MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by hn_throwaway_99 | 2025-07-16 03:29:20+00:00
Thanks, that's very kind!

I probably mean it less as "I'm too old" and more of "Wow, time really flies".

To me, who started my career in the very late 90s, the .com boom doesn't really seem that long ago. But then I realize that there is about the same amount of time between now and the .com boom, and the .com boom and the Altair 8800, and I think "OK, that was a loooong time ago". It really is true what they say, that the perception of time speeds up the older you get, which is both a blessing and a curse.

Regarding AI, it's a bit fascinating to me to think that we really only had enough data to get generative AI to work in the very recent past, and nearly as soon as we had enough data, the tech appeared. In the past I would have probably guessed that the time between having enough data and the development of AI would have been a lot longer.
by theamk | 2025-07-16 03:31:37+00:00
related post from few months ago: https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/21819-impact-of-ongoing-war...

"We avoided specifying the country or war to avoid involving GrapheneOS in a debate on forced conscription in an existential defensive war."

I will follow their wishes and not specify the specific war or side, but this comment gives me all the information to figure it out.
by gt0 | 2025-07-16 03:33:25+00:00
It may be hard to believe, that is considered a major reason for the baby boom. People were happy the war was over, happy to be back with their families, The GI Bill made people optimistic about the future.

There was PTSD of course, a lot of grief and life altering injuries, but back then you didn't talk about it and just drank and beat up your wife and kids instead.
by chubot | 2025-07-16 03:33:29+00:00
the specific format ... for the "exterior" design is an effect of the operating system. A different operating system might have a different way.

I'd say it's both the operating system and the hardware. The OS tends to follow the hardware (network, disk), and there's only one kind of hardware that I know of: that which traffics in bytes, or blocks of bytes.

You can (and should) build formats on top of that, like UTF-8 and JSON, but at bottom it's bytes. Which is of course not true of the "interior" designs -- those are more like in-memory data structures created by the .NET VM, and invisible to the outside world, without serialization.

It might depend on the specific use.

I'll have to write this out fully later, but the argument is that using 2 types of glue is strictly worse than using 1, because you create a combinatorial explosions of code. You also create more software interfaces, and interfaces are where bugs tend to happen.

More code and more interfaces leads to more bugs. One type of glue is better!

Also, the glue should be dynamically typed. Because shell is for gluing together say Rust and Go, which have wildly different type systems. It's better to have 2 type systems than 3. If you have 3, then you need more glue.

"I don't glue on top of my glue" - https://oils.pub/ysh.html
by Forgeties79 | 2025-07-16 03:34:29+00:00
You gift me $100 on Venmo or cashapp or whatever to go dinner with my partner. I transfer it to my bank. It’s in the same bank account as all my other liquid cash. How can either of us ever say whether or not I spent that specific $100 on dinner?

Mozilla/FF has a pot of money that donations go in to, which is the same pot they use to operate as well as pay people, which includes their CEO.
by tsoukase | 2025-07-16 03:36:51+00:00
I am pretty sure Google donates a great share of Mozilla's revenue but demands the following with this money:

- Firefox is alive, so that they are a theoretical competitor to avoid anti-trust measures

- Firefox has the lowest market share that remains that said competitor without distracting many users from G engagement

- Firefox emains of few steps behind in features and perforfance so that it remains in this pesky market share

- of course Firefox keeps Google search the default

- may be other under the table agreements? (Request for comments)

I cannot foresay what will happen next with the state of MV3.
by jasonjmcghee | 2025-07-16 03:37:31+00:00
For the bad edit one, to clarify, I mean, it would "put its edit pointer" at the top of the file and start deleting/inserting there, instead of where it "intended to" which would have been somewhere in the middle, for example.

---

Erroring in that way specifically makes me think the "deleting every line" issue isn't just a visual artifact but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
by benbridle | 2025-07-16 03:38:09+00:00
I'm currently selling a pixel-art drawing program called Cobalt, which is built on Bedrock (you can see a demo of it running at the bottom of the project page). It was initially only available for Windows and Linux, but I wanted to make it available for the Nintendo DS as well, so I wrote a new emulator and now it and all of my other programs work on the DS. It was far easier to write the emulator than it would have been to figure out how to port Cobalt to the DS directly, and now I don't have the issue of having to maintain two versions of the same software.

It's true that 64KB is pretty small in modern terms, but it feels massive when you're writing programs for Bedrock, and the interfaces exposed by Bedrock for accessing files and drawing to the screen and the likes make for very compact programs.
by smogcutter | 2025-07-16 03:39:37+00:00
Done properly, phonics shouldn’t be about memorizing rules per se so much as practicing them deliberately, until they are internalized.

For some kids, phonics mostly comes naturally. That sounds like your daughter, and myself for example as well. Spelling and pronunciation came easily. I was always the kid who had to flip back to find the page the class was on when it was time turn to read.

But our experiences aside, the fact is that if your daughter’s class was doing 3-cueing instead of phonics, many of her classmates simply wouldn’t learn how to read.
by TheDong | 2025-07-16 03:40:30+00:00
Sure, if we redefine "AGI" to mean "literally cloning a human biologically", then AGI suddenly is a very different problem (mainly one of ethics, since creating human clones, educating, brainwashing, and forcing them to respond to chat messages ala chatGPT has a couple ethical issues along the way).

I don't see how claiming that intelligence is multi-faceted makes AGI (the A is 'artificial' remember) impossible.

Even if _human_ intelligence requires eating yogurt for your gut biome, that doesn't preclude an artificial copy that's good enough.

Like, a dog is very intelligent, a dog can fetch and shake hands because of years of breeding, training, and maybe from having a certain gut biome. Boston Dynamics did not have to understand a single cell of the dog's stomach lining in order to make dog-robots perfectly capable of fetching and shaking hands.

I get that you're saying "yes, we've fully mapped the neurons of a fruit fly and can accurately simulate and predict how a fruit fly's brain's neurons will activate, and can create statistical analysis of fruit-fly behavior that lets us accurately predict their action for much cheaper even without the brain scan, but human brains are unique in a way where it is impossible to make any sort of simulation or prediction or facsimile that is 'good enough' because you also need to first take some bacteria from one of peter thiel's blood boys and shove it in the computer, and if we don't then we can't even begin to make a facsimile of intelligence". I just don't buy it.
by nomel | 2025-07-16 03:40:43+00:00
It seems that, for this to be true, AI (not just LLM) will have to plateau, very soon. Considering the Nobel prize for chemistry, last year, was about AI (not LLM) [1], I think there are still an incredible number of non-LLM applications of AI out there still.

[1] https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/chemistry/2024/press-relea...
by maxbond | 2025-07-16 03:40:49+00:00
I think the causality is flipped here, when you carefully consider a problem the result is often very clean and clear code. The clarity in your thinking is reflected in the code and it's structure.

But writing clean and clear code in the hopes that it's good aesthetics will result in correctness would be cargo culting. (Writing clean code is still worthwhile of course, and clean code + code review is likely to result in better correctness.)

Form follows function, not the other way around.
by zamadatix | 2025-07-16 03:41:46+00:00
There was a ~3% delta in absolute ticket sales.

I take it you really mean "so why wasn't 2003 the peak year instead of 2002" to which I'd say "I'm not trying to explain one needs a 55" widescreen 4k TV before you'll ever consider going to the movie theater less often, rather that this kind of difference over time is why you can't say movie theatre ticket sales in 2002 were higher so people must therefore have watched more movies then."
by yndoendo | 2025-07-16 03:42:34+00:00
Would the void of physical medium like VHS and DVD be part of the issue?

Younger me would go to Blockbuster Video and search the new release section for non-blockbuster movies. "Ghost World" was found this way with other cult films.

With the decline of purchasing physical media it makes it hard to bring in revenue to produce obscure art. Even big blockbuster movies that failed in theatres would often be uplifted from media sales.
by MattSayar | 2025-07-16 03:42:35+00:00
I tried to make an artifact that would simplify Wikipedia articles [0] but the artifacts stubbornly won't let you do ANY input into them, not even via query strings. I think I'd be able to make cooler artifacts once they allow more input/output stuff. I understand the security issues, and it makes sense to roll this out slowly, but I want it now!

[0] ended up making it a browser extension instead https://mattsayar.com/simple-wikiclaudia/
by pempem | 2025-07-16 03:43:06+00:00
Have you ever seen that meme about having less days off than a medieval peasant?

Yes, I can get chicago, new york, italian, or tokyo style pizza from my phone, in about an hour in a city that is none of those places. Still even my weekends include work. A strong effort in high school, college, grad school and at my jobs has led to fairly regular weekend work and working after putting the LOs down for bedtime, not connecting or socializing.

The answer isn't fewer rights. Its more.
by teitoklien | 2025-07-16 03:43:10+00:00
the mindset you're discussing isnt whats driving this for majority of people (im myself young and in my 20s). its a problem in your extremely small bubble of leftist spaces which i've often heard this doomism being argued.

World has never been that fair, its a work in progress that has been going on since 1000s of years heck probably 100,000s for humans.

First there was Anarchy / Stateless Societies (Pre-Leviathan), then came the notion of leviathan / Authoritarian Centralization the idea that letting a state get run by a ruler and his nobles would lead to a more stable state (the era of kings and emperors since last several centuries),

then came Theocratic or Feudal Orders : Society governed by divine rule or hierarchical feudal obligations. Middle Ages in Europe, dynastic China, Islamic Caliphates.

then Absolute Monarchy / Early Nation-States then Constitutionalism / Enlightenment Liberalism then came Democracy (but anti minority and primarily majoritarian with tons of political violence on minorities, still can see it in places like bangladesh, malaysia (singapore itself was born out of violence on such a non-malay minority) )

then came Liberal Democracy / Republic Which is what most western europeans, americans, indians, japan, etc live under or atleast the ideals its politicians promise to follow and do follow majority of the time.

Everything you and enjoy in our lives was created and improved upon by people before us, life has never been 'fair' nor will ever reach that utopian ideal of fair ever. Nor has it ever been the limiter on birth rates or growing societies.

It's just an excuse (sorry I'm not saying your concerns are invalid, but only that you share it with every human who has ever existed across time, and this has never been the bottleneck for our current problem with birth rates)

The problems are more behavioural in kind, and the norms that have arised rather than unfair system, psycological issues like that.
by BatmanAoD | 2025-07-16 03:43:27+00:00
Like a lot of blog posts, this feels like a premise worth exploring, lacking a critical exploration of that premise.

Yes, "inevitabilism" is a thing, both in tech and in politics. But, crucially, it's not always wrong! Other comments have pointed out examples, such as the internet in the 90s. But when considering new cultural and technological developments that seem like a glimpse of the future, how do we know if they're an inevitability or not?

The post says:

> what I’m most certain of is that we have choices about what our future should look like, and how we choose to use machines to build it.

To me, that sounds like mere wishful thinking. Yeah, sometimes society can turn back the tide of harmful developments; for instance, the ozone layer is well on its way to complete recovery. Other times, even when public opinion is mixed, such as with bitcoin, the technology does become quite successful, but doesn't seem to become quite as ubiquitous as its most fervent adherents expect. So how do we know which category LLM usage falls into? I don't know the answer, because I think it's a difficult thing to know in advance.
by moezd | 2025-07-16 03:44:10+00:00
At this point, arms-crossed mugshot of "{ex-Open AI} raises $2B" is a meme. Training one epoch of a model the size of the GPT-4 family is easily an 8 figure job. Considering other ops costs, UI and backend dev, securing Everest sized datasets, demos/talks, wages, bonuses etc, this probably gives them around 100 trial and errors, or in other words "Look at me mum, I won 100 chips for the casino!"

And imagine being the ops guy there, about to run a new training batch, but you specified the wrong input path. Puff, the money is gone. Absolutely wild stuff.
by gigatree | 2025-07-16 03:44:29+00:00
I don’t think the issue is that it feels alive as much as that it’s just not alive, so its utility is limited by its practical functionality, not its “opinions” or “personality” or variation.

I think it’s the same reason robot dogs will never take off. No matter how advanced and lifelike they get, they’ll always be missing the essential element of life that makes things interesting and worth existing for their own sake.
by delifue | 2025-07-16 03:45:03+00:00
> First is to assume that almost everything is an assumption. Second is to insert enough flexibility into the work so that only minimal parts of it are lost if your assumptions are wrong.

That's why rigid language like Rust is suitable for mature domains (like rewriting an existing app in Rust) where most things are known, instead of new and quickly iterating things (many unknown unknown). https://loglog.games/blog/leaving-rust-gamedev/
by vivzkestrel | 2025-07-16 03:45:11+00:00
Let T1, . . . , Tc be the components of T . Since each Ti is isomorphic to a subgraph of G1, for every i ∈ [c] we have |E(Ti)|/(|V (Ti)| − 1) ≤ m1(G1). In particular, |S| = c ∑ i=1 |E(Ti)| ≤ m1(G1) c ∑ i=1 (|V (Ti)| − 1) = m1(G1)(v − c), so (v − c)/|S| ≥ 1/m1(G1). Therefore μ′({F ⊆ G2 : E(F) ⊇ S}) ≤ Cm1(G1) 1 n !|S|(v−c)/|S| ≤ C1 n1/m1(G1) |S| , as desired. End of proof of Lemma 23.9. Proof of Theorem 23.7 We randomly partition V (G) into random clusters U1, . . . ,Um where |V (F)| | |Ui| and |Ui| ∼ C log n for i = 1, 2, . . . , m. The degree of v ∈ Ui in G[Ui] dominates Bin((δF +α)n, (|Ui|−1)/(n−1)) and so if C is sufficiently large, then w.h.p. δ (Ui) ≥ (δF + α/2)|Ui| for i = 1, 2, . . . , m. So, w.h.p. each Ui con- tains an F-factor. A simple calculation shows that for every set of distinct vertices x1, . . . , xs ∈ V (H) and every function f : [s] → [m], Pr xi ∈ Uf (i) for each i ∈ [s] ≤ C log n n s . (23.23) Theorem 23.7 from Lemma 23.9 (with C replaced by C log n) and Theorem 23.1.

this is the kinda stuff that truly scares me. i dont want to sit and decipher what you are trying to explain, i want to understand what you are trying to explain. i wish there was a resource that explained absolutely complex ideas like these in the simplest of words
by preommr | 2025-07-16 03:48:10+00:00
> they are actually crazy and frittering away 2B on hype

This assumes that being careless with billions can only ever be crazy.

If you're already set for life, why not gamble (including at completely irrational levels) for even more insane amounts of money when the whole thing is just a crazy house of mirrors. Yes, there's value at the heart, but there's also crazy amounts of money being funneled in, lots of opportunity for chaos, lots of chances for legal rug pulls. All of it inflated even further by a fervor of carelessness for any kind of consequences - things like the stock market are completely removed from any kind of fundamentals.

In a fun house of mirrors, that 2 billion could be 2 cents, or it could be 2 trillion. Buy the ticket and have fun!
by disillusioned | 2025-07-16 03:48:21+00:00
My wife had been pushing me to try for kids for, well, a couple of years, and I was finally getting there. I always knew I wanted kids, or figured I did, but then reality comes: can we afford it, shouldn't we enjoy what we have a little bit longer, are we sure we want to do this, etc.

Then, my friend messaged me one night and asked me to join him at the children's hospital to take a few photos as they were saying "goodbye." His 18 month old had been fighting cancer, and it was 1 in the morning and my melatonin-addled brain thought "oh, they must be taking him home."

It wasn't until I walked into the room with my DSLR that I realized what he meant. In fairness, he had prefaced the request with, "do you mind if I ruin your night?"

I am not even close to a professional photographer. But I tried to take as many pictures as respectfully as I could of the literal hardest moment any parents could ever hope not to have to go through. At a certain moment, it became time, and I found myself... stuck, in a sense. I was the only other one in the room aside from the parents, but I didn't feel like I could abandon them, and so I sat there as they disconnected the machines keeping their son alive. It was the most awful two minutes as the attending sat there with a stethoscope against this tiny chest.

I waited until an opportune moment, and then hugged them, quietly took my leave, went home, edited the photos as quickly as possible, uploaded and sent them, and then bawled for an hour or so.

Needless to say, this set back our efforts at even _trying_ for kids by about 2-3 years. Because I just was stuck by this all-encompassing thought: you can't lose what you don't have. You simply aren't open to that sort of vulnerability if you don't have children. It doesn't exist, until you form it into being. And that thought haunted me. Just like it haunts, well, every parent on some level.

And to clarify: this didn't even _happen to me_. It happened to _them_, and their son. But it was a defining moment for me that made it really tough to overcome.

Eventually, we did have two kids (after a miscarriage, of course, because isn't that how it goes), and they're sitting behind me watching a movie as I type this. But these sort of thoughts are always there in the background. And yeah, reading a story like this one about the flood just spears you in the soul.
by thayne | 2025-07-16 03:49:49+00:00
> but mandating things like keeping user passwords out of logs is a security improvement.

That has nothing to do with FIPS 140.

FIPS 140 is just requirements for "cryptographic modules".

It specifies which algorithms are allowed and requires that you use modules that have been "validated" by going through an expensive and slow auditing process.

While I don't think it is completely useless to have those requirements, it has some problems, such as:

- it takes a very long time for anything to get validated. For example, Ubuntu 22.04 only recently got its crypto packages validated after being "in process" for years.

- bug fixes have to go through the validation process too, so if a vulnerability is found, you can be left vulnerable for a while

- For many languages and runtimes, using FIPS certified modules is a royal pain. For example, for several versions of node, there was no good way to run it in a FIPS compatible way, because it required a newer version of openssl than the latest FIPS certified version. AWS lambdas, even in GovCloud don't include FIPS certified crypto, so you have to bundle it in your package and make sure to use your local library instead of the system library, which can be quite difficult depending on the language. Prior to this change in go, using FIPS in go required using cgo to link to a FIPS certified c library, and make sure you either did some fancy link magic to get any libraries you used to also use that, or don't use any libraries that use the standard crypto library.

- It doesn't include many algorithms that are widely used and generally considered secure including Ed25519, chacha20-poly1305, argon (along scrypt, bcrypt, etc.), etc. This can cause problems with compatibility with other systems.
by ldjkfkdsjnv | 2025-07-16 03:49:51+00:00
I think its much better than opus. I would describe its code output as boring and to the point, no fluff. O3 Pro is better at abstraction, but grok heavy is better at bug hunting, and only doing exactly as needed. I swapped my openai pro license for grok, its good. Another big advantage is the context window size. Honestly I use these models all day long, and have felt that while sonnet 3.5 was ground breaking, but that anthropic is behind google, openai, and now xai.

For tools, I use repo prompt + grok website. Personally think claude code is overrated, and hand building the context by selecting the files is far better for complicated tasks
by ameliaquining | 2025-07-16 03:50:57+00:00
This is going to be subject to the legal discovery process with the usual safeguards to prevent leaks; in particular, the judge will directly supervise the decision of who needs access to these logs, and if someone discloses information derived from them for an improper purpose, there's a very good chance they'll go to jail for contempt of court, which is much more stringent than you can usually expect for data privacy. You can still quite reasonably be against it, but you cannot reasonably call it "plain text logs available for everyone at the company to view".
by justsomehnguy | 2025-07-16 03:51:51+00:00
>> An area is a region in which space for based variables can be allocated. Areas can be cleared of their allocations in a single operation, thus allowing for wholesale freeing. Moreover, areas can be moved from one place to another by means of assignment to area variables, or through input-output operations. >> Based variables are useful in creating linked data struc tures, and also have applications in record inputoutput. A based variable does not have any storage of its own; instead, the declaration acts as a template and describes a generation of storage.

http://www.iron-spring.com/abrahams.pdf p. 19, 74

*shrug_emoji*
by ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 | 2025-07-16 03:52:02+00:00
Well, the reason is in the links I provided, and the reasoning doesn't scream arrogance to me.

Personally, I think choice is great. Why be upset when you can download chromium (it is supported by pretty much any platform FF is) and use it to do all sorts of stuff with WebUSB, if you are into that?

Still, I would like to see FF disable these features by default and allow opt-in. I don't see a great reason to avoid implementing them behind some "wall" (other than to avoid an increase in a concealed attack surface).