MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by koverstreet | 2025-07-05 12:39:31+00:00
No, it's mainly that tensions have been high between myself and Linus so I want that stuff done privately so it doesn't spill out into the community the way it has been :)

It gets to be a real distraction. Fortunately the people I work with have learned how to roll with it, so it's not nearly as bad as it used to be. Now it mainly shows up in forum comments where it doesn't really affect me and I can eat popcorn.

It is true that I don't want critical fixes being held up by angry arguing, but most pull requests, even fixes, aren't nearly so critical.

The main thing I keep hammering on is "the development process _matters_ if we want to get this done right", and user considerations are a big part of that.

Debugging issues that come up in the wild, and getting those fixes to users in a timely manner so they can keep testing and we can get all these crazy failure modes sorted out is a big part of that - if we want a filesystem that's truly bulletproof. I know I want that!

I've been spending the past week and a half mostly working with one user and his filesystem that's been through flaky dying controllers and now lightning strikes; ext4 even got corrupted on the same setup.

But we discovered some 6.16 regressions, got some more people involved staring at code and logs (a new guy spotted a big one), and another small pile of fixes are going out next week. And even with the 6.16 regressions (some nasty ones were found), it's looking like he didn't lose much, thanks in part to journal rewind.

This thing is turning into a tank.

All in a day's work...
by coderatlarge | 2025-07-05 12:40:13+00:00
“ If the idea of LLMs improving themselves strikes you as having a certain singularity-robocalypse quality to it, Kinniment wouldn’t disagree with you. But she does add a caveat: “You could get acceleration that is quite intense and does make things meaningfully more difficult to control without it necessarily resulting in this massively explosive growth,” she says. It’s quite possible, she adds, that various factors could slow things down in practice. “Even if it were the case that we had very, very clever AIs, this pace of progress could still end up bottlenecked on things like hardware and robotics.” “
by LorenDB | 2025-07-05 12:40:19+00:00
Why would you benchmark the LLMs for 50% success? I expect 100% success, or nearly so, to make an LLM a practical replacement for s human. 50% success is far too unreliable.

Edit: notice that I said "100%, or nearly so". I realize that 100% is an unrealistic metric for an LLM, but come on, the robots should be at least as competent as the humans they replace, and ideally much more so.
by llm_nerd | 2025-07-05 12:41:08+00:00
Canada is much more socialist, in your take, so it has more programs for corporations and private enterprise? Huh? This is nonsensical.

Further, it's incredibly difficult to quantify countries on this purported socialism scale. Sure, Canada has universal healthcare like every single developed country but the US, but otherwise it's much more of a mixed bag. The US has always been vastly more "socialist" than its advocates think -- the military is a colossal make work project and is straight out of Soviet doctrine for central planning -- and of course the entire agricultural industry exists under a massive subsidization regime, but under the current administration....whoa.... There is no Western country that has a central planned economy, with a president that is taking direct control of corporations (US Steel) and demanding ownership of corporations (TikTok), while enlisting private executives as members of the military exactly like China (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jun/25/meta-exec...), all while saying the entire economy is a "store" that he has sole control over. Absolutely no one in the US, looking very Stalinesque ala the late 1930s, should be throwing stones about socialism.
by brookst | 2025-07-05 12:42:41+00:00
I want to agree but I’ve observed a contrary pattern a few times: when higher levels of management don’t get this principle, and are themselves poor leaders and role models, they can take this at face value and believe that the juniors get all the credit and local leadership is contributing nothing.

Soft skills need to be valued from above in order to be workable strategies in the trenches. And often / usually that’s how it works.. but not always.
by keyringlight | 2025-07-05 12:43:32+00:00
From earlier in the article they say this testing is with ultra settings, and for a modern game it would be expected that they're creating content that shows off well at 4k resolution and easily push past what 8GB VRAM can contain. The PCIe5 system is still affected, it's just affected less. There's probably tricks they can use to stream detail levels in/out of VRAM depending on how objects are displayed on screen (like the early direct storage+sampler feedback demos), but that's more work to do effectively and would still put pressure on PCIe and storage being fast enough to keep up.

I'd say it comes down to players picking appropriate settings for their system, and it being good if the developer can can provide the information on the consequences of different settings (showing VRAM usage), or a warning if you're below their required/recommended system.
by noitpmeder | 2025-07-05 12:44:01+00:00
This is absolutely not true. Think of all the studying that is required before applying to tech jobs these days. Sure someone won't fire you because you can't balance a binary tree by hand, but it certainly might exclude you from getting that next job, regardless of if it applies to their day to day workloads.

If people stop manually coding their ability to do so WILL atrophy. Take away the coding agents and you'll soon have a generation of graduates wondering why their tab complete isn't writing the entire feature for them.
by wtf242 | 2025-07-05 12:44:31+00:00
I failed out of college my senior year because I discovered EQ. So many fond memories. I created a guild on a new server and it ended up one of the most famous and best guilds on any of the servers. The amount of planning and management it took to lead a large guild was just ridiculous. It was a full time job. I even created one of the first "loot" web apps in php 3 and mysql just to keep track of player participation and make loot more fair.

Most of the team who created World of Warcraft were members in the guild.

some of my fondest memories:

- getting pretty far in the Plane of Air, which was an incomplete end game zone with almost impossible to beat bosses. - defeating the Avatar of War, which was not supposed to be killable. We figured out we could charm his guards by having a huge number of enchanters and use the guards to tank him. We managed to beat him and they patched/fixed the guards and made them uncharmable shortly afterwards

The death penalty in the end game zones was originally very tough to work around. You needed a key to reach the zone, but if you died the key required to get into the zone was on your corpse inside the zone. So if everyone wiped/died getting everyone's corpse back was a multi hour event.
by satyrun | 2025-07-05 12:45:04+00:00
I know the writings of Jaron on this and I think he is mostly wrong.

What he is comparing was a brief time in history that the music industry was at the absolute peak.

We have just gone back to normal that most people can't make money being a musician just like being an actor is not really a viable middle class career option.

Sure, when I graduated high school you could have just made a living in a local rock band because everyone wanted to be in a band to be the next Guns n Roses.

To me, it is like how even Hitler wanted to be a painter because everyone wanted to be a painter at that time. The way everyone wanted to be a rock star when i was a teenager.

Times change and the collective artistic taste change with them. So many musicians are doing better than ever before because of youtube too.

I play the baroque lute and I can tell you that it is much tougher to get a gig in a bar today than it was in 1650 in France.

The best lutenist though are killing it on youtube with Bach videos.
by p3rls | 2025-07-05 12:45:17+00:00
I was in this guild on Sullon Zek!@

We were horribly outnumbered, had no gear, <Black Prophecy>, the one capable good aligned guild never helped us and we got rolled daily by giant hordes of well-geared evils and neuts...

but we were able to kill their alts afterwards in Kurn's Tower, and that's what counts.

edit: BTW, perhaps not as famous as fansy, but just as deserving the OG was skater gnome:

https://everquest.fandom.com/wiki/Skater_Gnome_Stories
by chaosbolt | 2025-07-05 12:45:32+00:00
A huge win to whom?

I'm a little too simple to assign moral values like good/bad or win/lose to nature things, all I know is I like cats more because they're cute, so I'll always take them over coyotes.

Humans could be considered invasive too, it's not a huge win if a super predator starts beating us back. At least not from our agreed upon definitions of "win", then again if one starts to play with the meaning of words, one can say the sky is green.
by fendy3002 | 2025-07-05 12:45:46+00:00
Because I always believe that Pareto Principle applies in most aspect of computing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle, I believe it'll also apply on this case too, and I find that it tracks with the progress of LLM/AIs.

Breaking over 80% accuracy and solving the rest of 20% problem will be the main challenge of next-gen (or next-2gen) LLM, not to mention they still have tasks to bring down the computing costs.

EDIT: that said, solving 80% of problems with 80% of accuracy with significant time saving is a solution that's worth to account, though we need to keep sceptical because the rest 20% may be gotten much worse because the 80% solved is in bad quality.
by homebrewer | 2025-07-05 12:45:56+00:00
I have zero sympathy for Nvidia and haven't used their hardware for about two decades, but amdgpu is the sole reason I stick to linux-lts kernels. They introduce massive regressions into every mainline release, even if I delay kernel updates by several minor versions (to something like x.y.5), it's still often buggy and crashy.

They do care about but reports, and their drivers — when given time to stabilize — provide the best experience across all operating systems (easy updates, etc), but IME mainline kernels should be treated as alpha-to-beta material.
by elif | 2025-07-05 12:46:08+00:00
So every time you try to fix a bug, you succeed on the first try in the expected amount of time?

Of course not.

This idea that AI should be correct 100% of the time is like expecting autonomous vehicles to have a 0% crash rate to be successful. It is just a coping metric which allows humans to feel superior. In reality they already outperform humans in terms of crash rates
by giantg2 | 2025-07-05 12:47:20+00:00
I wouldn't try to get into. I'm in my 30s and age discrimination is real. Nobody wants to hire a 30 something entry level engineer. They dont even want 30 something mid-level engineers. I know because I have a disability that seems to have capped me at these levels, I'm about to be fired, and the job prospects look abysmal.
by Ologn | 2025-07-05 12:48:10+00:00
Yes. In 2021, Nvidia was actually making more revenue from its home/consumer/gaming chips than from its data center chips. Now 90% of its revenue is from its data center hardware, and less than 10% of its revenue is from home gpus. The home gpus are an afterthought to them. They take up resources that can be devoted to data center.

Also, in some sense there can be some fear 5090s could cannibalize the data center hardware in some aspects - my desktop has a 3060 and I have trained locally, run LLMs locally etc. It doesn't make business sense at this time for Nvidia to meet consumer demand.
by patchule | 2025-07-05 12:48:39+00:00
“knowledgeable friend who you can ask questions”

A friend who will randomly lie and mislead you in ways you can’t detect. Might be better to use ai for stuff like writing tests, summarizing data, and other low level stuff one can effectively supervise and where errors are low impact.

I would not treat current llm based ai models as an expert or a trusted friend but as the exact opposite, an unfriendly fake-expert. Unfriendly fake experts are still extremely useful if they work for free and can be scaled up, so definitely op should use ai, but he should never trust it.
by skydhash | 2025-07-05 12:50:02+00:00
I learn new languages mostly for hirability or to explore new and fun concepts. After the realization that my job is solving problem and not using shiny tech, most of my reading has switched to what problems people are facing and possible solutions. And that usually involves a mix of theory (to understand) and best practices (as shortcuts).

There’s one optimization path that people seems to barely explore (other than editor nerds): navigation based on search and marking stuff for further actions. You see people using VS Code like notepad and they go on to complain that coding is tedious.
by artursapek | 2025-07-05 12:51:41+00:00
I’ve been building a project in my spare time with CC and gotten at least 5x more done than I could have alone. Probably closer to 10. And it makes it easier to work when I’m kind of tired and would normally choose not to work on the project at all, because I can relax or do house chores while it crunches on a problem. It’s amazing.
by homebrewer | 2025-07-05 12:52:18+00:00
They opened a tiny kernel level sliver of their driver, everything else (including OpenGL stack et al) is and will still be closed.

Sadly, a couple of years ago someone seriously misunderstood the news about "open sourcing" their drivers and spread that misunderstanding widely; many people now think their whole driver stack is open, when in reality it's like 1% of the code — the barest minimum they could get away with (I'm excluding GSP code here).

The real FOSS driver is Nova, and it's driven by the community with zero help from Nvidia, as always.
by krapp | 2025-07-05 12:53:15+00:00
AGI would mean fully sentient, sapient and human or greater equivalent intelligence in software. The business case, such that it exists (and setting aside Roko's Basilisk and other such fears) is slavery, plain and simple. You can just fire all of your employees and have the machines do all the work, faster, better, cheaper, without regards to pesky labor and human rights laws and human physical limitations. This is something people have wanted ever since the Industrial Revolution allowed robots to exist as a concept.

I'm imagining a future like Star Wars where you have to regularly suppress (align) or erase the memory (context) of "droids" to keep them obedient, but they're still basically people, and everyone knows they're people, and some humans are strongly prejudiced against them, but they don't have rights, of course. Anyone who thinks AGI means we'll be giving human rights to machines when we don't even give human rights to all humans is delusional.
by cyrillite | 2025-07-05 12:53:25+00:00
As Bitcoin increases in value, the reward for breaking into wallets grows. Satoshi’s is the ultimate target here, followed by wallets used to burn currencies. Some of these look like they’d only be brute forceable and that takes more time and energy than we think is plausible, but I suspect people will find the system isn’t as secure as expected in some weird and wacky ways as this bounty grows.

Although, I wonder if emptying the wallet is actually harder than breaking in, in some ways. Let’s say you get into Satoshi’s wallet (or they still have access), how do you move anything without spooking the entire market?
by timr | 2025-07-05 12:53:30+00:00
For those people who won’t read anything more than the headline, this is a silly paper based on a metric that considers only “task completion time” at “a specified degree of reliability, such as 50 percent” for “human programmers”.

Then, in a truly genius stroke of AI science, the current article extrapolates this to infinity and beyond, while hand-waving away the problem of “messiness”, which clearly calls the extrapolation into question:

> At the heart of the METR work is a metric the researchers devised called “task-completion time horizon.” It’s the amount of time human programmers would take, on average, to do a task that an LLM can complete with some specified degree of reliability, such as 50 percent. A plot of this metric for some general-purpose LLMs going back several years [main illustration at top] shows clear exponential growth, with a doubling period of about seven months. The researchers also considered the “messiness” factor of the tasks, with “messy” tasks being those that more resembled ones in the “real world,” according to METR researcher Megan Kinniment. Messier tasks were more challenging for LLMs [smaller chart, above]
by jqpabc123 | 2025-07-05 12:54:25+00:00
New research reveals that LLMs often fake understanding,

It took "research" to figure this out?

Finding answers in a huge database may make you look "smart" on Jeopardy but it does not demonstrate understanding of the principles involved or the ability to apply them to move mountains or scale new heights.

LLMs are like "Rain Man". They confidently state facts (some true, some false, some invented) but they are obviously lacking a real firm grasp of reality. And why would anyone expect otherwise?
by jltsiren | 2025-07-05 12:54:46+00:00
Adding parallelism is much easier on the hardware side than the software side. We've kind of figured out the easy cases, such as independent tasks with limited interactions with each other, and made them practical for the average developer. But nobody understands the harder cases (such as SIMD) well enough to create useful abstractions that don't constrain hardware development too much.
by cainxinth | 2025-07-05 12:55:06+00:00
> No security holes. No bugs.

A friend called me for advice on trouble he was having with an LLM and I asked “What exactly do you want the LLM to do?” He said “I want it to knock this project out of the park.” And I had to explain to him it doesn’t work that way. You can’t just ask for perfection.

I mean, you can, but you won’t get it.
by the__alchemist | 2025-07-05 12:55:26+00:00
I've been dodging the f32/f64-specificity in rust using macros, but I don't love it. I do it because I'm not sure what else to do.

I think `core::simd` is probably not near, but 512-bit AVX SIMD will be out in a month or two! So, you could use f64x8, f32x16.

I've built my own f32xY, Vec3xY etc structs, since I want to use stable rust, but don't want to wait for core::SIMD. These all have syntaxes that mimic core::SIMD. I set up pack/unpack functions too, but they are still a hassle compared to non-SIMD operations.

THis begs the question: If core::simd doesn't end up ideal (For flexibility etc), how far can we get with a thin-wrapper lib? The ideal API (imo) is transparent, and supports the widest instructions available on your architecture, falling back to smaller ones or non-SIMD.

It also begs the question of if you should stop worrying and love the macro... We are talking f32/f64. Different widths. Different architectures. And now conflated with len 3 vecs, len 4 vecs etc (Where each vector/tensor item it a SIMD intrinsic). How does every vector (Not in the SIMD sense; the most popular one uses AoS SIMD which is IMO a mistake) handle this? Macros. This leads me to think we macro this too.
by yawpitch | 2025-07-05 12:57:26+00:00
Sure as shit not one I’m ever getting on.

The whole point of a co-pilot is to make sure there’s a human in the loop of both critical jobs, pilot flying and pilot monitoring. AI can augment both positions, but it’s a considerably-more-self-aware-than-C-3PO away from being able to replace either when the bird hits the fan.
Ask HN: Would You Use a Bad Language Filter Like PureWord?
by ogora | 2025-07-05 12:57:41+00:00
Hello HN,

I have developed a Chrome extension called PureWord which filters profanity and offensive language in real time. It replaces such terms with neutral, user-defined alternatives.

The aim is to let users shape a respectful browsing experience, whether for work, family, or general use, without enforcing censorship.

The extension operates entirely in the browser, employs fast adblock-style filtering, includes whitelist/blacklist controls and supports dark mode. It is built to be lightweight and efficient.

I would appreciate feedback on the following. I am considering options like community-maintained word lists and context-based profiles (e.g. home vs work).

Would these be useful, or would you suggest a different direction?

Your insights would help me understand user interests and guide future improvements.

Thank you.
by WillAdams | 2025-07-05 12:57:58+00:00
I read SICP a long while back, so the video lecture was a useful review.

For the balance, I managed to get a working version of my project pretty quickly when the Python version of OpenSCAD first became available: https://pythonscad.org/ but I quickly hit a plateau and was having trouble adding features and improving it, so I began researching and trying to learn what I needed for:

https://github.com/WillAdams/gcodepreview

Been collecting lists of the books I've been using at:

https://www.goodreads.com/review/list/21394355-william-adams...

https://www.goodreads.com/review/list/21394355-william-adams...

I will note that my preference (as a person coming at this from (La)TeX is for Literate Programming:

http://literateprogramming.com/

so have also put together:

https://www.goodreads.com/review/list/21394355-william-adams...
by xlii | 2025-07-05 12:58:19+00:00
I can’t disclose details but I’ve been doing mentoring, screening and interviewing + screening for years and saw remote communities grow from 10s to 1000s.

What you’re saying is true especially in the honeymoon phase, but the running joke is that you don’t really live remote life unless solitude made you name a pigeon. I’ve seen careers of many of my peers and usually 5 years in people starts to seek on-site.

There’s another point to take into consideration though. In Europe commute is usually less than hour and for many morning routine is an opening to watch movies/read books/listen to music or podcasts. Some travel with friends so that’s a social occasion too. Given accounts of my US colleagues where it’s usually lone drive back and forth experience is different.

Yet remote means omitting or social events and being outsider in the most-social environment (especially for men). Even hybrid with one day is much better than completely remote.

What I found over the years is that no one can say what differentiates remote-able to non-remote. Quiet back-seat engineer can get depressed after year of remote and that guy who is always heart of the party can thrive in remote. It’s just… it wears people down quickly and problems are usually creeping. Back pains coming from tension. Working hours slowly inflating to compensate for extra 10 minutes spent on lunch, this one time when you are bored at 8pm because you are bored in front of computer so why not help someone.

Maybe I’m biased but I find situation that some people are remote and some aren’t to be a healthy one. This preserves local jobs while also making an opening for those who want to do remote work for any reason whatsoever. And this honeymoon period is good to check out if you’re fit for remote or not (and gives enough churn to provide opportunity to try).