MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ibaikov | 2025-07-29 12:30:55+00:00
I wonder if that's actually illegal, because it feels very close to false ads etc. It seems legal, but I think courts would side with customers.

As if google would say that yes, emails are $5/mo, but there's actually a limit on number of emails daily, and also number of characters in the email. It just feels so illegal to nerf a product that much.

Same with AI companies changing routing and making models dumber from time to time.
by tirumario | 2025-07-29 12:31:00+00:00
Full disclosure, I'm on the Kilo Code team, but I read your analogy, and I have to respectfully disagree. Musicians don't all use autotune, because autotune is a specalized technology used to elicit a specific result. BUT, MOST musicians use technology; either to record their work, or mix their tracks, or promote their work. You could definitely say "A musician who doesn't post online to a platform or save their work in certain audio formats at the studio are going to be replaced by musicians who do." Are there musicians who still release their work on vinyl or cassette tapes and prefer the sound of an stage with no microphones? Sure. But to dismiss the overarching influence of technology on the process would be ignoring where the progress is going. I'd argue that people who use Kilo Code don't just "autotune" their code, they're using it as a tool that augments their workflow and lets them build more, faster. That's valuable to an employer. Where the engineer is still vital is in their ability to know what to ask for, how to ask for it, and how to correct the tool when it's wrong, because it'll never been 100% right. It's just not hype, it's inevitable.
by lapcat | 2025-07-29 12:31:09+00:00
> I’m not asking what someone should do, but what your average person would do.

I guess I misunderstood your question then. I thought you were responding to, "Logically, distrusting The Lancet means distrusting Wakefield's paper too."

I think we've already established what an average person would do: not revise their beliefs in light of new evidence.

> To circle back to the point, people aren’t capable of understanding any independent confirmation, nor are the capable of understanding the explanation for the change in position. The operation of science is incomprehensible to most people.

I think this overcomplicates the situation, which is just about beliefs, evidence, and changing your mind. And people do change their minds in light of new evidence... about topics to which they're not emotionally attached. It's the emotional attachment to beliefs that causes people to perform mental cartwheels and stand on their heads just to avoid admitting the obvious truth.

For the most part, professional science, its complex math and statistics, operates in a parallel universe to our daily lives. A paper is published in a scientific journal? Shrug. A paper is retracted? Shrug. It may be interesting, a curiosity, but it's largely irrelevant to the average person. They're not emotionally committed to any of it. The problems occur when professional science somehow overlaps with something that they do care deeply about. And their interaction with that scientific work is not even an attempt to analyze it; rather, they simply want to cherry pick scientific results that agree with their preconceived notions, and use (abuse) scientific authority in order to argue for their preconceived notions.

But independent confirmation is not that difficult to understand. Is Jane lying or telling the truth about a particular situation? If you're skeptical of Jane's claims, then you ask John, someone else you know who also has first-hand knowledge of the situation. Average people can't design a scientific experiment, but they can certainly dig deeper into some question. However, you've got to be motivated to dig deeper. Some people want to be lied to, because the truth would be uncomfortable.
by Ukv | 2025-07-29 12:32:15+00:00
These are the malicious commits in question:

https://github.com/aws/aws-toolkit-vscode/commit/678851b

https://github.com/aws/aws-toolkit-vscode/commit/1294b38

Which were made using an "inappropriately scoped GitHub token" from build config files:

https://aws.amazon.com/security/security-bulletins/AWS-2025-...

> The incident points to a gaping security hole in generative AI that has gone largely unnoticed [...] The hacker effectively showed how easy it could be to manipulate artificial intelligence tools — through a public repository like Github — with the the right prompt.

Use of an LLM seems mostly incidental and not the source of any security holes in this case (at least not as far as we know - may be that vibe coding is responsible for the incorrectly scoped token). The attacker with write access to the repo could have just as easily made the extension run `rm -rf /` directly.
by sneak | 2025-07-29 12:32:24+00:00
> Israel is systematically exterminating the Palestinians using kinetic force and starvation?

If this were the goal, they could do it in hours. Why is the body count so low given the duration of the war?

This isn’t rhetoric. It might be they want plausible deniability.

It seems to me however that everyone knows they aren’t really fooling anyone with their narrative, which really draws into focus: why aren’t they killing tens of thousands of Palestinians every day? They have the means, motive, and opportunity. They have the technology and are in position to do so.

They have not.

We know what systematic genocide looks like. This is mass murder, sure, but if they wanted to commit genocide, it would be done and over with by now.

Instead, they have killed less than 5% of the population of Gaza.

Why is that?
by swat535 | 2025-07-29 12:33:05+00:00
The worst part is that God forbid the genders were reversed and you had a male only app to discuss their relationships.

The app would be banned within a few seconds and 90% of people here would celebrate it.

Majority of people assume the following:

1. Men don't deserve to have private spaces

2. Men can't be victims of abuse (sexual, physical or else)

3. Men don't need to be protected from toxic relationships

4. Women don't need to ask men for consent

Men here refers to all men, including trans men, homosexuals, bisexuals, heterosexuals, etc.

Perhaps, it's time that we have an honest discussion about the realities of living in the world as a man in 2025.

If you're reading this and find my comment in bad taste, or that it frustrates you, I highly encourage that you take sometimes and introspect as to why you feel that way.
by swiftcoder | 2025-07-29 12:33:19+00:00
> in a world where there are many languages that do the same thing it really boils down to using the one with the syntax that you like the most

Wat? If all languages were just syntax re-skinning, we really wouldn't need more than one compiler backend...

Generally the semantic differences are much more important. Rust isn't interesting for its syntax, it's interesting for its ownership rules and borrow checker. Erlang isn't interesting because of its syntax, it's interesting for its actor model concurrency. And so on...
by littlestymaar | 2025-07-29 12:33:20+00:00
> The Tour de France was originally intended to be so tough that only one person might finish it.

The difficulty has been toned down a lot since the early days though. (You'll never see a 466km long stage like the first of Tour de France 1903[1] ever again).

[1]: https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1re_%C3%A9tape_du_Tour_de_Fr...)
by acjohnson55 | 2025-07-29 12:34:07+00:00
I've been using SQL from backend languages for years, and I totally disagree. Using raw SQL is the only way for me. It's much easier to develop, tune, and debug in a SQL IDE. There's no need to translate back and forth between SQL and the language-specific DSL. With SQLx, I get all the type safety I really need.

Dynamically constructing queries is awkward, but most of mine ha very limited dynamic variation.
by iLoveOncall | 2025-07-29 12:34:19+00:00
The reality is the vast majority of users will just not submit their ID and the large companies will lose most of their UK traffic.

There was a study by Amazon [1] that showed that every 100ms of extra load time of a page cost 1% of revenue. How much revenue do you think adding an ID verification that takes 10 minutes to complete cost???

You think PornHub loves this law???

[1] https://www.conductor.com/academy/page-speed-resources/faq/a...
by bartblast | 2025-07-29 12:34:38+00:00
Wasmex is an interesting project, but there's an important distinction to clarify: Wasmex isn't actually a compiler that would transpile Elixir to WASM. Instead, it's a bridge that allows you to call existing WASM modules from Elixir code running on the server/BEAM VM.

Even if we had a hypothetical Elixir-to-WASM compiler, I believe transpiling to JavaScript offers several advantages for Hologram's use case:

- Bundle size: JavaScript bundles are much smaller since we only transpile the code that actually runs on the client, rather than shipping an entire runtime.

- DOM access: WASM doesn't have direct DOM access - it still needs to go through JavaScript APIs. This creates an additional communication layer and overhead for every DOM operation, which is frequent in UI frameworks.

- Communication overhead: The boundary between WASM and JavaScript has performance costs for frequent data exchange, which would impact things like event handling and state updates.

- Debugging experience: The transpiled JavaScript code remains readable and debuggable with familiar browser dev tools, making development much more pleasant.

- Selective transpilation: We can leverage high-level JavaScript functions and browser APIs directly instead of having to transpile every single operation from scratch.

- Performance: For Hologram's use case (UI logic, state management, event handling), the performance difference between JS and WASM is negligible. WASM really shines for CPU-intensive computations, which isn't our primary bottleneck.

The JavaScript approach gives us the right balance of performance, bundle size, and developer experience for a client-side UI framework.
by ramchip | 2025-07-29 12:34:55+00:00
The way Erlang does it is to use buckets so it looks like a single queue to the user code but really is more like multiple queues behind the scene. Scales extremely well. It's certainly not "just moving a pointer to a piece of shared memory" though...

https://www.erlang.org/blog/parallel-signal-sending-optimiza...
by kibwen | 2025-07-29 12:35:11+00:00
> Just as the developer who refused to adopt version control, IDEs, or Stack Overflow eventually became unemployable

This passage forces me to concluse that this comment is sarcasm. Neither IDEs nor the use of Stack Overflow is anywhere near a requirement for being a professional programmer. Surely you realize there are people out there who are happily employed while still using stock Vim or Emacs? Surely you realize there are people out there who solve problems simply by reading the docs and thinking deeply rather than asking SO?

The usage of LLM assistance will not become a requirement for employment, at least not for talented programmers. A company gating on the use of LLMs would be preposterously self-defeating.
by timost | 2025-07-29 12:35:22+00:00
There is this french website[0] which (among other things) analyses TdF performances over the years.

They compute power metrics based on climbing times in the mountain stages. The trend these last few years is quite worrying, reaching and going above peak doping-era performances [1].

The website is maintained by a former pro-level coach of the festina era.

[0] https://www.cyclisme-dopage.com/

[1] https://www.cyclisme-dopage.com/actualite/2025-07-26-cyclism...
by robeastham | 2025-07-29 12:36:13+00:00
This is fricking awesome. It's the coolest thing I've seen on HN for a while. Love it!

N.B. I visit HN multiple times per day. I've been a member of HN since 2010. My last comment was made in 2018. I logged in for the first time in years just to make this comment :-)
by rlupi | 2025-07-29 12:36:49+00:00
That's an interesting question. I don't know the answer.

It reminds me of a video by Yuval Noah Harari https://youtu.be/1rtS2OEV6bM?si=WNuCtsr92O-06jyQ where he argues that, from an ethical and political point of view, the basis of consciousness is the potential for suffering. Only the conscious can truly suffer.

Only the conscious can be punished. So, answering your question implies defining non-human agents that are conscious. That's not just non-human technological agents, animals qualify too as non-human agents.
by littlestymaar | 2025-07-29 12:37:15+00:00
> and remember: the top performers getting busted would probably mean the end of pro cycling as we know it for decades

You mean, like when Lance Armstrong got caught?

It was less than 20 years ago and yet you still argue like it didn't happen. Undetected doping was indeed possible (he did it for years) and no it didn't destroy pro cycling…
by theshrike79 | 2025-07-29 12:37:24+00:00
There's still work for artisanal woodworkers, doing everything by hand with the utmost care[0]

But that doesn't change the fact that the VAST majority of people are just fine with mass-produced furniture

I think this is the difference that's going to happen to software.

There's the one doing everything in bare vim with zero assist, just rawdogging function names and library methods from rote memory.

And then there's the rest who use all the tools at their disposal to solve problems. Is the work super clean, efficient and fully hand-crafted? Nope. Does it solve the problem? Yes it does, and fast.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/@ISHITANIFURNITURE
by kragen | 2025-07-29 12:37:44+00:00
Interesting and thought-provoking.

I don't think Rust is mainstream enough to be what they were attacking, especially 6 years ago or whenever Blow gave that talk. Unity certainly is, and they seem to reserve special scorn for it, maybe because it's so popular.

I don't agree that it's easy to make Mario hit a stable 60fps in any popular gaming environment. In the browser, it's easy to hit 60fps but impossible to keep it stable. And, as you concede, it can be challenging with Unity (or Godot).

Latency is a separate issue from fps, even when the fps isn't janky. With your PC plugged into a Smart TV, you can hit a stable 60fps, but typically with two or even three frames of lag from the TV, which is a very noticeable downgrade from a 6510-based Nintendo connected to an RF modulator and a CRT TV from 01979. And often the OS adds more! Three 60fps frames of lag is 50ms. The one-way network latency from New York to London is 35ms. Most players won't be able to identify that there's a problem, but they will reliably perform more poorly and enjoy the game less.

I'm skeptical of the Muratori crowd's implicit assertion that this kind of responsivity is inherently something that requires the game developer to understand the whole technology stack from SPIR-V up. I think that's a design problem in current operating systems, where it definitely does exist. And, while I'm skeptical of their dismissal of the importance of bugs, I'm confident that they're representing their own needs as accurately as they can.

But probably it's better for you to engage with their explanation of their own ideas than with mine. I might be misunderstanding them, and I don't have their experience.
by jennyholzer | 2025-07-29 12:37:51+00:00
> explain some tricky math in a paper I am reading

To me this seems to be the single most valuable use case of newer "AI tools"

> generating a Bash shell script quickly

I do this very often, and to me this seems to me the second most valuable use case of newer "AI tools"

> The value of AI is in improving ourselves

I agree completely.

> help brain storm

This strikes me as very concerning. In my experience, AI brainstorming ideas are exceptionally dull and uninspired. People who have shared ideas from AI brainstorming sessions with me have OVERWHELMINGLY come across as AI brained dullards who are unable to think for themselves.

What I'm trying to say is that Chat GPT and similar tools are much better suited for interacting with closed systems with strict logical constraints, than they are for idea generation or writing in a natural language.
by qwertox | 2025-07-29 12:37:54+00:00
I've believed for a long time that if they want to do this shit, they should do it first on the civil servants, politicians included. They, their spouses and their kids. For a timespan of 5 years.

And allow any citizen to try to hack their 100% secure backdoors without any fear of consequences.

It after 5 years everything is OK, that is, no data has been leaked, no information access abuse has occurred, the test group has not been affected psychologically in a negative way by this potential surveillance, they should present the results, including how many criminals and deranged people have been caught and imprisoned through the direct help of this technology.

Then set it up for a direct vote by the people.

Else they should just fuck off with their ideas.
by lysace | 2025-07-29 12:38:10+00:00
Even low-grade encryption was actually forbidden in France for a while in the mid 90s. I remember snickering about the whole thing back then, in a much smaller but also quite similar forum.

https://www.theregister.com/1999/01/15/france_to_end_severe_...

> Until 1996 anyone wishing to encrypt any document had to first receive an official sanction or risk fines from F6000 to F500,000 ($1000 to $89,300) and a 2-6 month jail term. Right now, apart from a handful of exemptions, any unauthorised use of encryption software is illegal.

These two former empires seem/seemed to have an over-inflated sense of importance and ability to control the world.
by dreamer7 | 2025-07-29 12:38:37+00:00
This is consistent with my own experiments with local LLM models. I've also been experimenting with chaining the model to flagship LLMs when it is incapable of achieving the outcome using Langgraph.

It is good as a learning tool or to use in applications where latency is not a concern but there can be a high number of requests. But, not yet fast enough to do auto-complete on an IDE for instance.
We built a simple text-to-image AI. Curious what HN thinks about it
by ahmedelalaoui | 2025-07-29 12:38:44+00:00
We recently launched [Lartist.ai] — a tool that turns plain text into artwork instantly. But instead of dropping a link, I’d love to hear:

What do HN folks think of AI art tools right now?

Is realism or creative control more important?

Happy to answer questions or go into the tech behind it if anyone’s curious.
by ubermonkey | 2025-07-29 12:38:51+00:00
A surprising number of the "classic steel" bikes I see on the enthusiast rides I go on were LeMonds. They're beloved, even in a world of advanced carbon, electronic-shifting marvels.

I expect PART of that is the fact that where I lived until recently was pancake flat, so there was no real disadvantage to staying with rim braking, but still.
by aeon_ai | 2025-07-29 12:39:32+00:00
Two masters go head to head. One uses AI tools (wisely - after all, they're a master!), the other refuses to. Which one wins?

To your second point -- With as much capital as is going into data center buildout, the increasing availability of local coding LLMs that near the performance of today's closed models, and the continued innovation on both open/closed models, you're going to hang your hat on the possibility that LLMs are going to be only available in a 'limited or degraded' state?

I think we simply don't have similar mental models for predicting the future.
by spiffytech | 2025-07-29 12:39:36+00:00
I always loved the idea of the Dotsies glyph system for coffeeshop mode. It's a font that converts the English alphabet into a compact dot notation.

Never got around to becoming fluent in it, but I'd like to someday.

https://web.archive.org/web/20240418032751/https://dotsies.o...
Ask HN: How will the OSA affect small Mastodon instances?
by Digit-Al | 2025-07-29 12:40:13+00:00
I am not currently a user of Mastodon, but I have some interest in the project. I was looking at some stuff that seemed to indicate to me that the OSA could make it difficult to self host Mastodon without providing age verification. I was then reading the provisions and realsised that it didn't really affect you unless you have at least 3 million monthly users, so in theory would not affect self hosters with only a few users. But then I thought that if you are federated with a very large instance then your users could potentially be able to interact with enough users to fall under the provisions.

This could potentially be a grey area that could expose self hosters to considerable risk if they are not careful.

I wonder if there any UK based Mastodon hosters out there who are considering this. Are you considering shutting down to prevent any liability? Could this be the "death" of Mastodon hosting in the UK?
Show HN: Open Source AI Code Review Agent for Teams
by dearilos | 2025-07-29 12:40:14+00:00
Hey HN! Ilya and Nikita here. We're working on wispbit - the open source AI code review agent for teams - https://github.com/wispbit-ai/wispbit.

We made wispbit because we previously struggled in big codebases and teams that grew quickly. Keeping codebase standards alive was frustrating, and investing in static internal tooling was too hard. We would sit in post-mortem meetings and expect engineers to remember every single booby trap.

wispbit fixes this by enforcing your codebase rules, and raises a violation if a rule is broken. It also runs anywhere (Github actions, CLI, Claude code). You can come up with rules on your own, or use our free rules repository https://wispbit.com/rules.

Some ways we and other engineers use wispbit:

- Enforce database migration or schema patterns - consistent table names, columns, checking for redundant indexes.

- Take a look at your most recent postmortem doc and turn it into a rule.

- Enforce standards for commenting, test writing patterns, and component usage to keep your team accountable.

- Take something you frequently check for and turn it into a rule.

Why wispbit over other tools? We found that existing code review tools are too random and noisy - a level that is unacceptable in big codebases and teams. wispbit keeps it simple by reviewing only what you ask for.

We're also working on a cloud version over at https://wispbit.com, currently in early access. It focuses on creating and maintaining rules for you based on codebase activity. In the long term, we want to fix tribal knowledge and reduce the burden on teams having to remember every single detail within complex stacks.

If this resonates with you, or you built your own code review tool internally - give it a spin!
by ItCouldBeWorse | 2025-07-29 12:40:27+00:00
Introducing - the bhurka-bitcoin. Should you try to buy sexual services, like OF-subscriptions or similar filth, the coin will automatically buy a bhurka for all content, hiding those models behind decency textile filters. Halal and wholesome! Bhurka-bitcoin! Now with the first bodymounted organic cellphonestand for loyal customers!
by sjsdaiuasgdia | 2025-07-29 12:40:40+00:00
Exactly. "Unlimited" is practically guaranteed to become a lie for any service that provides some amount of utility and lasts long enough to accumulate a significant number of users.

Nothing in our world is truly unlimited. Digital services and assets have different costs than their physical counterparts, but that just means different limits, not a lack of them. Electrical supply, compute capacity, and storage are all physical things with real world limits to how much they can do.

These realities eventually manifest when someone tries to build an "unlimited" service on top of limited components, similar to how you can't build a service with 99.999% reliability when it has a critical piece that can only get to 99.9%.