MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by toomuchtodo | 2025-07-27 14:37:21+00:00
Not investing advice. A lot of the S&P value is currently predicated on GPUs: Google, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia, Tesla to a lesser extent. You could buy long dated deep out of the money puts if you think the AI thesis will implode. But, to be early or late is the same as being wrong. Tread carefully.

> Back in May, Yahoo Finance's Laura Bratton reported that Microsoft (18.9%), Amazon (7.5%), Meta (9.3%), Alphabet (5.6%), and Tesla (0.9%) alone make up 42.4% of NVIDIA's revenue. The breakdown makes things worse. Meta spends 25% — and Microsoft an alarming 47% — of its capital expenditures on NVIDIA chips, and as Bratton notes, Microsoft also spends money renting servers from CoreWeave, which analyst Gil Luria of D.A.Davidson estimates accounted for $8 billion (more than 6%) of NVIDIA's revenue in 2024. Luria also estimates that neocloud companies like CoreWeave and Crusoe — that exist only to prove AI compute services — account for as much as 10% of NVIDIA's revenue.

...

> In simpler terms, 35% of the US stock market is held up by five or six companies buying GPUs. If NVIDIA's growth story stumbles, it will reverberate through the rest of the Magnificent 7, making them rely on their own AI trade stories.

https://www.wheresyoured.at/the-haters-gui/

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44645391
by morninglight | 2025-07-27 14:38:50+00:00
Yes, this creates real confusion. Does this mean that you can eat a dozen hotdogs if you wash them down with a glass of beetroot juice?

If you are still not confused read this:

"Although prevalent in the diet, nitrates have been viewed negatively because they chemically form carcinogenic nitrosamines in acidic environments, e.g. stomach, purportedly leading to gastric cancer as well as neoplasia of the intestine, brain, pancreas, and contributing to Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. "

https://www.memphis.edu/healthsciences/pdfs/martin-asnh.pdf
by tlogan | 2025-07-27 14:38:54+00:00
San Francisco home prices have increased approximately 2.5 to 2.6 times over the past 25 years after adjusting for inflation [1]. Nominal prices in San Francisco grew by over four‑fold in 25 years.

I bet the reason for this rule that house price in SF are finally in step with inflation.

Anyway Im not against doing this but let’s be honest here: this is going to make houses just less affordable. The are some benefits of this rule but affordability is not the one.

[1] https://www.redfin.com/city/17151/CA/San-Francisco/housing-m...
by ksec | 2025-07-27 14:39:09+00:00
Given how Apple's M4 Core can access all of the L2 Cache ( it is shared ) and has a SLC ( System Level Cache ) one could argue it is better to compare it to AMD X3D variant on Cache size. However on Geekbench 6 it is still off by 30-40% per clock. Even if we consider zero performance improvement from M5, it would be a large jump for Zen 6 to catch up.

And that is also the case with Qualcomm's Oryon and ARM's own Cortex X93x series.

Still really looking forward to Zen 6 on server though. I cant wait to see 256 Zen 6c Core.
by hotpotat | 2025-07-27 14:39:33+00:00
> You must carefully not leaving any recursive functions not annotated with #[recursive]

Isn’t the same true of forgetting #[stacksafe]?

This reminds me of certain Haskell patterns where you selectively make some operations strict instead of lazy for similar reasons. I’m glad this library exists, but I’m sad the Rust compiler itself doesn’t have better support for recursion.
by mariusor | 2025-07-27 14:40:47+00:00
I haven't spent time investigating if my specific setup is the problem, or an actual bug in the drivers, but after I resume from suspend, the btrfs root fs is in a read-only state.

The only solution is to reboot/shutdown, but it takes a long time and there are some scary fs checks running. Luckily no lost data so far. Currently I'm just shutting down the machine every time because it the boot times are quite fast.
by giantg2 | 2025-07-27 14:40:52+00:00
"Back in school I was often told the lead pipes in Roman aqueducts likely played a key role in the fall of Roman. We know lead is a poison with negative long term effects on cognition."

I highly doubt there was much effect from the pipes. They would quickly be sealed in mineral scale. Cups or utensils - maybe, but would be more about specific important people using them rather than being widespread.
by apitman | 2025-07-27 14:41:52+00:00
I'm optimistic about self-hosting/self sovereignty (which both fall under the umbrella of what I call indie hosting) long term.

But I think both of these articles gloss over the fact that end-to-end encryption has never been shown to work in a real system with normal people. Key management is a completely unsolved problem.

If you don't have e2ee, with current tooling most people will need someone they trust to run their server. But then you run into a privacy paradox: most people have more content they would rather have google looking at/training on than someone close to them looking at, than the other way around.

Personally I think the next step forward is improving software to be more turnkey so everyone can run their own as a GUI app on an old laptop or phone.

That said, we definitely need protocols for sharing stuff.
by altairprime | 2025-07-27 14:42:06+00:00
Yes: you can donate to https://openwebdocs.org/ (purple button at top right).

> Open Web Docs (OWD), an independent open source organization, is one of the most productive contributors to MDN Web Docs

Per MDN’s partners page, their director is ex-MDN, so that’s about as close to the tree as the apple can fall given Mozilla’s defective structure.
by rrjjww | 2025-07-27 14:42:07+00:00
The lack of quality is what gets to me. I've used AI tools in many aspects of my life to great benefit. Yet, nowadays scrolling through Reddit, X, or even video based platforms are a deluge of drivel. It was bad enough that I was spending too much time on my phone instead of interacting with other people but now even the content I'm interacting with isn't human!
by kevindamm | 2025-07-27 14:42:28+00:00
They compare cost, speed-to-market, schedule, and scalability, but it looks like they ignore failed launches and consider all missions successful?

I couldn't find a comparison of the number of launch failures between the two, my recollection is that this happened a lot more often in SpaceX rockets. But maybe that's included in the cost overrun figures and still puts SpaceX ahead by an order of magnitude.

I agree with the thesis of the paper, that platforms and incremental advances are more efficient and more economical. I don't quite agree that an incremental approach would have worked well for the NASA efforts in the 60s and 70s. Perhaps it should be considered as an option for these large organizations, but I'm not convinced it's always better.

Also, to do this study fairly, you would have to set up SpaceX to not benefit from any of the advances made by NASA for the decades beforehand. Some step-function style advances did happen under NASA supervision that benefitted the entire scientific community.
by paradox242 | 2025-07-27 14:43:01+00:00
From the very first sentence, I can already tell we are doomed if the right breakthroughs are made. It's like people's brains short-circuit when they imagine all the power and wealth that they might command through AI, and they don't take the extra two seconds to consider that any super intelligent system that can deliver on these promises will likely be very quickly outside of their control by definition.

Even during the interval of time these remained under human control, we are talking about people like Altman, Musk and Zuckerberg unilaterally wielding unprecedented economic power. What evidence is there in their behavior or human history in general to believe that this would be anything but bad for the majority of the worlds population?

Meanwhile these companies have been able to successfully nerd-snipe a small army of engineers who are right at that sweet spot of technical excellence and naivete. I won't say this is actually that difficult as these traits actually seem highly correlated in that population as a whole, but they have become the willing instruments of masters which will discard them at the first opportunity.

A global commitment to banning the development of AGI is the only sane response, and the number of people to whom this very premise itself sounds insane tells you just how fucked we are if they pull this off even halfway.
by microtonal | 2025-07-27 14:43:03+00:00
I did use a Ryzen Linux desktop from ~2018-2020 besides a MacBook, but Apple Silicon was so insanely good when it was introduced that I went back fully back to Mac on the desktop. But Ryzen mobile APUs have been catching up.

I have also used headless Linux machines throughout my Mac vacation :).

With regards to the hard stuff. 1994-2007 was from my 12th to my 25th, basically overlapping with when I was a high school/university student. So, plenty of time and not enough money for a Mac or some commercial UNIX system. That period was also super exciting, especially up till the dotcom crash a lot of people thought that Linux was going to take over the desktop (anyone remember Corel Linux and even WordPerfect on Linux?). Linux did take over, but in different ways than we imagined, the server was kinda expected after the mid-nineties, but Android not.
by kingkongjaffa | 2025-07-27 14:43:11+00:00
You don't _NEED_ to know it, but it's probably good for your career to have some exposure in 2025 to LLMs.

Download ollama and mess with a model locally, implement your own RAG system so you get a feel for what that entails and what good and bad use cases look like. I use LLMs every day for random stuff, but not really because I need the output, more because I need to know and understand where it's strengths and weaknesses are.

You're not trying to become an overnight expert here. Nobody expects that. But there's this gap right now between what stakeholders think AI can do (basically everything) and what it actually can do. And guess who needs to bridge that gap?

As a software engineer part of your responsibility is to advise non-software engineers on what is just now possible with technology, because when a stakeholder comes to you with some wacky idea, you need to be able to judge it and decide on the investment of time the idea might require, or if it's even possible today/now.
by al_borland | 2025-07-27 14:44:04+00:00
A lot of people are really bad at making slide decks, and PowerPoint often is the lazy presenters tool of choice, so it falls on the sword.

When I was last leading a team we prepared extensively for our demos. We used PowerPoint, as everyone did, but we reviewed the deck several times as a team, moving things 1 pixel this way or that way to make sure everything was lined up perfectly. If someone was getting into the weeds, we’d pull them out. If someone was talking about what they did instead of how it related to the user, we’d redirect their focus to make sure the presentation would be meaningful to the audience. If we were handing off between people, we’d practice that so it was smooth without and fumbling or people not knowing how to share a screen. We would spread this out over 3 separate meetings with time between for people to tweak and tune their parts. We’d also be thinking about the demo at the end of the sprint during sprint planning to make sure it was something we could show, and we collected what we needed along the way to show the value.

The end result was really positive feedback from everyone and even after a year our demos were very well attended. One manager with 30 years in the company showed up to one of our demos and said it was the best presentation he had ever seen at the company. The little things really matter to give a good impression at the end of the day.

When most people make a slide deck, they are doing it as an obligation to check a box, and it sucks. In my view, if we couldn’t properly explain to our stakeholders what it is we did and why it mattered, we might as well not do anything at all. Those demos were our public image to the organization and that was how people would see and judge us. In many ways, the demos mattered more than the work itself, and needed the same care (or more). Much like people judging the cleanliness of a restaurant’s kitchen by how clean the bathrooms are, the quality and inner workings of the team are judged by the demos. Lazy PowerPoints are indicative of issues throughout the team.

My current team (I’m an individual contributor on it) has garbage presentations put together by a lazy person, and it shows. I hate it. No one really knows what we do, and someone just got laid off for failing to properly explain the value of what he was working on to leadership. Poor presentations, and direct leadership not making this a priority, cost him his job as far as I can tell. Prior to the layoffs, he was very outspoken about our lack of quality demo and tried to champion making things better, as did I to some degree, but we got zero support, and I was explicitly told not to step in and help.

So yeah, it’s not PowerPoint, it’s the people who are being tasked with making most of them and their mental framework behind what they’re doing.
by brandonb | 2025-07-27 14:44:10+00:00
I used to work with a cardiologist who joked that "we should just add statins to the water," so you have a point.

The current guidelines for prescribing statins are based on your risk of a major cardiac event in the next 10 years (forecasted using a statistical model). But given that plaque builds up in your arteries over your lifetime, there's a strong argument for using a 30-year or lifelong time horizon.
by stevenwoo | 2025-07-27 14:44:29+00:00
There are other studies that show that reintroduction of wolves also appeared to lead to a decrease in coyotes and changed the populations and behaviors of other prey animals, in turn changing other plant populations. This particular headline does not indicate all the apparent changes. These second and third order effects are not things a state fish and game body would particularly care about until it was forced to by other arms of government.
by Razengan | 2025-07-27 14:44:53+00:00
This is something that I sometimes think about since a long time: What would be the best way to store "data" over thousands of years, maybe even a million years?

DNA is an obvious candidate, but on the "macro" level, how about mating rituals??

Birdsong, or the elaborate shapes that some fish draw in the sand of the sea floor. The species HAS to pass them on in order to reproduce.
by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 | 2025-07-27 14:44:57+00:00
I would hesitate before entrusting that kind of hardware to an AI agent. It is an interesting idea, but what if it decides full format is necessary? In my personal anecdata of where AI went wrong, at least I was the human in the middle to stop the bad decision. At best, you end up with a Simpson level nuclear plant terminal, where Homer is just trained to press Y each time it sees a prompt.

I guess what I am saying is: some LLM integration may be worthwhile.

Separately, on a more serious note, what makes this offer that different from its competition?
by prerok | 2025-07-27 14:45:32+00:00
I am sorry but I don't quite agree with you.

In science, there is clear delineation between things we know to be true (laws), things that appear to be true based on our current knowledge (theories) and things that may or may not be true but seem to be true based on limited data/limited research (hypotheses).

I don't think the three (I only see two, though, but don't want to nitpick) approaches are really comparable.
by aspenmayer | 2025-07-27 14:45:46+00:00
> Both links are paywalled so I can't comment on what they say (positive or negative).

Fixed!

https://eu.coloradoan.com/story/news/2024/02/09/colorado-sta... | https://archive.is/k0NqZ

https://academic.oup.com/book/26688/chapter-abstract/1954809... | https://annas-archive[.]org/md5/3d5be21998575e23a28fdaa53ff5...

(You will have to replace "[.]" with "." in the above link in case that wasn't obvious.)
by pcmaffey | 2025-07-27 14:46:02+00:00
There’s a raging battle to decimate wolf populations in Montana. I’d encourage any and all to speak up.

https://fwp.mt.gov/aboutfwp/public-comment-opportunities Click on the dropdown for “Fall 2025–Winter 2026 Furbearer and Wolf Trapping and Hunting Seasons and Quotas.”

> Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MTFWP) is proposing new, despicable wolf hunting regulations that could allow up to 500 wolves to be killed. This would increase the number of wolves that can be killed next season by 50 percent, nearly half the state’s entire wolf population. MTFWP is also pushing expanded hunting and trapping rules, including allowing hunters to kill up to 30 wolves per person.

> This proposal comes despite livestock losses remaining near historic lows, with only 35 confirmed cattle deaths in 2024, and a significant drop in the number of wolves killed due to livestock conflicts. It is also worth noting that revenue from wolf hunting licenses is among the lowest ever recorded – which helps explain why these expanded rules are less about science and more about politics, profit, and desperation.

> The Montana Fish and Wildlife Commission will vote on this proposal at its next meeting on August 21. In the meantime, public comments are open through August 4, and wolves need your voice. In your comment, consider including the following:

- There is no scientific or ethical reason to kill this many wolves.

- Wolves pose no significant threat to humans.

- Wolves help maintain healthy prey populations by targeting the weak or sick, which may help control the spread of chronic wasting disease in elk and deer.

- Legal hunting can increase poaching.

- Traps and snares are cruel, outdated, and often harm pets and endangered species.
by parasense | 2025-07-27 14:46:27+00:00
The SLS was a good idea, and it's actually a great rocket. However you are correct in saying it turned into a huge program for the old school rocket industrial complex. I think the private sector currently does this better, or it's certainly debatable. However, I think it's a mistake to say only the private sector can do this kind of thing optimally. There is some multiverse in the timelines where government contractors create an industrial rocket production line that quickly and cheaply stamps out heavy lift rockets. Granted, it's easier said than done, but it still doesn't have to be so expensive. Clearly the expensive part should be the R&D with the industrial production parts being jigged, automated, and fully optimized. The SLS obviously went another route by making the rocket production bespoke with non optimal, manual labor, etc... that kind of protection is acceptable for one-off science mission payloads, but not heavy lift....

Anyhoo, NASA letting so many people resign is good if your opinion is such that lowering government expenditure is a good thing. So long as the exit package is comparable to retirement package these government employees would have got otherwise. My guess is the resignation package has great near term performance but low long term (retirement) performance, making it a great option for younger workers able to pivot to new careers.
by infinitezest | 2025-07-27 14:47:01+00:00
> （Disclaimer: This blog post was drafted with the help of a language model, but all opinions expressed are my own.）

This is when I head to an LLM to summarize the key take-aways. If you can't be bothered to write it, I can't be bothered to read it. That said, I certainly agree with the summary! :P
by rgoulter | 2025-07-27 14:47:07+00:00
> You can just tell them to write in a different style and they will.

I'm guessing the priorities are to have contributions which stick to Wikipedia's guidelines. The LLM tendencies cited are in violation of those.

I don't think the game is strictly "we only want human contributions", where you can imagine a sophisticated LLM-user crafting a reasonable contribution which doesn't get rejected.

The "accidental disclosure" section indicates that some of these bad contributions are just very low effort.
by Out_of_Characte | 2025-07-27 14:47:51+00:00
> auto-magic-ing size reading to access members after it

From the article

>we now have everything we need to calculate the size, offset and alignment of every field, regardless of their positioning in the struct. >init to allocate the memory >get to get a pointer to a field >resize to resize the arrays >deinit to free the memory

You're now suggesting to do exactly what the article is about without being aware of it.
by dahart | 2025-07-27 14:49:03+00:00
> and not even nasa could figure out how to run a profit despite a monopoly

You seem to be unaware that NASA does run a profit, and that SpaceX wouldn’t have been possible without NASA’s research and money. NASA has invested tens of billions in SpaceX.

https://www.planetary.org/articles/nasa-versus-spacex

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA#Economic_impact...

https://thehill.com/opinion/technology/3721375-how-much-does...
by altairprime | 2025-07-27 14:49:15+00:00
It’s trivial for them to solve this automatically. It’s also illegal under the computer fraud and abuse act, because then they’re knowingly and intentionally bypassing for profit (fraud) a clearly defined authorization barrier that explicitly prohibits their (ab)use. No joke, that’s an actual U.S. federal crime, and it would hold up well enough to reach a courtroom to be judged. (Can’t say what would happen after that — the law is not code, etc.) That’s why it’s so effective: it doesn’t matter that they can bypass it, it matters that they could be jailed if they do so, and corporations only take risks whose profits can pay for the penalties incurred. The cost of federal prison is well in excess of what most corporate leaders will tolerate :)

ps. I learned assembly programming from my grandma. She would have loved to discuss this problem with me.
by slashdev | 2025-07-27 14:49:24+00:00
You mean like your opinion?

Do you understand fog of war? Both sides say things that are false or exaggerated, and it's difficult to discern the truth because information is censored and journalists are restricted in their movement and what they can report. This not unique to this conflict, you see the same thing in the Russia-Ukraine war, and in the recent Thailand Cambodia skirmishes.

I don't trust what either side says, I assume the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

One of the more balanced and accurate sources, in my opinion, has been Preston Stewart on Youtube[1], especially on the Russia-Ukraine war. He sources things frequently from military bloggers from both sides in their native language and verifies what he can and is honest about what is unconfirmed.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/@PrestonStewart
by AlgebraFox | 2025-07-27 14:49:37+00:00
IMO, that is worst of both worlds. You still put your data out there on somebody else's computer but also get to maintain the infrastructure.

Unless you end-to-end encrypt your data, hosting on a VPS is just a marginal improvement over using Google or Apple's regular cloud.

To me self-hosted is having full control over the data. That includes where the data is stored, not just who's maintaining it.
by jebarker | 2025-07-27 14:50:32+00:00
> Their science missions are inspiring, but not as inspiring as they ought to be

Are they 1% as inspiring as what the DoD does with their budget? I don't mean to be snarky, but level of inspiration is pretty subjective and difficult to put a price tag on. Honestly, I feel like the NASA budget needs to be considered in context relative to the DoD budget and then these cuts look much less convincing as being necessary.