MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by LarsDu88 | 2025-07-09 16:38:55+00:00
I think Nvidia's market development efforts have meant more than its culture. Ever since Nvidia started moving towards general purpose compute with the 8800 GPU back in the mid 2000s, it's been actively growing markets - first in research (leading to AI advances), and now in autonomous driving, world simulation, biotechnology, and robotics.

The market for compute is endless, and Nvidia makes huge efforts to commoditize the software side of things so people can buy hardware.
by TZubiri | 2025-07-09 16:39:15+00:00
It's not entirely unrelated, the fact that the system is non-deterministic means that it necessarily is probabilistic.

A business can reduce temperature to 0 and choose a specific seed, and it's the correct approach in most cases, but still the answers might change!

On the other hand, it's true that there is some probability that is independent of determinism, for example maybe changing the order of some words might yield different answers, this might be a deterministic machines, but there's millions of ways to frame a question, if the answer depends on trivial details of the question formatting, there's a randomness there. Similar to how there is randomness in who will win a chess match between two equally rated players, despite the game being deterministic.
by shagie | 2025-07-09 16:39:54+00:00
You can freeze strings that are created at runtime.

irb(main):001> str = "f".concat("o").concat("o") => "foo" irb(main):002> str.frozen? => false irb(main):003> str.freeze => "foo" irb(main):004> str.frozen? => true irb(main):005> str = str.concat("bar") (irb):5:in 'String#concat': can't modify frozen #<Class:#<String:0x000000015807ec58>>: "foo" (FrozenError) from (irb):5:in '<main>' from <internal:kernel>:168:in 'Kernel#loop' from /opt/homebrew/Cellar/ruby/3.4.4/lib/ruby/gems/3.4.0/gems/irb-1.14.3/exe/irb:9:in '<top (required)>' from /opt/homebrew/opt/ruby/bin/irb:25:in 'Kernel#load' from /opt/homebrew/opt/ruby/bin/irb:25:in '<main>'
by mrweasel | 2025-07-09 16:40:22+00:00
I don't agree with the direction Musk has set for X, but businesswise it's not doing worse. Twitter was a financial catastrophe before the take over, so you didn't need much improvement. Moderation was a financial drain, the API didn't make them any money and none of the users seems to care all that much about the platform not being open to users without an account... because they all have accounts and wasn't able to interact with you anyway.

The media seems to get a good laugh out if Grok arguing the plight of white South Africans and is fondness to Hitler, but I'm not seeing journalists and politicians leaving X in droves because of it.
by jdiff | 2025-07-09 16:40:40+00:00
I don't find this to be true. There are languages that are difficult to wrap your head around initially, but that turn out to be delightfully productive with a few adjustments to the mental model. Adjustments that LLMs don't have the training data for.

That says nothing about the language at all, actually. Just that it's small and easily confused for something more idiomatic to a newbie.
by porridgeraisin | 2025-07-09 16:40:50+00:00
> not just for decoration

Still, they are just a convention.

When you are retrying an API, you are calling the API, you know whether its a getBookings() or a addBooking() API. So write the client code based on that.

Instead of the API developer making sure GET /bookings is idempotent, he is going to be making sure getBookings() is idempotent. Really, what is the difference?

As for the benefits, you get a uniform interface, no quirks with URL encoding, no nonsense with browsers pre-loading, etc etc,. It's basically full control with zero surprises.

The only drawback is with cookies. Samesite: Lax depends on you using GET for idempotent actions and POST for unsafe actions. However, I am advocating the use of this only for "fetch() + createElement() = UI" kind of app, where you will use tokens for everything anyways.
by nativeit | 2025-07-09 16:40:57+00:00
Time for some grossly oversimplified back-of-the-proverbial-envelope value crunching! I’ll assume the average GPU price, for the sake of argument, is $1000. Let’s also assume their per-unit profit margin is roughly 30% (I found conflicting numbers for this on a casual search, esp. between figures that measure quarterly and annual income, I suppose it isn’t a surprise that their accountants frequently pull rabbits from hats).

Nvidia would need to move on the order of 4,000,000,000 units to hit $4T in revenue, more than triple that to realize $4T in profits. Even if the average per-unit costs are 2-3x my estimated $1k, as near as I’ve been able to tell they “only” move a few million units each year for a given sku.

I am struggling to work out how these markets get so inflated, such that it pins a company’s worth to some astronomical figure (some 50x total equity, in this case) that seems wholly untethered to any material potential?

My intuition is that the absence of the rapid, generationally transformative, advances in tech and industry that were largely seen in the latter half of the 20th-century (quickly followed with smartphones and social networking), stock market investors seem content to force similar patterns onto any marginally plausible narrative that can provide the same aesthetics of growth, even if the most basic arithmetic thoroughly perforates it.

That said, I nearly went bankrupt buying a used car recently, so this is a whole lot of unqualified conjecture on my part (but not for nothing, my admittedly limited personal wealth isn’t heavily dependent on such bets).
by mandmandam | 2025-07-09 16:41:10+00:00
Climate change, wars for profit, mass censorship and surveillance, etc, aren't blameless issues - there are people doing these things, people like you and I (only wealthier). Fossil fuel companies knew for a fact that they were causing climate change, and responded by poisoning the global conversation while suppressing alternatives.

What's between us and a better world is class awareness. So, for example, when you say things like "Facebook and other large companies drive engagement above all else", you're missing a major piece of the puzzle.

The daily atrocities in Gaza could drive tremendous engagement on Facebook, were they not heavily censored and suppressed.

Same goes for mainstream media. Look how unanimous the opinion of the media and political class was against Luigi. Look how they chorused in unison with smears against Jill Stein, or against Assange, Snowden etc. Again, all people who had their stories suppressed on social media as well.

This also explains how with Greta "the main story surrounding her turned into questioning her" - there's an agenda that unites the tiny number of billionaires who own basically all media in the West. The element of class even explains neatly why the media stopped covering Greta - because she started connecting the world's issues to capitalism and inequality. (You know, like MLK did, right before he was assassinated.)

So please don't think I have a message of blamelessness for the world's issues. There's more than enough blame to go around, and the problems won't be fixed if we keep ignoring the problems stemming from massive wealth inequality.
by d4mi3n | 2025-07-09 16:41:34+00:00
> Personally, I think banning non-competes probably does reduce the amount of investment in education that companies make, but it's a tradeoff worth making to improve overall labor market efficiency and better guarantee personal freedom.

I largely work for Californian companies and by and large the benefits have been excellent. While I wish more money was put into training overall, I feel this is driven more by short term financial planning than things like non-competes.

What have you seen or encountered that led you to the conclusion that non-competes would lead to more educational investment?

My assumption is that they’re more useful when a non-compete reduces the amount of people with key skills from a market—it seems counter-intuitive to do this and then disseminate those skills via training programs.
by kragen | 2025-07-09 16:41:37+00:00
I forget the particular failure mode that POSIX arguably permitted in this case. I think it had to do with fsyncing the directory? And the file ending up existing but empty after the reboot? Anyway, it broke userspace, so the ext4fs maintainers killed it. I think there were some LWN articles.

I might have been misremembering: https://lwn.net/Articles/322823/

"With ext4's delayed allocation, the metadata changes can be journalled without writing out the blocks. So in case of a crash, the metadata changes (that were journalled) get replayed, but the data changes don't."

That was without fsync, though. But apparently it's a topic of discussion more recently: https://lwn.net/Articles/789600/

I agree that it still requires a lockfile if write conflicts are not acceptable.
by rockemsockem | 2025-07-09 16:41:49+00:00
I will fondly remind folks that Grok isn't even the first LLM to become a Nazi on Twitter.

Remember Tay Tweets?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tay_(chatbot)

Honestly I really don't think a bad release of an LLM that was rolled back is really the condemnation you think it is.
by hinkley | 2025-07-09 16:42:25+00:00
One of the things I’ve said I would do and never did is create a set of test suites for as many facts about a language as I know and then run it for every new release to see what I need to unlearn.

Most but not all of these were performance related. If it took a few days to run that’s fine. Major versions don’t come out that often.
by TZubiri | 2025-07-09 16:42:31+00:00
That is not particularly cheap, especially since it scales linearly with doc size, and therefore time.

Additionally the quality of loading the context-window decreases linearly as well, just because your model can handle 1M tokens it doesn't mean that it WILL remember 1M tokens, it just means that it CAN

RAG fixes this, in the simplest configuration a RAG can be an index, and the only context you give the LLM is the table of contents, and you let it search through the index.

Should it be a surprise that this is cheaper and more efficient? Loading the context window is like a library having every book open at every page at the same time instead of using the dewey decimal system
by naasking | 2025-07-09 16:42:37+00:00
> but the client code (JavaScript/HTML/CSS) is not generic

The HTML/hypermedia returned is never generic, that's why HATEOAS works at all and is so flexible.

The "client" JS code is provided by the server, so it's not really client-specific (the client being the web browser here--maybe should call it "agent"). Regardless, sending JS is an optimization, calendars and messaging are possible using hypermedia alone, and proves the point that the web browser is a generic hypermedia agent that changes behaviour based on hypermedia that's dictated solely by the URL.

You can start programming any app with a plain hypermedia version and then add JS to make the user experience better, which is the approach that HTMx is reviving.
by trealira | 2025-07-09 16:43:22+00:00
> since haskell is non-strict, if can be implemented as a function, and iirc it is

"If" can be implemented as a function in Haskell, but it's not a function. You can't pass it as a higher-order function and it uses the "then" and "else" keywords, too. But you could implement it as a function if you wanted:

if' :: Bool -> a -> a if' True x _ = x if' False _ y = y

Then instead of writing something like this:

max x y = if x > y then x else y

You'd write this:

max x y = if' (x > y) x y

But the "then" and "else" remove the need for parentheses around the expressions.
by commodorepet | 2025-07-09 16:44:19+00:00
Very vocal, we do have a very solid TODO list for another 12 months. They are also quite loyal and number of them are with us for 3+ years and they use software daily (its just a very small customer list overall). I do wonder sometimes why they stay with us given other competitors are much better. We mostly grew through word of mouth and cold emails. I believe we are already solving a fairly niche use case (TAM is few thousand customers in USA) and my idea is to grow revenue enough to go after larger TAM (several milion).
by naasking | 2025-07-09 16:44:24+00:00
> Yikes. Nobody wants to implement a browser to create a UI for ordering meals from a restaurant.

You don't need a full web browser. Fielding published his thesis in 2000, browsers were almost trivial then, and the needs for programming are even more trivial: you can basically skip any HTML that isn't a link tag or form data for most purposes.

> baking the semantics of them into the client is that we don't want the behavior of the application to get tripped up on whether someone failed to close a <b> tag.

This is such a non-issue. Why aren't you worried about badly formatted JSON? Because we have well-tested JSON formatters. In a world where people understood the value of hypermedia as an interchange format, we'd be in exactly the same position.

And to be clear, if JSON had links as a first class type rather than just strings, then that would qualify as a hypermedia format too.
by AIPedant | 2025-07-09 16:44:29+00:00
The AP News story[1] had a tidbit I missed:

In late June, [Elon Musk] invited X users to help train the chatbot on their commentary in a way that invited a flood of racist responses and conspiracy theories. “Please reply to this post with divisive facts for @Grok training,” Musk said in the June 21 post. “By this I mean things that are politically incorrect, but nonetheless factually true.”

Yaccarino is obviously not Executive Of The Year, but what are you supposed to do when your boss is even more reckless and stupid than Donald Trump? I'm surprised it took this long.

[1] https://apnews.com/article/x-ceo-linda-yaccarino-elon-musk-g...
by SahAssar | 2025-07-09 16:45:32+00:00
> FastCGI or some other method to avoid forking for each request is valuable regardless of runtime. If you have a runtime with high startup costs, even more so.

What's the point of using FastCGI compared to a plain http server then? If you are going to have a persistent server running why not just use the protocol you are already using the semantics of?
by lukeschlather | 2025-07-09 16:45:47+00:00
I feel like the problem is a lack of realism about what is required to meet the usability standards of traditional analog switches. Like, I hear you talking about a tradeoff between security and usability for a "rare" provisioning event but I think in practice if you imagine a device has a 10 year lifespan, I would guess that making the provisioning hardware probably translates into at a minimum a full month of downtime over the lifespan of the device, with many devices being down for months or years at a time because no one can be bothered to figure out why.

The security concerns probably have typically zero impact on the operation of the device. I'm not saying that the security concerns are unjustified. Really I'm actually leaning more that this is completely impractical and not a good replacement for a dumb physical switch. The security issues are unacceptable and the downtime caused by even the useless security measures available is even worse. (Also, the security measures seem more concerned with whether or not I have a license to watch my video on that particular device than preventing people from turning on my toaster.)
by kylebenzle | 2025-07-09 16:46:12+00:00
Of course I hate what Elon has done to Twitter but you're feeling previously that everyone was there was an illusion brought on by massive propaganda and manipulation of the conversation. The same thing has happened to Reddit now, well it feels more inclusive and open it's actually an incredibly controlled enclosed system that only allows one specific viewpoint. Now of course to the people inside that bubble it feels like freedom but to everyone else it looks like a liberal echo chamber.

For example, when the actual owner of the at Bitcoin handle wasn't pushing the narrative that Jack Dorsey wanted they hijacked the moniker and gave it to a pro b Blockstream (THE COMPANY THAT CONTROLS THE BITCOIN CODE BASE) individual. For most people that support Bitcoin and blockstream it looks like a victory of free speech but in reality they're just controlling more and more of the speech and kicking out anyone from the conversation who disagrees.
by ImJamal | 2025-07-09 16:46:17+00:00
> If I were in charge I'd reorient the leanings so that sources like NPR would not show up as "left-leaning" but as centrist (i.e. a more European alignment which is more historically accurate/real, IMHO

It is not historically accurate. The terms left and right come from the French Revolution.

Those on the right supported a strong monarchy, those in a center supported a weak monarchy with a republic, and those on the left supported a republic and no monarchy.

Pretty much every news media, regardless if they are now considered "right wing", would meet the definition of left wing historically.
by black6 | 2025-07-09 16:46:39+00:00
That's always been the actual effect of non competes in the US. Slavery was abolished; you can't be told by a former employer that you can't work for someone else unless they continue to pay you not to.

That you're being downvoted is telling for the HN crowd who will rally behind "tax the rich" but ignore the call to "help the poor."
by glenstein | 2025-07-09 16:47:05+00:00
If it impresses you that the CEO pay is 20% of earnings, then, well, software development is going to be something like 500% of earnings, overhead will be 250%, and so on. The relative proportions of the different expenses will be the same. They just look bigger when you compare them to profits.

The CEO pay certainly matters and it's more than I would like, but I don't see how considering it as 20% of profits rather than 1% of revenue demonstrates that it's taking more away from development than any other 1% of their spending.
by jchw | 2025-07-09 16:47:20+00:00
Oh my god! This could go on forever.

Having a guy named Steve manage your servers is not "serverless" by my definition, because it's not about you personally having to manage the server, it's about anyone personally having to manage it. AWS Lambda is managed by Amazon as a singular giant computer spawning micro VMs. And sure yes, some human has to sit here and do operations, but the point is that they've truly abstracted the concept of a running server from both their side and yours. It's abstracted to the degree that even asking "what machine am I running on?" doesn't even have a meaningful answer and if you did have the answer you couldn't do anything with it.

Shared hosting with a cgi-bin is closer to this, but it falls short of fully abstracting the details. You're still running on a normal-ish server with shared resources and a web server configuration and all that jazz, it's just that you don't personally have to manage it... But someone really does personally have to manage it.

And anyway, there's no reason to think that serverless platforms are limited to things that don't actually run a server. On the contrary there are "serverless" platforms that run servers! Yes, truly, as far as I know containers running under cloud run are in fact normal HTTP servers. I'm actually not an expert on serverless despite having to be on this end of the argument, but I'll let Google speak for what it means for Cloud Run to be "serverless":

> Cloud Run is a managed compute platform that enables you to run stateless containers that are invocable via HTTP requests. Cloud Run is serverless: it abstracts away all infrastructure management, so you can focus on what matters most — building great applications.

These PaaSes popularized the term to mean this from the gitgo, just because you have passionately formed a belief that it ever meant something else doesn't change a thing.
by umbra07 | 2025-07-09 16:47:37+00:00
on the other hand - I had contractors install our Nanoleaf recessed light cans (thread over matter) in our new house. In all the hubbub, I forgot to make sure to save the light cans boxes that had the QR codes inside. I found around half the QR code stickers, but I lost the other half. The light cans also have the QR codes printed on the top, but we have nailed-down attic flooring that covers them completely. So I'm basically just praying that Nanoleaf's CS can give me the pairing codes based on my order number, haha.
by TZubiri | 2025-07-09 16:47:40+00:00
I used Supabase for regular database and auth features, I have not used MCP or AI features.

However due to this critical security vulnerability in Supabase, I will not be using Supabase any longer.

The fact that the answer to the critical security vulnerability was responded to in such a calm manner instead of shutting down the whole feature, is just a cherry on top.

When there's a security incident along the lines of "leak an entire SQL database" the minimal response is "our CTO has resigned", and even that may not be enough, a resonable answer is "we are closing the company".

"We will wrap some stuff with prompts that discourage vulnerabilities" is laughably ridiculous, any company who uses Supabase or even MCPs at this stage deserves to go bankrupt, and any employee who brings these technologies deserves to get fired.
by gorgoiler | 2025-07-09 16:47:47+00:00
Another use of call is in barn / folk / country dancing where a caller will call out the moves. “Swing your partner!”, “Dosey do!”, “Up and down the middle!” etc. Each of these calls describes a different algorithmic step. However, it’s unlikely this etymology has anything to do with function calling: each call modifies the global state of the dancers with no values returned to the caller.