MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by watwut | 2025-07-15 09:20:23+00:00
I will go further. In the snake oil market, trying to produce actually good novel drugs is a loosing strategy. You wont be selling more, because you will have exactly the same footing as those who just lie and exaggerate over their results. Except they will have more funds to spread those lies and to convince people, because they did not wasted money on research.
by eduardofcgo | 2025-07-15 09:21:08+00:00
Part of the inevitabilism is how these tools are being pushed. At this point it doesn't matter how good they are, it's just how many people live now. Microsoft sure knows how to turn bad software mainstream.

It helps also that these tools behave exactly like how they are marketed, they even tell you that they are thinking, and then deceive you when they are wrong.

Their overconfidence is almost a feature, they don't need to be that good, just provide that illusion
by imdsm | 2025-07-15 09:21:32+00:00
You can fight against the current of society or you can swim in the direction it's pulling you. If you want to fight against it, you can, but you shouldn't expect others to. For some, they can see that it's inevitable because the strength of the movement is greater than the resistance.

It's fair enough to say "you can change the future", but sometimes you can't. You don't have the resources, and often, the will.

The internet was the future, we saw it, some didn't. Cryptocurrencies are the future, some see it, some don't. And using AI is the future too.

Are LLMs the endpoint? Obviously not. But they'll keep getting better, marginally, until there's a breakthrough, or a change, and they'll advance further.

But they won't be going away.
by kukkeliskuu | 2025-07-15 09:22:45+00:00
I was using Redis and Celery but was not happy with the complexity.

But then I found out that background workers are being implemented to Django.

https://github.com/django/deps/blob/main/accepted/0014-backg...

This functionality has been backported as django-tasks library. You can use the database (i.e. Postgres) as the permanent storage.

For periodic jobs and running the django-tasks, I use Superchronic, which is a Docker-compatible cron. It is compatible with cron, with the added benefit that you can run jobs with sub-minute granularity. I have had no problems with running Superchronic inside my fly.io app.

I run Superchronic and Django with honcho and Procfiles.
by andybak | 2025-07-15 09:23:35+00:00
I sometimes feel that a lot of people bringing up the topic of creativity have never spent much time thinking, studying and self-reflecting on what "creativity" actually is. It's a complex topic and one that's mixed up with many other complex topics ("originality", "intellectual property", "aesthetic value", "art vs engineering" etc etc)

You see a lot of Motte and Bailey arguments in this discussion as people shift (often subconsciously) between different definitions of key terms and different historical perspectives.

I'd recommend someone tries to gain at least a passing familiarity with art history and the social history of art/design etc. Reading a bit of Edward De Bono and Douglas Hofstadter isn't a bad shout either (although it's many years since I've read the former so I can't guarantee it will stand up as well as my teenage self thought it did)
by TeMPOraL | 2025-07-15 09:24:45+00:00
> I'm not going to read that hack, but in either case, the metaphysical monster of the market you're proposing is not what is propping up LLMs. It's the decisions of actors at major tech companies and VCs. These are people, not magical entities.

Your loss. The article is actually talking about the thing you're saying. And so am I. These are all people, not magical entities, and that is exactly why the near-term future of "AI being the new electricity" is inevitable (short of a total collapse of civilization).

The article spells out the causal mechanism 20 different ways, so I still recommend reading it if the dynamics are not blindingly apparent to you yet.
by theSherwood | 2025-07-15 09:25:29+00:00
I think this is a case of bad pattern matching, to be frank. Two cosmetically similar things don't necessarily have a shared cause. When you see billions in investment to make something happen (AI) because of obvious incentives, it's very reasonable to see that as something that's likely to happen; something you might be foolish to bet against. This is qualitatively different from the kind of predestination present in many religions where adherents have assurance of the predestined outcome often despite human efforts and incentives. A belief in a predestined outcome is very different from extrapolating current trends into the future.
by BrandoElFollito | 2025-07-15 09:26:16+00:00
Yes, we also had lessons about the differences between BE and AE so we are aware of both, it is just that when Brian was in the kitchen, he was asking about the colour of something.

The reference to Brian being in the kitchen is understandable only for Gen X in France. (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_is_Brian%3F, only in French unfortunately but you also have https://youtu.be/11jG7lkwDwU?si=gQoVL_AmBfQMrZbX&t=57)
by roncesvalles | 2025-07-15 09:26:19+00:00
I have a feeling you'd have had better results if you actually paid $10k/month to a good dev or three in a LCoL geo.

You can actually hire a few excellent devs for very little money. You just can't hire 20k of them and convince them to move to a certain coastal peninsula with high rent and $20 shawarmas, for very little money each.
by PeterStuer | 2025-07-15 09:26:36+00:00
For non Belgians, ItsMe is an identity/digital signature/2FA app used almost universally in banking, ecommerce and gov in Belgium.

The 'attack' is getting the victim to confirm the identity or signature for you through social engineer them to initiate the set up of a parralel session.

This is possible for inplementations of ItsMe that only rely on Phonenumber/Application, and do not validate the actual session, e.g. by having the user scan an in session QR code.
by 0xEF | 2025-07-15 09:26:37+00:00
It was short-lived if I recall, a few articles and interviews, not exactly a marketing blitz. My take-away from that was calling an LLM a "stochastic parrot" is too simplified, not that they were saying "AI us a person." Did you get that from it? I'm not advanced enough in my understanding of Gen AI to think of it as anything other than a stochastic parrot with tokenization, so I guess that part of the hype cycle fell flat?
by gMermigkis | 2025-07-15 09:27:07+00:00
Hello, just an update from the VectorCamp team Based on your comments & suggestions (huge thanks!), we've made several improvements to our website:

[1] Empty search no longer returns results [2] Tuned elastic-search for better results (hiccups will still appear) [3] Intrinsic prototypes are now visible directly in the search results — no need to click through [4] When using the filters in the intrinsics tree, empty categories are hidden for better clarity [5] Dark theme support — finally here

++ We released a new blog "Best Practices & API Integration" (https://simd.info/blog/how_to_get_the_most_of_our_model_and_...) for our tool SIMD.ai.

Once again, thank you for your comments.
by dvdkon | 2025-07-15 09:27:41+00:00
I based my comment mainly on my knowledge of communist Czechoslovakia and other East Bloc countries. There the country was hardly lawless and the state was pretty efficient in its efforts to find and punish dissidents. Laws were being bent and corruption was high, but I'd never heard of anyone bribing their way out of dissent charges. There were plenty of people who were relatively well-off and/or were willing to snitch to rise in the ranks.

Totalitarian regimes don't need to be failed states. These countries had functioning rule of law and bureaucracy before WW2, and this apparatus was fully used by the new totalitarian governments. So I think they're the closest model that we have for how our ("western") societies might work after sharing undesirable information is made an offence.
by pickledoyster | 2025-07-15 09:28:18+00:00
I believe there are some debatable assumptions baked into your comment, so I have to ask. Do you believe that the entirety of all possible knowledge ("answers") is already online? If not, how is new knowledge supposed to appear online: what are the incentives to put it up on the web if the last open gateways to it are killed by this LLM "experience"? And, if new information must be added continuously, how is it supposed to be vetted?

That last one is important, since you state: > That model worked when the web was smaller, but now it’s overwhelming.

Because it seems like the "experience" changes, but the underlying model of sucking up data off the web does not. If it was "overwhelming" in the past, how is it supposed to be easier now, with subsidized slop machines putting up new information full-tilt?
by akst | 2025-07-15 09:28:45+00:00
For sure, but I'm not sure this the primary purpose of a writing system.

By all means a fun aspect about English that you can look at a word and guess the origin, and it's pretty satisfying to pull it up on google to see your high because you looked at spelling. This novelty has come at the expense of many other things that would have increased its utility.

I guess I'll add one thing to list benefits, this probably has resulted in different dialects of English writing things the same way despite saying them differently. Singaporean English is very different from Scottish English, but the written form of the same statements for the most part decipherable by the other dialect.
by ben_w | 2025-07-15 09:29:30+00:00
Not saying this to defend the models as your point is fundamentally sound, but IIRC the user-visible "thoughts" are produced by another LLM summarising the real chain-of-thought, so weird inversions of what it's "really" "thinking" may well slip in at the user-facing level — the real CoT often uses completely illegible shorthand of its own, some of which is Chinese even when the prompt is in English, but even the parts in the users' own languages can be hard-to-impossible to interpret.

To agree with your point, even with the real CoT researchers have shown that model's CoT workspace don't accurately reflect behaviour: https://www.anthropic.com/research/reasoning-models-dont-say...
by Lennie | 2025-07-15 09:29:36+00:00
I'm gonna ask something stupid, maybe: what is keeping you from having a minisplit in each room ? You don't have to run them the whole day. Just where you are going to be for a couple of hours.

My guess is: the cost of the minisplits, pretty certain if you had them and turned them all on, you could still draw that much power from the grid.

And probably you are underestimating the cost of nuclear anyway.
by jakozaur | 2025-07-15 09:29:53+00:00
It is possible to talk even to a runtime engineer, but you need to be on their enterprise plan and spend millions per year with AWS. It may sound brutal, but AWS prioritizes based on the account size.

Given the AWS Active mention, the author may be living off free AWS credits and has a modest spend afterwards.

Not sure if a seven-week investigation is the best use of engineering resources at early startups. Once you hit the limits of PaaS platforms, going EC2/Fargate/Kubernetes seems like a more pragmatic option. AWS Lambda is not for async jobs; once you return HTTP, it's done. Not convinced this is a bug.

However, he did manage to get to the front page of Hacker News, and the write-up is quite decent (minus the AWS blame part).
by TeMPOraL | 2025-07-15 09:30:15+00:00
Sort of, kind of. Most decisions you'd see him make would quickly cause his control over Amazon to disappear, without actually improving anything for Amazon workers.

That's one part of the bad mental model of organizations and markets (and thus societies) people have. The people at the top may be richer and more powerful, but they're not actually free to do whatever. They have a role to play in the system they ostensibly "control", but when they deviate too far from what the system expects them to do, they get ejected.

Never mistake the finger pointing at the Moon for the Moon itself. Also, never mistake the person barking orders for the source from which those orders originate.
by jononor | 2025-07-15 09:30:34+00:00
The Internet was also very expensive in its infancy. Dialup charged by the minute for mere kilobytes. The cost per MB dropped by a factor 1000x over the course of 30 years. It took billions in investments, and millions of people working on it to make it happen. Give LLLms a couple of decades, and the price for a given capability will have increased by 1-4 orders of magnitude.
by ZeroGravitas | 2025-07-15 09:31:20+00:00
I'd be a lot happier if we were even doing what is "strictly dictated by economy".

The tech and economics are there and have been for a while, it's politics and disinformation that's holding us back.

The key lesson I'm taking is that even if we avoid the worst of this environmental disaster we've created a political realm that looks to profit individually from making disasters worse rather than profit collectively by fixing them and that cannot be good for the human race as we face upcoming disasters, some of which will be spin-offs of this one, like climate wars and climate refugees.
by bstsb | 2025-07-15 09:31:48+00:00
yeah from the way the article is written ("Erlang's victory wasn't about speed — it was about architecture"), and the awkwardly commented code, i'm pretty sure the aforementioned "test" never happened and this was hallucinated by an LLM

edit: the original article on Medium was deleted (https://medium.com/@codeperfect/we-tested-7-languages-under-...)
by gschizas | 2025-07-15 09:32:26+00:00
This looks cool, but I'm a bit wary of publishers that aren't verified.

> Do you trust the publisher "Ali Mostafavi"?

> The extension voil is published by Ali Mostafavi. This is the first extension > you're installing from this publisher.

> Ali Mostafavi is not verified.

> Visual Studio Code has no control over the behavior of third-party extensions, including how they manage your personal data. Proceed only if you trust the publisher.
by sebstefan | 2025-07-15 09:32:33+00:00
> Rust 1.78

> Primary failure mode: Under our error cascade simulation, some low-level failures in unsafe code regions propagated in ways that eventually caused deadlocks in resource management.

What was the point of using Rust if you're going to benchmark it with unsafe code and it crashes there? Or was it code from the standard library, like the unsafe part of the Arc implementation? In which case, why would you not include details
by meindnoch | 2025-07-15 09:33:42+00:00
>The article even mentions an arguably better approach (check on a timer), but for some reasons claims it is worse.

How do you know what timeout to use for the timer? You may end up with tons of unnecessary polling if your timeout is too short, or high latency if your timeout is too long.

>Standard C++ has one albeit somewhat overcomplicated, senders and receivers

*in C++26
by pmontra | 2025-07-15 09:33:45+00:00
Well, if we look at the flow of most of internet traffic we don't have highways (I'm thinking about the USA East/West North/South highway matrix).

Instead we have roads that go straight from suburbs to a few big city centers. Sometimes a new center rise, but it's still very centralized. I'd say that the prediction was correct. What they failed to foresee is that we don't connect to libraries and newspapers, we connect to Netflix, FB, Instagram etc.
by defrost | 2025-07-15 09:35:11+00:00
That's just the UK (high latitude), at tempretures lower than current tempretures in Death Valley / Marble Bar.

Give it time for higher tempretures to reach dense urban centres, look to India and equatorial countries that'll experience both high temp and high humidity and you'll see heat exhaustion deaths rise to well past those anglocentric numbers.

The more serious numbers will come from climate related conflict and migration in any case (assuming no change in increasing emmissions, even assuming a flattening to a steady human annual addition).
by lucumo | 2025-07-15 09:35:11+00:00
> They're preparing for it by blocking it off completely.

No we don't. Quite the opposite. Several dams have been made into movable mechanic contraptions precisely to NOT stop the tide coming in.

A lot of the water management is living with the water, not fighting it. Shore replenishment and strengthening is done by dropping sand in strategic locations and letting the water take care of dumping it in the right spot. Before big dredgers, the tide was used to flush sand out of harbours using big flushing basins. Big canals have been dug for better shipping. Big and small ships sailed and still sail on the waters to trade with the world. A lot of our riches come from the sea and the rivers.

The water is a danger and a tool. It's not stopped, only redirected and often put to good use. Throughout Dutch history, those who worked with the water generally have done well. And similarly, some places really suffered after the water was redirected away from them. Fisher folk lost their livelihoods, cities lost access to trade, some land literally evaporated when it got too dry, a lot of land shrunk when water was removed, biodiversity dropped...

Anyway, if you want to use the Dutch waters as a metaphor for technological innovations, the lesson will not be that the obvious answer is to block it. The lesson will be to accept it, to use it, to gain riches through it: to live with it.
by djtango | 2025-07-15 09:35:56+00:00
It's kind of their prerogative to spend their money how they like. If it's anti-competitive then you can hope that regulation exists to prevent that behaviour. As a shareholder you can complain that they will stop this value igniting behaviour. As an investor if you believe this behaviour is irrational you can short their stock and hope that the market is efficient and the share price will reflect the igniting value in their multiple.

As a bystander and outsider it is hard to isolate the value igniting behaviour from the moonshot behaviour. Shareholders love to gut a business of its risk taking and excess behaviour for predictable and inflated margins (and dividends) but the past 20+ years of our megacap companies is that they have continued to "innovate" in spite of all their inefficiencies.

I always have a chuckle when I recall how shareholders tried to oust Zuck for buying Instagram for 1B...

These vanity hires do seem frothy and reminiscent of dotcom style behaviour. But "AI" clearly will be game changing much like the internet was, and who at this stage can say what is worth recruiting people at the forefront of commercialising the tech right now
by tim_sourcery | 2025-07-15 09:36:54+00:00
I tested out 6 different AI agents - Loveable, Bolt, V0, Replit, Cursor, and Claude Code to see which would produce the best (and worst) quality code.

The task they were given was pretty simple and none of them generated complete garbage, but Claude and Bolt outperformed the others by a pretty decent margin.

Any thoughts on other quality metrics/methodologies I should use to compare?
by ptspts | 2025-07-15 09:37:55+00:00
The Str_to_double code in the article produces inaccurate results in the last few bits. (What is the use of parsing a double inaccurately?) Accurate parsing of a double is really tricky (and memory-hungry and slow). The strtod(3) function provided by a decent libc (such as glibc and musl, and also the FreeBSD libc) can do it correctly.
by pickledoyster | 2025-07-15 09:38:19+00:00
>They spend 18 hours a day in conversation with chatbots.

Engagement metrics like that are what product managers love to see. Promotions incoming. /s

Sad to see it, but I believe these "companions" and "spiritual gurus" will generate the most revenue in B2C. If you have a user base that's on the slop drip 24/7, you can make them pay premium and target them with ads at the same time. The trend is already here: people listen to podcasts, follow influencers and streamers on every platform just for the surrogate friendship effects. Why not automate it away and make the spiritual guru bot sell you the next vpn subscription?
by TheDong | 2025-07-15 09:39:00+00:00
> Speaks the S3 API

Let's test that lol.

First, I looked at the docker compose file, seems like an easy way to run it right? Wrong, the docker compose file just runs minio, a real s3 compatible thing: https://github.com/ebogdum/callfs/blob/16e1096095c809f31aa93...

Why check in a docker-compose that only runs someone else's code, not your own project?

Okay, fine, let's run it normally:

./callfs server -c ./config.yaml.example failed to load config file ./config.yaml.example: file provider does not support this method

Okay, fine, your example config doesn't work with an inscrutable error.

But running it without a config flag works, so let's do that:

{"level":"info","ts":1752571569.821955,"caller":"cmd/main.go:251","msg":"Starting HTTPS server","addr":":8443"}

Let's see if it's really s3 compatible now:

AWS_CA_BUNDLE=./server.crt aws --endpoint-url https://localhost:8443 s3 mb s3://foo make_bucket failed: s3://foo An error occurred (404) when calling the CreateBucket operation: Not Found

"404" is not the response AWS gives to a make bucket request.

Reading the actual docs, this is _not_ s3 compatible, not even close. So much for "Speaks the S3 API".

Just use minio, or one of the other actually functioning things in this space.
by KaiserPro | 2025-07-15 09:39:16+00:00
> why do i need environmental review to stick a shed in my backyard??

Because cowboys make cowboy decisions, which leads to loss of lives.

"We're going to build on a flood plane, don't worry we've put in protection" turns out they didnt and the things they did made the flooding worse.

> companies have a strong incentive not release bad drugs now

Given that fentanyl exists and managed to get through, and was widely prescribed by doctors, and the whole industry setup to encourage prescription, I think thats not really true. Its not even like its that effective as a pain relief (https://www.bjanaesthesia.org/article/S0007-0912(17)37428-7/...)
by londons_explore | 2025-07-15 09:39:16+00:00
My proposed design has many page sizes - nothing stops a software developer making all mappings multiples of 4kb and not using the byte sized pages.

My example was 1mb, 4kb and 1 byte pages - but a real design would probably use every power of two, or every even power of two to get best use of the TLB space.

It hasn't been done before because of a chicken and egg problem. CPU designers don't build it because no OS has the ability to use it, and no OS uses it because no CPU supports it. It would be a substantial amount of work for both parties.
by moffkalast | 2025-07-15 09:40:27+00:00
Eh, I doubt it, tech only got massively better in each world war so far, through unlimited reckless strategic spending. We'd probably get a TSMC-like fab on every continent by the end of it. Maybe even optical computers. Quadrotor UAV are the future of warfare after all, and they require lots of compute.

Adjusted for inflation it took over 120 billion to build the fleet of liberty ships during WW2, that's like at least 10 TSMC fabs.
by alexdowad | 2025-07-15 09:42:49+00:00
My belief is that whatever technology can be invented by humans (under the constraints of the laws of physics, etc) will eventually be invented. I don't have a strong argument for this; it's just what makes sense to me.

If true, then an immediate corollary is that if it is possible for humans to create LLMs (or other AI systems) which can program, or do some other tasks, better than humans can, that will happen. Inevitabilism? I don't think so.

If that comes to pass, then what people will do with that technology, and what will change as a result, will be up to the people who are alive at the time. But not creating the technology is not an option, if it's within the realm of what humans can possibly create.