articulate what those methods are. It's all just hot air.

I would like to suggest that at least in the case of the US the problems are largely political and thus there can be no straightforward solution since the people who would enact any solution are themselves the root cause.

> engineer your way out of it, or stay out of the conversation.

Yet a solution is conspicuously missing from your own rant.
by vlovich123 | 2025-07-25 03:48:15+00:00
Hyperoptimizing for the fast path today and ignoring that hardware and usage patterns change is the reason modern software is so slooow :)

A more robust strategy would be at least be to check if the rule was the same as the previous one (or a small hash table) so that the system is self-healing.

Ken’s solution is at least robust and by that property I would prefer it since it’s just as fast but doesn’t have any weird tail latencies where the requests out of your cache distribution are as fast as the ones in.
by TrainedMonkey | 2025-07-25 03:48:56+00:00
$200 per month will get you roughly 4-5 hours of non-stop single-threaded usage per day.

A bigger issue here is that the random process is not a good engineering pattern. It's not repeatable, does not drive coherent architecture, and struggles with complex problems. In my experience, problem size correlates inversely with generated code quality. Engineering is a process of divide-and-conquer and there is a good reason people don't use bogo (random) sort in production.

More specifically, if you only look at the final code, you are either spending a lot of time reviewing the code or accepting the code with less review scrutiny. Carefully reviewing semi random diffs seems like a poor use of time... so I suspect the default is less review scrutiny and higher tech debt. Interestingly enough, higher tech debt might be an acceptable tradeoff if you believe that soon Code Assistants will be good enough to burn the tech debt down autonomously or with minimal oversight.

On the other hand, if the code you are writing is not allowed to fail, the stakes change and you can't pick the less review option. I never thought to codify it as a process, but here is what I do to guide the development process:

- Start by stating the problem and asking Claude Code to: analyze the existing code, restate the problem in a structured fashion, scan the codebase for existing patterns solving the problem, brainstorm alternative solutions. An enhancement here could be to have a map / list of the codebase to improve the search.

- Evaluate presented solutions and iterate on the list. Add problem details, provide insight, eliminate the solutions that would not work. A lot of times I have enough context to pick a winner here, but if not, I ask for more details about each solution and their relative pros and cons.

- Ask Claude to provide a detailed plan for the down-selected solution. Carefully review the plan (a significantly faster endeavor compared to reviewing the whole diff). Iterate on the plan as needed; after that, tell Claude to save the plan for comparison after the implementation and then to get cracking.

- Review Claude's report of what was implemented vs. what was initially planned. This step is crucial because Claude will try dumb things to get things working, and I've already done the legwork on making sure we're not doing anything dumb in the previous step. Make changes as needed.

- After implementation, I generally do a pass on the unit tests because Claude is extremely prolific with them. You generally need to let it write unit tests to make sure it is on the right track. Here, I ask it to scan all of the unit tests and identify similar or identical code. After that, I ask for refactor options that most importantly maximize clarity, secondly minimize lines of code, and thirdly minimize diffs. Pick the best ones.

Yes, I accept that the above process takes significantly longer for any single change; however, in my experience, it produces far superior results in a bounded amount of time.

P.S. if you got this far please leave some feedback on how I can improve the flow.
by robmensching | 2025-07-25 03:49:52+00:00
> Some licenses might allow you to distribute binaries with extra restrictions, but the one you chose almost certainly doesn't

The OSMF EULA has been through a few lawyers now. If you're a lawyer, we're happy to have the discussion on the Open Source Maintenance Fee's Discussion forum.

> So your nuget package and github release would be a binary distribution, what license applies?

If I understand your question correctly, the EULA applies to the binary distribution.

> Your license essentially explicitly disallows you from doing what your trying to do.

No. The source code is available, and there are no restrictions placed on your use of the source code.

> This also goes horribly against the spirit of open source software,

I disagree, but the OSI doesn't say much about it specifically. The FSF, however, explicitly calls out the idea of paying a fee for the convenience of acquiring the software. This is straight in line with the FSF.

> if every small package on a Linux distro did this it'd cost tens of thousands at least to even launch the OS

No, because you only pay the Maintenance Fee for the software you directly depend upon. And if you don't use the Open Source project to make money, you don't pay anything. These catastrophic scenarios you are drawing up are not the reality.
by pseudo0 | 2025-07-25 03:49:59+00:00
> A valid and reliable survey instrument was mailed to 4,924 households on the mailing lists of six non-profit Down syndrome organizations.

Definitely no sampling bias here... And given that the vast majority of people who do prenatal screening decide not to have a child with Down Syndrome, I don't think the people who choose to have a Down Syndrome child are really representative of prospective parents as a whole.

The revealed preference is clear, particularly in places like Iceland where prenatal screening is ubiquitous. They have effectively eradicated Down Syndrome going forward.
by maerch | 2025-07-25 03:50:14+00:00
> A repeated trend is that Claude Code only gets 70-80% of the way, which is fine and something I wish was emphasized more by people pushing agents.

Recently, I realized that this applies not only to the first 70–80% of a project but sometimes also to the final 70-80%.

I couldn’t make progress with Claude on a major refactoring from scratch, so I started implementing it myself. Once I had shaped the idea clearly enough but in a very early state, I handed it back to Claude to finish and it worked flawlessly, down to the last CHANGELOG entry, without any further input from me.

I saw this as a form of extensive guardrails or prompting-by-example.
by AIPedant | 2025-07-25 03:50:28+00:00
By this standard we passed the milestone in the 60s when Lisp was used to build better Lisp compilers.

By a more honest standard we are still a very long way away from AI suggesting new ANN architectures, new approaches to managing RLHF, better training data, new benchmarks, etc etc. LLMs are nowhere close to being able to improve themselves.
by astrange | 2025-07-25 03:50:41+00:00
Note that text includes CLI commands so technically they can do anything that way. But an MCP might be able to hold state about something (eg keep an ssh connection open), and it also might be easier to teach new things than Claude itself.

I've also seen a lot of amateur ones with grandiose claims about how they enable AGI thinking ability by trying slightly harder to plan things.
by AdieuToLogic | 2025-07-25 03:51:53+00:00
> The fucked up thing is how they are enforcing archaic puritan ideals on the whole world. Acting as self appointed global censors. (Eg. not allowing adult games on Steam or Itch.io)

Banks, which constitute the majority of both payment networks, are not "enforcing archaic puritan ideals on the whole world" nor acting as "censors."

> The most confusing thing for me is why. I have read a few theories, but nothing convincing. What could be a strong enough motivator to do such a bizarre thing?

There is no need for theories regarding the inability to sell "adult games on Steam or Itch.io" as the answer is simple. Banks have identified this particular line of business to exceed their risk tolerance for any combination of:

Chargebacks Fraud Money Laundering

They have lost too much money in this particular domain.

That's it.
by energy123 | 2025-07-25 03:52:12+00:00
Those things aren't information warfare. They should be discussed separately.

On the topic of information warfare, this is good reading:

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Research_Agency#Ralli...

[1] https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/09/16/1035851/facebook...