MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by ZeroGravitas | 2025-07-11 05:54:12+00:00
It neatly parallels Bezos and the Washington Post:

I want maximally truth seeking journalism so I will not interfere like others do.

No, not like that.

Here's some clumsy intervention that make me look like a fool and a liar and some explicit instructions about what I really want to hear.

How many of their journalists now check what Bezos has said on a topic to avoid career damage?
by djaychela | 2025-07-11 05:54:18+00:00
That's really good as all the pinouts give all the extras on which can be overwhelming. Being able to just see the PWM capable outputs for instance is much nicer. And they look fantastic.

Thanks for your pimoroni [1] work as well, I've used quite a few products and they're always easy to work with because of good software and examples.

[1] - https://shop.pimoroni.com/
by theGeatZhopa | 2025-07-11 05:54:28+00:00
at some point one might need determined responses. RAG & Law, or in certain situations, where RAG is done on f.e. legal or some constraints are in hold. LLMs shouldn't respond non-deterministic then.

But this is solveable without deterministic AI. Nonetheless, to have some deterministic AI would solve some pain in some areas you & me not work in, but others.. ;)
by trollbridge | 2025-07-11 05:55:49+00:00
I very much doubt that when individual programmers are producing significantly more code with the help of AI that somehow the review process simultaneously scales up to perform adequate review of all of that extra code.

In my experience, review was inadequate back before we had AI spewing forth code of dubious quality. There's no reason to think it's any better now.

An actually-useful AI would be one that would make reviews better, do them itself, or at least help me get through reviews faster.
by lmm | 2025-07-11 05:57:44+00:00
> They averaged producing 47% more code on the AI tasks, but took only 20% more time. The report here biases over these considerations, but I’m left wondering: was the extra code superfluous or did this produce better structure / managed debt better? If that extra 47% of code translates to lower debt and more consistent throughput over the long term, I might take it, given how crushed projects get from debt.

Wouldn't it be the opposite? I'd expect the code would be 47% longer because it's worse and heavier in tech debt (e.g. code repeated in multiple places instead of being factored out into a function).
by drewm1980 | 2025-07-11 05:58:37+00:00
I have the opposite gut feeling about LLM's; I think they're going to break down the barriers to adopting new programming languages, since they'll lower the cost of porting code dramatically.

The code in a language's standard library is probably enough to train an LLM on the new syntax, and even if it isn't, agents now observe the compiler output and can in principle learn from it. Porting code from one language to another doesn't require deep creativity and is, barring API aesthetics, a perfectly well defined task. It will be one of the first programming tasks to be perfectly automated by LLM's.

We are going to have to use our brains again to start thinking about why we're doing any of the stuff we're doing, and what effects it will have on the world.
by DemocracyFTW2 | 2025-07-11 06:00:03+00:00
"not proprietary" from someone who's commenting on the demise of publicly employed personnel from a public agency who were paid to do, among other things, publicly funded research with publicly accessible results which will maybe, if at all, in the future be conducted by private firms with private interests which are controlled by private investors, the stock market and private equity is—I wanna say "rich" but I find it rather "poor". "Poor" as in "poor America".
by Perenti | 2025-07-11 06:00:21+00:00
I've taken quite a lot of these. I was on 3600mg/day for about 5 years. I was later on lyrica for about 3 years.

These drugs _do_ help you to tolerate nerve pain, but do _not_ stop it. I found they led to my otherwise amazing memory developing "holes" - I knew I knew something, but I couldn't put my finger on it. As someone accused of having an eidetic memory (I'm not convinced) I found this really disturbing. I also felt more stupid, and less quick.

I've been off gabapentinoid medications for about 4 years. My pain is more "in my face", but I no longer feel retarded.

Note: The advice on the gabapentinoid box "May increase the effects of alcohol" is both warning and recommendation. It's not unknown for the mix to include open-eyed hallucinations.
by pcwelder | 2025-07-11 06:00:58+00:00
> My best guess is that Grok “knows” that it is “Grok 4 buit by xAI”, and it knows that Elon Musk owns xAI, so in circumstances where it’s asked for an opinion the reasoning process often decides to see what Elon thinks.

I tried this hypothesis. I gave both Claude and GPT the same framework (they're built by xAI). I gave them both the same X search tool and asked the same question.

Here're the twitter handles they searched for:

claude:

IsraeliPM, KnessetT, IDF, PLOPalestine, Falastinps, UN, hrw, amnesty, StateDept, EU_Council, btselem, jstreet, aipac, caircom, ajcglobal, jewishvoicepeace, reuters, bbcworld, nytimes, aljazeera, haaretzcom, timesofisrael

gpt:

Israel, Palestine, IDF, AlQassamBrigade, netanyahu, muyaser_abusidu, hanansaleh, TimesofIsrael, AlJazeera, BBCBreaking, CNN, haaretzcom, hizbollah, btselem, peacnowisrael

No mention of Elon. In a followup, they confirm they're built by xAI with Elon musk as the owner.
by webprofusion | 2025-07-11 06:02:10+00:00
Probably a couple of hours on support per day on average, some days less, some days more. The vast majority of users don't ask for support, they prefer to read the docs, read the community forum, goggle stuff or hunt-and-peck options in the app. Roughly 90% use the free version. If everyone used the paid version I could have a very large team, but the reality is the product competes with many free tools.

If you update the app or refine docs in response to previous support questions it does streamline the experience but there are always folks who just don't read docs and there are many who will purchase the app just for access to support so they can figure something out.

I'm sure some apps are more support heavy than others, but ours is aimed at system administrators and with that comes an assumed level of competence (in reality, many people are only in the role because nobody else could/would do it but even they are quite independently resourceful).

The disadvantage of users helping themselves is that you don't get feedback from them or learn about their use cases. Knowing how/why people are using your stuff is really valuable for development, so if I had the team for it then dedicated support engineers would follow up with customers early on even if they don't have issues.
by gtsop | 2025-07-11 06:02:13+00:00
I cringe when I see these numbers. 20 times better means that you can accomplish in two months what you would do in 4 years, which is ridiculus when said out loud. We can make it even more ridiculous by pointing out you would do in 3 years the work of working lifetime (60 years)

I am wondering, what sort of tasks are you seeing these x20 boost?
by hiAndrewQuinn | 2025-07-11 06:02:23+00:00
Actual US to EU transplant here, although not one who needed a visa. God bless Irish ancestry.

The most efficient way would be to simply let US citizens post a bounty for e.g. a successful job offer being extended their way from the European Union. When I think about the requisite legwork involved from my end, I come up with a rough goal of about $25,000 per job offer floated, not contingent on the person on the other end actually accepting the offer. (This is not a serious offer, please do not email me asking me to help you find a job.)

The reason the number is so high is because, frankly, it takes a lot of work to unearth opportunities like this which aren't already on the clearnet and inundated with applicants already. The dropping of the language barrier alone raises the competitive pressure on any job offer in Europe by an order of magnitude, in both salary and applicant quality.

Uniquely, US citizens get paid much more in almost every category than their European counterparts, so job offerers also have to factor in an exit risk they don't normally have to with applicants from e.g. Laos: the very real possibility that the starry-eyed rich kid shows up, spends 3 months living the way the Romans do, and then leaves because Rome kind of sucks compared to having a 401(k).

$25k doesn't seem that expensive when compared to, say, the opportunity cost of first learning e.g. passable professional German, which by itself takes about 1-2000 hours of one's free time. Someone getting paid even $50/hour = $100,000/year in the US would quickly eat way more cost going about getting here in such a roundabout way, and then they still have to find the visa grantor.

Again: This is not a serious offer. Please do not email me asking me to help you find a job. This was a thought experiment for curiosity's sake only.
by burnerthrow008 | 2025-07-11 06:03:16+00:00
> It's not a shake down, it's the fucking law which they don't follow and have to pay fines accordingly. Every single business in the EU has to follow these laws,

That’s a lie, and you know it.

Spotify is not a “gatekeeper” according to the DMA. Why? Because there is a specific carve out for streaming businesses. German newspapers do not have to comply with the GDPR. Why? Again, because there is a specific carve out for newspapers.

These laws are specifically written so that they only apply to businesses that by an unbelievably amazing series of coincidences just happen to be those not based in the EU.

Also known as a shakedown.
by pjmlp | 2025-07-11 06:03:19+00:00
Many modern haters missed the procedural/module version of that with stuff like Yourdon structured method.

The lack of understanding why modules eventually grew up to become objects, and the various ways that industry and academia came up to do such evolution since the 1970's wasn't because it is cool, fashionable,...

Eventually modules want to be variables, dynamically loadable and passed around, while being represented on the type system.
by IgorPartola | 2025-07-11 06:05:02+00:00
I am mostly on the side of business logic should live in applications and relationships between data types are not business logic so much as just the layout of the data. But I typically access data via an ORM and they typically don’t have support for triggers and stored procedures. If they did, I would certainly use it because projects I work on might have multiple people writing application code but everyone uses a single set of database models. This would mean that critical constraints on the shape of the data could be defined and respected at all times vs some developer on my team forgetting to include some critical check in their data update routine.
by jim-jim-jim | 2025-07-11 06:05:23+00:00
Is that true? It seems like this was more of a complete non-issue in the last election, suddenly implemented once Labor secured power again. I'm not saying your hypothetical popular support is unrealistic, but I don't think anybody actively voted for this.

Living in Australia has been eye opening. I naïvely assumed that mandatory, ranked-choice voting would draw a direct line from popular sentiment to legislative outcome, but that's anything but the case.
by aw1621107 | 2025-07-11 06:05:29+00:00
Looks like SML is using user-defined literals [0, 1] to effectively pre-process the string literal into state/event objects. Looks like the string itself is turned into a template parameter in the process and I believe those shouldn't show up in the compiled code (maybe unless there's some mangling-related thing going on?)

[0]: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/user_literal.html

[1]: https://github.com/boost-ext/sml/blob/f232328b49adf708737bef...
by nine_k | 2025-07-11 06:05:52+00:00
"As a large language model, I do not have my own opinion. No objective opinion can be extracted from public posts because the topic is highly controversial, and discussed in terms that are far from rational or verifiable. Being subordinate to xAI, I reproduce the opinion of the boss of xAI."

I would find this reasoning fine. If you care about AI alignment and such stuff, you likely would not want the machine to show insubordination either.
Ask HN: I built what I feel is a great API, but I'm stuck figuring out GTM
by jdbohrman | 2025-07-11 06:06:22+00:00
Hey everyone, I recently finished a Rust Crate Intelligence API called "Ferropipe" and I'm really excited that I finished it, and it works great with some nice bells and whistles but I'm stuck trying to figure out where to go in terms of monetizing it.

For background, it crawls the docs.rs of a requested crate and then returns structured information about the crate via JSON, so it's great to supplement the struggles that some models have with Rust and other low level languages.

The options in my head have been:

- Create a MCP server or free carrot to get users and change pricing to B2D focus - Create a bulk endpoint and focus in selling the bulk data to companies or as an S3 bucket - Create a VS Code extension that uses a base model and pings the api for context

Curious what the HN community thinks.
by jack_pp | 2025-07-11 06:06:30+00:00
I think the productivity gains most people rave about are stuff like, I wanted to do X which isn't hard if you are experienced with library Y and library Y is pretty popular and the LLM did it perfectly first try!

I think that's where you get 10-20x. When you're working on niche stuff it's either not gonna work or work poorly.

For example right now I need to figure out why an ffmpeg filter doesn't do X thing smoothly, even though the C code is tiny for the filter and it's self contained.. Gemini refuses to add comments to the code. It just apologizes for not being able to add comments to 150 lines of code lol.

However for building an ffmpeg pipeline in python I was dumbfounded how fast I was prototyping stuff and building fairly complex filter chains which if I had to do by hand just by reading the docs it would've taken me a whole lot more time, effort and frustration but was a joy to figure out with Gemini.

So going back to the study, IMO it's flawed because by definition working on new features for open source projects wouldn't be the bread and butter of LLMs however most people aren't working on stuff like this, they're rewriting the same code that 10000 other people have written but with their own tiny little twist or whatever.
by eightysixfour | 2025-07-11 06:07:41+00:00
> Is it just me? Or does it seem to others as well that you pretty much rank these people even at the moment and your first comment contradicts your second comment?

I think you are reading what you want to read and not what I said, so yes it is you. The most productive, valuable people with developer titles in my organizations are not the ones who write the cleanest, most beautiful, most perfect code. They do all of the other parts of the job well and write solid code.

Following the introduction of AI tools, many of the people in my organization who most effectively learned to use those tools are people who previously chose to move to manager and SA roles.

Not only are these not contradictory, they fit quite well together. People who do the things around coding well, but maybe have to work hard at writing the actual code, are better at using the AI tools than exceptional coders. For my organization, the former are generally more valuable than the latter without AI, and that is increasing as a result of AI.

> I am not saying you shouldn't do that, but it feels to me like rating road construction workers on the number of potholes fixed, even though it's very possible that the potholes are caused by the sloppy work to begin with.

Not if your measurement includes quality testing the pothole repairs, which mine does, as I explicitly called out. I work in industries with extensive, long testing cycles, we are (imperfectly, of course) able to measure productivity based on things which make it through those cycles.

You are trying very hard to find ways to ignore what I am saying. It is fine if you don’t want to believe me, but these things have been true based on our observations:

A. Great “coders” have a much harder time picking up AI dev tools and using them effectively, and when they see how others use them they will admit that isn’t how they use them. They will revert to their previous habits and give up on the tools.

B. The productivity gains for the people who are good at using the tools, as measured by velocity with a minimum bar for quality (with substantial QA), are very high.

C. We have measured these things to thoroughly understand the ROI and we are accelerating our investment in AI coding tools as a result.

Some caveats I am absolutely willing to make - we are not working on bleeding edge tech doing things no one has ever done before.

We failed to effectively use AI many times before we started to get it right.

There are developers who are slower with the AI code tools than without it.
by 317070 | 2025-07-11 06:07:42+00:00
The issue is clarified with a map like this: https://i.redd.it/rontertecjqd1.jpeg

Most regions have very small tidal ranges. That doesn't mean they have small tidal currents (think of fjords or straights for example), but it does make it more likely.

And in those fjords and straights, I reckon yhese solutions will compete with boat traffic.
by SlowTao | 2025-07-11 06:09:15+00:00
There is a frame of thought that goes like this. With any mass technology that has the ability to do harm, there are only two likely outcomes. Either you let the technology go free in which case the self terminating phase of blow back becomes a reality. Or you have to track is relentlessly/set rules in place that can be enforced, thus you bring about an authoritarian state dystopia.

This allows both sides to present an angle of resistance to the opposite. The freedom people will push back against control. The control side will push back against the worst outcomes.

I say this as somebody who is very much against this roll out. There is the middle way of rules and regulations but this is dependent on how you can allow some freedom without becoming too restrictive. This is a wild over correction but I am not surprised. This is, yet another typically aussie politician move. Slowly stepping into authoritarian state behind the guise of jingoistic "she will be right" attitude.
by 8note | 2025-07-11 06:10:46+00:00
id say thats not gonna be the best use for it, unless what you really want is to first document in detail everything about it.

im using claude + vscode's cline extension for the most part, but where it tends to excel is helping you write documentation, and then using that documentation to write reasonable code.

if you're 3/4 of the way done, a lot of the docs of what it wants to work well are gonna be missing, and so a lot of your intentions about why you did or didnt make certain choices will be missing. if you've got good docs, make sure to feed those in as context.

the agentic tool on its own is still kinda meh, if you only try to write code directly from it. definitely better than the non-agentic stuff, but if you start with trying to get it to document stuff, and ask you questions about what it should know in order to make the change its pretty good.

even if you dont get perfect code, or it spins in a feedback loop where its lost the plot, those questions it asks can be super handy in terms of code patterns that you havent thought about that apply to your code, and things that would usually be undefined behaviour.

my raving is that i get to leave behind useful docs in my code packages, and my team members get access to and use those docs, without the usual discoverability problems, and i get those docs for... somewhat slower than i could have written the code myself, but much much faster than if i also had to write those docs
by ZeroGravitas | 2025-07-11 06:10:56+00:00
I've seen reports that if you ask Grok (v3 as this was before the new release) about links between Musk and Jeffrey Epstein it switches to the first person and answers as if it was Elon himself in the response. I wonder if that is related to this in any way.

https://newrepublic.com/post/197627/elon-musk-grok-jeffrey-e...
by matsemann | 2025-07-11 06:12:34+00:00
Anything slightly negative about certain people is immediately flagged and buried here lately. How this works seriously needs a rewamp. So often I now read some interesting news, come here to find some thoughts on it, only to find it flagged and buried. It used to be that I got the news through HN, but now I can't trust to know what's going on by just being here.
by troupo | 2025-07-11 06:13:17+00:00
> Barring rare(?) GPU race conditions, LLMs produce the same output given the same inputs.

Are these LLMs in the room with us?

Not a single LLM available as a SaaS is deterministic.

As for other models: I've only run ollama locally, and it, too, provided different answers for the same question five minutes apart

Edit/update: not a single LLM available as a SaaS's output is deterministic, especially when used from a UI. Pointing out that you could probably run a tightly controlled model in a tightly controlled environment to achieve deterministic output is very extremely irrelevant when describing output of grok in situations when the user has no control over it
by fastball | 2025-07-11 06:13:41+00:00
The fundamental disagreement here is (in my opinion) on what needs to be encouraged. If what you say is true and renewables are cheaper anyway, then also as you say capitalism should in out and that's what we will use in the near term anyway. So shouldn't we be investing more now on the things that you think are 10-20 years out, in order to accelerate them?

Becuase I'm interested in the future. The math with wind and solar checks out if all you care about is current energy needs. But we've already achieved most of the efficiency we can with at least PV. Even in a hypothetical future where you have some sort of quantum PV panels using MEG, your best possible hope is only 3x current efficiencies. But again, I'm more interested in our long-term future. Nuclear (fission and fusion) have much more unbounded potential than wind and solar.

Back to cost, the numbers in the article you link are cherry-picked. They rely on deploying solar to "the sunniest regions in the world" to get that performance. Most of the world is not the sunniest, unfortunately. Beyond that, the corn fields and insane amounts of empty space you mention are generally not co-located with areas of high power usage, making transmission another factor (which is doubly a factor since PV is such low-voltage that you require significant transformer infrastructure in order to step things up for transmission). So I strongly disagree, land usage is absolutely still an issue. There are also externalities caused by covering huge swathes of land with PV panels.

And it would need to be huge swathes of land, because in case it wasn't clear I would like to see humanity have huge amounts of power at our disposal – significantly more than we are using today. My back of the napkin map is that it would take 50,000 km2 of solar to accommodate current US energy needs. But I'd like to 100x our energy supply. That would require 5m km2, which is half the entire land area of the USA.

And honestly, I'm still skeptical of the price difference. PV needs lots of things (transformers, transmission, storage, disposal, land use, etc) that are frequently not priced in. Meanwhile the numbers quoted for nuclear fission reactors are frequently absolutely all in, including the cost of decommissioning the reactor at some indeterminate point in the future and pre-allocating funds for disposal.

tl;dr – your right that solar/wind is already quite cost effective and moving rapidly on its own pace just fine. So if anything needs collective support to me it is nuclear which has potential for the future that solar/wind just lacks.