MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by GuB-42 | 2025-07-07 02:16:27+00:00
It is not utopia, it is my country, France. And while public healthcare looks better than in the US, it is absolutely not a utopia, from understaffing, bureaucracy and fraud, it is not without problems, even putting aside how much it costs in taxes.

But the idea is: in current society, for some pathologies / personality traits, you are better off with the label than without the label, so people will seek the label rather than avoid it, they would be crazy not to...
by int_19h | 2025-07-07 02:17:38+00:00
There will be consequences, they'll just take some time to set in. But morale is in the gutter across the company now, and a lot of people who would previously go above and beyond to maintain some level of software quality have thrown in the towel now, since this last round of layoffs, by virtue of who was targeted, very clearly demonstrated that the company doesn't actually care about any of that one bit, and the sole reason to perform is to ensure that you stay above the cut (and even that's hardly a guarantee when whole teams get laid off).

Aside from that, there's also the matter of fewer people tasked with the same amount of things. The official line on that is that AI makes the remaining employees more productive. The reality is that it's nowhere near good enough for many products, so it just means overworked people making more mistakes and burning out faster.
by cookiengineer | 2025-07-07 02:19:00+00:00
The Chaos Computer Club offers proxy services for vulnerability disclosures, as they also have a legal team that can help you. It's totally anonymous, create a shitty randomized protonmail or whatever for it and you're set.

I am never filing any vulnerability disclosure under my real name and neither my pseudonym. I've learned this lesson the hard way. Incompetence gets never punished, because intentions do not matter in front of the law - and especially not in front of a criminalizing-by-default law.

Only mad men file responsible disclosures under their real name and risk going to prison because of barbaric laws. Don't be that fool.

[1] https://www.ccc.de/disclosure
by georgemcbay | 2025-07-07 02:19:09+00:00
> but I can't fully convince myself such a large stock can be manipulated like that.

I have the same initial reluctance to believe it that you do, but less so when I remind myself that we live in a world where the Social Security Administration sent out a mass email praising the passing of the "big beautiful bill".

I think our built-up understanding of how the US government functions at a baseline has not caught up to recent events. Especially in regards to how much regulatory bodies are doing their traditional jobs vs being forced to sit on their hands, or in some cases just not even existing anymore.
by ayaros | 2025-07-07 02:19:11+00:00
I've received several comments regarding the font - people are saying some of the character widths appear uneven. The font characters are literally bitmap fonts; each character is printed the same way every time, unless one or more styles is applied to it, but this is done in a consistent way. The Lisa's system font is also of a notably distinct style; the vertical parts of each letter are slightly wider than the horizontal parts to make up for the 2:3 pixel aspect ratio.

If things appear uneven, these issues may be due to viewing the screen at 1x scale on a lower-DPI display, as I mentioned in another comment. The only way for me to debug these issues is with a screenshot. You can press Windows + PrintScreen to take a screenshot on Windows, or press Command + Shift + 3 on a Mac. You can send them to me using the email link at the bottom of https://yaros.ae/ or by messaging me on Bluesky (https://bsky.app/profile/lisagui.com).

Also, I've been posting project updates to the Bluesky account, and I'll continue to do so in the future for anyone interested in keeping up with the project. There's also an RSS link on my website for anyone who's old-school and doesn't want to make a Bluesky account.
by ianbicking | 2025-07-07 02:20:48+00:00
Some of the issues with parsers and knowing what to type could be helped quite a bit if the text adventure interfaces had a bit more affordances. Making important objects bold is an easy one (unless you feel that determining the importance of objects is part of the puzzle). But if you break out of the linear-narrative approach there's a lot to do. Label exits with their destinations (if you have traveled there before). Use colors akin to blue/purple links to indicate history. Inventory doesn't need to be a command. If mapmaking isn't part of the challenge, then give people ways to move quickly (e.g., "go to throne room" could just find a path to the throne room based on your knowledge).
Show HN: DeepSky, a New AI Superagent for Business
by chrchang510 | 2025-07-07 02:21:44+00:00
We built a business "super" agent called DeepSky. The goal is to power entire businesses with our agent.

We started with making it really good at deep business research to enable business users to do hard (mostly) qual research tasks like competitive analysis, investment research, policy research, business plan development, etc.

We also have the same AI read and analyze the news for you.

Obviously early in our journey, but we have a few things on our roadmap for the next quarter. 1. Enabling more powerful, long running tasks, that could be scheduled in the background. 2. Making the research more complex and enabling quantitative research. 3. Letting you automate processes with the agent, not just automating research workflows.
by Davidzheng | 2025-07-07 02:22:04+00:00
I agree with the last part but I think that criticism applies to many humans too so I don't find it compelling at all.

I also think by original definition (better than median human at almost all task) it's close and I think in the next 5 years it will be competitive with professionals at all tasks which are nonphysical (physical could be 5-10 years idk). I could be high on my own stories but not the rest.

LLMs are good at language yes but I think to be good at language requires some level of intelligence. I find this notion that they are bad at spatial reasoning extremely flawed. They are much better than all previous models, some of which are designed for spatial reasoning. Are they worse than humans? Yes but just the fact that you can put newer models on robots and they just work means that they are quite good by AI standards and rapidly improving.
by akdev1l | 2025-07-07 02:24:40+00:00
I disagree with your premise that 3 years ago “people” knew about hallucinations or that these models shouldn’t be trusted.

I would argue that today most people do not understand that and actually trust LLM output more on face value.

Unless maybe you mean people = software engineers who at least dabble in some AI research/learnings on the side
by Loughla | 2025-07-07 02:24:49+00:00
I understand what you're saying, but experience has taught me that many many many people use whatever the thing is (trauma, ADHD, whatever) as an excuse to act however they want whenever they want. It becomes a crutch, or a security blanket to let them just be okay with wallowing in the negativity and externalizing every problem.

There has to be a happy medium. I have some neuro issues, and yet I understand that while I may not be able to control the issues themselves, only me is responsible for my own actions. That is lacking in many folks who share my diagnoses. We dropped the ball somewhere and I don't know where, to be honest.
by lucb1e | 2025-07-07 02:24:51+00:00
> But if you only have tens of thousands of users or less

Even on HN#1, you get like two requests per second for maybe 18 hours. That's three orders of magnitude below 200M/day. Shifting the argument to say that no hobby project needs this is easy. PHP being in common use already proves that starting up and tearing down all context is fine for >99% of websites. But the context we're in is an article saying one can do 200M requests per day with CGI-bin, not whether 99% of sites need that. CGI-bin is simply wasteful if the process takes 400ms before it starts doing useful work, not to mention a noticeable amount of lag for users. (Thankfully TFA specifies they're not doing that but are speaking of compiled languages)

> your computation per request is [commonly] small compared to our hypothetical 400 ms Python CGI overhead. Maybe [that makes it go] from 400ms to 420ms

At "only" 420ms total request time, I'd still want to take that prototype code out of this situation. Might be as easy as wrapping the code so that the former process entrypoint (__main__ in python) gets, instead, called by some webserver within the same process (Flask as the first python example that comes to mind). Going from 420ms request handling time to slightly over 20ms seems rather worth an hour of development time to me if you have this sort of traffic volume
by tptacek | 2025-07-07 02:25:48+00:00
I don't know why this would matter, re: lobste.rs; it's two sites with the same remit and different groups of users, of course they're going to share stories.

It feels like this site can always use strong incentives for better, more informed, and more civil conversation in threads. But it doesn't need much incentive to get good stories posted; that happens organically.

The simplest solution here would be to eliminate "karma" outright.
by ameliaquining | 2025-07-07 02:25:59+00:00
I think maybe the problem being alluded to is that a lot of interviewers aren't that good at this and instead give off vibes that play up the "I'm judging you from a default presumption that I'm more competent than you" angle.

(Really, it shouldn't be surprising that most technical interviewers aren't that competent, since they usually aren't selected for it.)
by nelox | 2025-07-07 02:26:22+00:00
Precisely. I would posit that many of those are no different from those who start studying psychology formally struggle with statistics because it requires a shift from intuitive, qualitative thinking to rigorous, quantitative analysis, which can be challenging for those without prior exposure. Psychology curricula often include courses in statistical methods or research design, which demand skills in mathematical reasoning, data interpretation, and abstract concepts like probability distributions or hypothesis testing. These topics can feel alien to students drawn to psychology for its focus on human behaviour and emotions rather than numbers.
by palmotea | 2025-07-07 02:26:55+00:00
> If raising a kid has become much harder today in some cases, then it's even more impractical to have many kids without having a joint family to support you.

My point is raising a kid isn't actually harder. Also the intense effort can backfire, resulting is worse off kids (e.g. the anxiety and lack of resilience that results from helicopter parenting).

My other point is the joint family thing seems like a wash: yes they can support you, but you also have to support them in equal measure.
by automatoney | 2025-07-07 02:27:49+00:00
Your comment made me realize that maybe we're just going through the transition to a collectively better understanding of people. Right now we sort of have to pass through the clinical diagnosis/therapy terms in order to recognize something as not being a moral failure/making someone less valuable as a person. And then the next step we're building to is maybe like acceptance of people's differences without needing to make reference to diagnostic labels. Kind of like what's happened with queerness: past - fluid, undefined, marginalized; present - labels, understanding, less marginalization; future - moving beyond the need for labels in order for people to accept and understand.
by borski | 2025-07-07 02:28:02+00:00
Some people find excuses anywhere they look. But we shouldn’t stigmatize those who don’t on behalf of those who do; the vast majority of people are not that way, which is why they stand out when they are, imho.

And it is more important to not stigmatize talking about it at all than it is to optimize for some people not using it as an excuse.
by Arainach | 2025-07-07 02:28:23+00:00
>almost 8k people were gone back in 2015

That wasn't a traditional layoff - it was a reimagining of the development process and the elimination of SDET which was overwhelmingly a good thing - I also joined in 2009, and SDET was an utter disaster. All the good SDETs got out of that job - either to SDE at Microsoft or to SDE at another company. Those that were left were largely a waste of money, and the entire culture of "this person writes the code, this person writes the tests" meant that a lot of devs got high recognition and rewards for writing untestable unmaintainable garbage that someone else had to try to cover.
by add-sub-mul-div | 2025-07-07 02:29:01+00:00
I don't understand the "does or does not" framing, as if there's symmetry to the debate. One side is making the claim that we're on the verge of creating that which you say we barely understand. The other side should remain at certainty that no such thing is happening until there's proof that it is. And what would that proof look like when, without said understanding, all we can do is point to output from a program that looks or sounds like its training data?
by andyfilms1 | 2025-07-07 02:29:09+00:00
Thousands are being laid off, supposedly because they're "being replaced with AI," implying the AI is as good or better as humans at these jobs. Managers and execs are workers, too--so if the AI really is so good, surely they should recuse themselves and go live a peaceful life with the wealth they've accrued.

I don't know about you, but I can't imagine that ever happening. To me, that alone is a tip off that this tech, while amazing, can't live up to the hype in the long term.
by tzs | 2025-07-07 02:29:46+00:00
> It should have been simple to add a line about the "other important results" and not violate show not tell.

Only a very tiny fraction of the publication's readers will have any idea what the heck the Mizohata-Takeuchi conjecture is. Naming the important results that Mizohata–Takeuchi being true would have validated would have been just technobable to nearly everyone reading the article.
by alephnerd | 2025-07-07 02:30:03+00:00
Other way around. Lower rungs at AGMUT roles are the most vocal about abuses of power becuase they want to become a joint secretaries in 20 years. It's once your role approaches cabinet appointment level that stuff gets dicey. Of course, Pandeyji is fairly clean and has a reputation as an enforcer in Odisha and later during the cleanup in the run-up of privatization. It's going to be mid-level leadership that will push back.

Like I said before, treat this the same way you would similar news in Vietnam, China, Russia, or Romania.
by datatrashfire | 2025-07-07 02:30:36+00:00
Am I missing something? Predicts AGI through continuous learning in 2032? Feels right around the corner to me.

> But in all the other worlds, even if we stay sober about the current limitations of AI, we have to expect some truly crazy outcomes.

Also expresses the development as a nearly predetermined outcome? A bunch of fanciful handwaving if you ask me.
by Arainach | 2025-07-07 02:31:09+00:00
It's a straightforward comparison in the area. Below Principal/Staff, Microsoft's stock awards are a (very unfunny) joke and their comp is pretty meh.

I left in 2018. I was 63 (first level senior) and had offers from Google and Meta for a downlevel (L4) at a 40% increase in total comp. The gap has closed slightly in the last 7 years but not much at those levels.
by jhanschoo | 2025-07-07 02:34:06+00:00
> Second, I don't see why political will is necessary.

> Most of the big changes that have happened in our lives over the past decades have had nothing to do with laws being passed or voters voting for anything.

I can agree with the latter without agreeing with the former. But political will and oil go hand-in-hand. Governments have been destroyed by foreign interests in oil. Governments hostile to their people have been maintained by foreign interests in oil. Governments giving great security to its people have been built from sovereign oil.

Writing this response made me realize that you are right. Considering the means and methods of countervailing interests, democratic persuasion does not seem anywhere near sufficient, even though these are the methods being used by advocates. A surer path might involve highly militant and capable states willing to perform espionage, terrorism, and regime change to pursue environmental goals.
by georgemcbay | 2025-07-07 02:34:59+00:00
I'm traditionally pro Open Source but I don't see how it helps much in this case, because whatever effort you put into Open Source software equally benefits the corporations you are fleeing from who can just take your work for free now.

And this is more true now than ever before since they can (so far legally, if not morally) also use LLMs to whitewash off GPL and other such licenses that would in the past have put practical limitations on their usage.
by maxdamantus | 2025-07-07 02:35:17+00:00
In my jq PR I used negative numbers to represent them (the original byte, negated), since they're already just using `int` to represent a decoded code point, and it's somewhat normal to return distinguishable errors as negative numbers in C. I think it would also make sense to represent the UTF-16 errors ("unpaired surrogates") as negative numbers, though I didn't make that change internally (maybe because they're already used elsewhere). I did make it so that they are represented as negatives in `explode` however, so `"\uD800" | explode` emits `[-0xD800]`.

In something other than C, I'd expect they should be distinguished as members of an enumeration or something, eg:

enum DecodeResult { Ok(char); ErrUtf8(u8); // 0x80..0xFF ErrUtf16(u16); // 0xD800..0xDFFF }
by TheTon | 2025-07-07 02:35:26+00:00
Several years ago, a coworker made an Arduino "mouse" that traced a square with a 1KHz report rate. Multiple systems running Windows 10 and reading mouse updates via either regular window events or the Win32 raw mouse API would occasionally lose events, meaning the square would drift over time. We tried both with a custom app and with drawing programs like Paint.

We could not reproduce the issue on systems running macOS or Linux, and we chalked it up to a bug in Windows. It was hard to know if it affected real mice but I expect it did. I haven’t tried retesting with more recent versions of Windows to see if it is fixed, maybe it has been.

Anyway, I’m not disputing OPs claim, I can totally believe it, but I always thought it was funny that pro gamers on Windows with high end mice could be losing the occasional movement and apparently nobody noticed that.
Show HN: I built a website to summarize Tech Twitter each day
by nsomani | 2025-07-07 02:36:07+00:00
Hey folks, I built this as a nightly job that pulls the tweets from a burner account I made, then passes it to GPT-4.1 to summarize alongside some recent headlines: https://github.com/neelsomani/tweet-insight-daily/blob/main/...
by bravetraveler | 2025-07-07 02:36:36+00:00
Believe to know more. As someone who has managed to live comfortably in the margins... I have never been more miserable than recently. What changed? This unsolicited assistance.

I was a perfectly fine and productive remote worker before the pandemic. Now, every bit of energy I have goes towards "no, really, I'm alright" and the leagues of hustlers.
by shagie | 2025-07-07 02:37:28+00:00
> Anyone who thinks English has "no proper rules" clearly has never had the joy of learning English as a second language.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophony#Ablaut-motivated_comp... and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduplication#English

Tic Tac Toe is the one that I remember most easily...

> Examples include: bric-a-brac, chit-chat, clip-clop, ding-dong, flimflam, flip-flop, hip-hop, jibber-jabber, kitty-cat, knick-knack, mishmash, ping-pong, pitter-patter, riffraff, sing-song, slipslop, splish-splash, tick-tock, ticky-tacky, tip-top, whiff-whaff, wibble-wobble, wishy-washy, zig-zag.

Saying any of those in the wrong order sounds wrong to a native ear.

It even shows up in Live, Laugh, Love.

And then there's adjective order... https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/grammar/british-grammar/...

--

If people want a language with "proper rules"... head over to conlangs. https://youtu.be/x_x_PQ85_0k https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ithkuil is my favorite (I've got a copy of the grammar guide that is on my shelf of random things next to Random Numbers by the RAND corporation).
by mapontosevenths | 2025-07-07 02:38:14+00:00
Ayn Rand has a lot of friends here. She also described the neurodivergent as "subnormal" and thought that society should do nothing to help them or the handicapped. Additionally, she believed that "normal" children shouldn't have to ever interact with those who were mentally different as it would harm the "normal" children.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1HD8KXn-kI
by SpicyLemonZest | 2025-07-07 02:38:17+00:00
The pattern was exploitable only on the specific days that Jane Street was allegedly manipulating. How would you have figured out, without counterparty information and before noisy sales start dragging down the index, that day X is a manipulation day?

How would you have identified that there's even such a thing as a manipulation day? Do you have a model that tells you the objectively correct number of days a non-manipulated index should be lower at close?
by toast0 | 2025-07-07 02:38:19+00:00
I don't think you can mandate that in this kind of encoding. This just encodes code points, with some choices so certain invalid code points are unable to be encoded.

But normalized forms are about sequences of code points that are semantically equivalent. You can't make the non-normalized code point sequences unencodable in an encoding that only looks at one code point at a time. You wouldn't want to anchor the encoding to any particular version of Unicode either.

Normalized forms have to happen at another layer. That layer is often omitted for efficiency or because nobody stopped to consider it, but the code point encoding layer isn't the right place.
by Polizeiposaune | 2025-07-07 02:38:29+00:00
Not way higher. wikipedia says Iridium satellites orbit at 781km altitude. Starlink satellites are a little lower -- mainly at around 560km (but there's some variation).

Way higher would be O3B at around 8,000km, GPS at 20,200km and geosynchronous at around 35,800km.
by Retric | 2025-07-07 02:38:33+00:00
Someone who is clinically depressed isn’t just sad, they are unable to return to normal. Things that help normal people feel better simply fail, it’s a meaningfully different situation. Similarly treatments for depression like electroconvulsive therapy shouldn’t be applied to normal people.

OCD, clinical addiction, etc are all more involved than just feeling the desire to do something. The lack of control is the issue not just the momentary impulse.

Intrusive thoughts are fine, acting on them isn’t.
by Tijdreiziger | 2025-07-07 02:38:36+00:00
Ah, I see. I think the ‘label’ (ugh – what a terribly awful way to describe a diagnosis) and the beatings are orthogonal, though.

In my parents’ time in a (then) Dutch colony, nobody was diagnosed with anything (that was only for crazies), but all the men knew how being hit with a belt felt (daughters were spared, from what I’ve been told). Self-medicating with alcohol and beating your kids if they ‘misbehaved’ was just the done thing, as far as I’ve been told.

This is to say that anyone who showed (what we would now identify as) neurodivergent behaviour probably would’ve been beaten, but this then wouldn’t have precluded them from going on to start a family and business (and maybe beat their own kids).

Actually, this is probably still how it works in many parts of the world. Even here in the Netherlands, beating your children was only outlawed as recently as 2007.