MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bumby | 2025-07-07 19:06:38+00:00
>If you save it from the bin you should be able to do whatever you want with it either way, scan it how you see fit.

Don’t we already have laws covering this? For example, sometimes excess books can be thrown in the bin. Often, they have the covers removed. Some will say something to the effect that “if you’ve received this without a cover it is a copyright violation.” I think one of the points of the lawsuit is it gives copyright holders discretion as to how their works are used/sold etc. The idea that “if you saved it from the bin you can do with it whatever you want” strips them of that right.
by achempion | 2025-07-07 19:06:48+00:00
I wanted to build something similar that works nicely across different devices (mac/linux) that is fast and supports keyboard-first navigation as I'm also struggling with a similar problem.

When surveying potential users I discovered that most are happy with the web gmail interface and don't really care. It sounds like a very niche requirement and it'll be very challenging to find enough customers (1k+) who would care about using a very nice email client.
by danaris | 2025-07-07 19:06:56+00:00
The purpose of a government* is to provide stability, safety, and prosperity to the people within its jurisdiction.

The purpose of a mob/mafia/organized crime group is to illegally enrich the people at the top in an organized fashion.

Some governments experience corruption that leads them to act similar to organized crime. It does not change the purpose of government, nor mean that it is inherently no better than the mob.

If you have a better suggestion for how society can be maintained, people can be supported, and the common defense ensured, that does not involve a government that is theoretically vulnerable to corruption, then by all means, propose it. You'd probably win a Nobel Prize.

But you won't, because there isn't such a thing. Once you're doing those things, you are a government. Any government, no matter how many or few people are involved, is at least theoretically vulnerable to corruption, but that vulnerability can be reduced by a variety of measures.

And saying "we just shouldn't do that" is a non-starter, both because it's morally repugnant and for the reasons I described in my previous post.

* The obvious exception here is authoritarian governments established by strongmen, as I described previously. However, I would posit that, over time, these will also transition toward seeking to provide at least some level of stability for the people under them, because the alternative is almost invariably to be overthrown when the people get sick of your shit.

ETA: ....But there are also circumstances where local organized crime is the closest a particular geographic area has to a government, and does, in fact, act the way you describe. In those circumstances, depending on the details, it could very well be moral to support the local mob.
by wizardforhire | 2025-07-07 19:07:07+00:00
Specifically to english and dialects, you are correct. England proper has a different dialect and accent for every nook! London for literal neighborhoods! It also has several hundred if not thousand of years on the US for language to develop. Africa has everyone beat on this front. Bantu alone has who knows how many sublanguages! America has done a pretty remarkable thing in keeping its language internally consistent despite it’s overwhelming cultural diversity and influences! That it sucks to learn for the uninitiated is exactly for this reason.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-07-07 19:07:20+00:00
> That is, he ruled that

> - buying, physically cutting up, physically digitizing books, and using them for training is fair use

> - pirating the books for their digital library is not fair use.

That seems inconsistent with one another. If it's fair use, how is it piracy?

It also seems pragmatically trash. It doesn't do the authors any good for the AI company to buy one copy of their book (and a used one at that), but it does make it much harder for smaller companies to compete with megacorps for AI stuff, so it's basically the stupidest of the plausible outcomes.
by sim7c00 | 2025-07-07 19:07:24+00:00
i LOVE this despite feeling for the impacted devs and service. love me some good guitar tabs, and honestly id totally beleive the chatgpt here hah..

what a wonderful incident / bug report my god.

totally sorry for the trouble and amazing find and fix honestly.

sorry i am more amazed than sorry :D. thanks for sharing this !!
by timmytokyo | 2025-07-07 19:07:42+00:00
You should read Baldur Bjarnasson's recent essay, "Trusting your own judgment on AI is a huge risk". https://www.baldurbjarnason.com/2025/trusting-your-own-judge...

Excerpt:

"Don’t self-experiment with psychological hazards! I can’t stress this enough!

"There are many classes of problems that simply cannot be effectively investigated through self-experimentation and doing so exposes you to inflicting Cialdini-style persuasion and manipulation on yourself."
by AnimalMuppet | 2025-07-07 19:09:04+00:00
> They just want an excuse to pay for big offices...

Say what? They're just itching for an excuse to waste money for no reason? I have heard a number of people saying that, and I've never heard anything that sounds like a convincing reason why they should want that.

Don't bother telling me about investments in commercial real estate. First, I've never seen any evidence that the people making these decisions have any such investments. It seems to be a "just so" story rather than anything with any substance behind it. Second, even if they had such investments, the first one who defects wins, and everyone can see that. They should be dumping such investments and then dumping their office buildings.

> ... and an excuse for laying us off at a moment's notice.

WFH does not in any way protect you from being laid off at a moment's notice.

You may be saying that demanding return to office gives them an excuse to lay off everyone who won't comply. That may be true. But they don't actually need that excuse. They can lay you off anyway.
by kragen | 2025-07-07 19:09:38+00:00
image_get is clearer—unless you've used Matlab, Octave, matplotlib, SciPy, OpenCV, scikit-learn, or other things that have copied Matlab's interface. In that case, using the established name is clearer.

(Unless, on the gripping hand, your image_get function is subtly different from Matlab's imread, for example by not returning an array, in which case a different name might be better.)
by aaroninsf | 2025-07-07 19:10:02+00:00
LLMs should not replace ______ is the general form of this.

The lemma is LLMs shall absolutely replace ______ in very predictable patterns.

Were ever costs are prohibitive, consequence may be externalized, or risks are statistically low enough, people will use LLM.

As with many current political and policy acts, our civilization is and will increasingly pay an extraordinary price for the fact that humans are all but incapable of reasoning with stochastic, distributed, or deferred consequences.

A tree killed may not die or fall immediately. The typical pattern in the contemporary US is to hyper-fixate, reactively, on a consequence which was explicitly predicted and warned against.

I sincerely hope the nightmare in Texas is not foreshadowing for what an active hurricane season might deliver.
Show HN: I built a CLI tool that uses AI to document an entire Python codebase
by Naniy | 2025-07-07 19:10:49+00:00
Show HN: I built a CLI tool that uses AI to document an entire Python codebase

For years, I've dealt with the pain of undocumented Python projects. It makes onboarding new devs a nightmare and brings refactoring to a crawl. Existing tools can lint for missing docstrings, but they don't actually write them for you.

I wanted a tool that could just fix the problem. So, I built Docu-AI Pro.

It's a simple Python CLI tool that recursively scans a directory, finds every function without a docstring, and uses an AST-based analysis (a smart simulation of an AI for now) to generate a clear, helpful one. It correctly identifies parameters, return statements, and even infers the function's purpose from its name and structure.

It's idempotent, so you can run it safely on a project anytime. The goal is to get a codebase from 0% to 80% documented in about 5 minutes.

I've packaged it as a lifetime deal for $49. I'm hoping to build it into a more powerful tool with true LLM integration in the future, and early buyers will get all 1.x updates.

I'd love for you to check it out and hear your feedback.

Link: https://stirring-dieffenbachia-dfcdcf.netlify.app/
by gkoeka | 2025-07-07 19:11:47+00:00
Fractional/Freelance Product Manager/Project Manager/Biz Ops expert available. Let's co-own the problem space, be it your product, your business as a product, or your culture as a product. Visit gregkoeka.com or connect with me on LinkedIn (www.linkedin.com/in/gregkoeka) to learn more about my background and how we can collaborate.
by caiatech | 2025-07-07 19:12:36+00:00
The Concept:

When you push documents to GitHub, you create evidence that's harder to fake than traditional methods because:

Server timestamps - GitHub records when you pushed (can't be spoofed like local timestamps) Network effect - When others clone your repo, they create independent timestamps Distributed proof - Multiple copies across different systems = harder to tamper Audit trail - GitHub's API logs all activities permanently

Real World Example:

"I documented workplace harassment in a GitHub repo. When 50 colleagues cloned it, they unknowingly created 50 independent timestamps proving when those documents existed. The company couldn't claim I fabricated evidence after-the-fact."

Why It Works:

- Email can be "lost" or "never received"

- Local files can be backdated

- But GitHub creates multiple layers of verification:

- Your push timestamp

- Server logs

- Clone records

- Fork history

- Issue/PR references

Not claiming it's perfect - just that it's better than most current methods and creates reasonable evidence for disputes.

I proved this works. I'm not debating it, I'm already using it.
by alexpasmantier | 2025-07-07 19:12:56+00:00
tv is a cross-platform, fast and extensible fuzzy finder for the terminal.

What's changing:

Revamped channels: config, templating, shortcuts, live-reload Major CLI upgrades: layout flags, keybindings, previews, --watch UI polish: new status bar, portrait mode, inline mode, scrollbars Shell support: nushell, better completions, inline usage Other: mouse support, better testing, perf boost, bug fixes

Full notes: https://alexpasmantier.github.io/television/docs/Developers/...
by brainwad | 2025-07-07 19:14:08+00:00
Most English words are regular, and most commonly used ones too. "the", "be", "are", "why", "can", "might", "life", etc. are all perfectly regular if you understand how to read english orthography (which uses character clusters and can't be read a letter at a time).

Infinite/finite regularly related, too - the reason the pronunciation of the finite cluster changes is due to stress differences (initial in- always takes the stress, and then the following syllable must be destressed). Note that the long vowel at the end comes back in the 4 syllable "infinitum", again due to regular stress rules.
by charcircuit | 2025-07-07 19:14:13+00:00
My point is that the 2 commenters are working off of different definitions. One is using the common definitions of words in English and the other is trying to advocate for their ideological rooted definitions by trying to correct people who use the normal English definitions. 99% of the time how this will play out is the idealog will preach about their values instead of acknowledging that they are purposefully using different definitions.

In short the post is bait.
by rtkwe | 2025-07-07 19:14:19+00:00
The meshtastic coverage might be much better in your area than it looks on Meshmap too. It relies on being connected to the main MQTT [0] server to get placed there and lots of people don't do that because the chatter there can be spammy and irrelevant to you locally. There are many city or state specific MQTT meshes that are far more popular. For example NCMesh [1] has way better coverage in NC, though most contacts still happen over MQTT instead of via RF, compared to the same area on Meshmap.

So long as you're using the standard long fast and 0/20 frequency slot you'll still have your messages passed via NCMesh nodes even if you're using the broader US Mesh as your MQTT server.

[0] MQTT here simply tunnels the messages over the internet so you get placed in a broader chat room and pseudomesh than you could reach through RF.

[1] https://ncmesh.net/learn/#coverage
by southernplaces7 | 2025-07-07 19:16:13+00:00
Sure, and I feel zero moral qualms about me or anyone else doing it. The vast majority of the shit flows flows from the other direction towards individuals and consumers when it comes to content delivery companies and worse still, software companies. Let's address that before wringing our hands about individual acts of "piracy", even at scale.

I could, right now in just a few minutes, go download a perfectly functional pirated copy of nearly any Adobe program, nearly any Microsoft program and a whole range of books and movies, yet I see zero real financial troubles affecting any of the companies behind these. All the contrary in fact.
by sim7c00 | 2025-07-07 19:16:52+00:00
u know, mixed feels.

on one hand, sure, they over played.

on the other hand who used genAI as much before ppl used chatgpt?

on the backhand of the other hand: oh god all is lost.

:'k

i guess i hope for all the talent who contributed good to the world to also get what they deserve. it can be in the mist if the c-level is included in that but id be sad if the wrong people get the wrong end of the stick once the dust settles.
by alganet | 2025-07-07 19:16:55+00:00
We need to normalize behaviors that are commonly attributed to paranoia.

It is ok to ask a lot of questions, it is ok to be skeptic of friendly interactions, it is ok to be suspicious. These behaviors are not social anxiety, not psychosis, not anti-social. They are, in fact, desirable human aspects that contribute to the larger group.

There is no automated detection, no magic way of keeping these new threats away. They work by exploring humans in vulnerable states. We need kind humans that are less vulnerable to those things.
by jdelman | 2025-07-07 19:17:36+00:00
My wife and I have been using Berkanan (an iOS app) for many years for this purpose. It's not very good - unlike literally every other chat app, it presents conversations in reverse chronological order, and the interface is janky. But it gets the job done when there's no WiFi (airplanes, though this is becoming less of a problem) or cell service (crowded venues).
by ianbicking | 2025-07-07 19:18:06+00:00
For something a little different than a coding task, I tried using it in my game: https://www.playintra.win/ (in settings you can select Mercury, the game uses OpenRouter)

At first it seemed pretty competent and of course very fast, but it seemed to really fall apart as the context got longer. The context in this case is a sequence of events and locations, and it needs to understand how those events are ordered and therefore what the current situation and environment are (though there's also lots of hints in the prompts to keep it focused on the present moment). It's challenging, but lots of smaller models can pull it off.

But also a first release and a new architecture. Maybe it just needs more time to bake (GPT 3.5 couldn't do these things either). Though I also imagine it might just perform _differently_ from other LLMs, not really on the same spectrum of performance, and requiring different prompting.
by kragen | 2025-07-07 19:18:21+00:00
Yes, the verb "is" in "Passive voice is painfully boring to read" is in the active voice, not the passive voice. But umanwizard was not saying that "is" was in the passive voice. Rather, they were saying that the past participle "made", in the phrase "the points already made", is a passive-voice use of the verb "make".

I don't know enough about English grammar to know whether this is correct, but it's not the assertion you took issue with.

Why am I not sure it's correct? If I say, "In addition to the blood so red," I am quite sure that "red" is not in the passive voice, because it's not even a verb. It's an adjective. Past participles are commonly used as adjectives in English in contexts that are unambiguously not passive-voice verbs; for example, in "Vito is a made man now," the past participle "made" is being used as an attributive adjective. And this is structurally different from the attributive-verb examples of "truly verbal adjectives" in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attributive_verb#English, such as "The cat sitting on the fence is mine," and "The actor given the prize is not my favorite;" we could grammatically say "Vito is a man made whole now". That page calls the "made man" use of participles "deverbal adjectives", a term I don't think I've ever heard before:

> Deverbal adjectives often have the same form as (and similar meaning to) the participles, but behave grammatically purely as adjectives — they do not take objects, for example, as a verb might. For example: (...) Interested parties should apply to the office.

So, is "made" in "the points already made" really in passive voice as it would be in "the points that are already made", is it deverbal as it would be in "the already-made points" despite its positioning after the noun (occasionally valid for adjectives, as in "the blood so red"), or is it something else? I don't know. The smoothness of the transition to "the points already made by those numbskulls" (clearly passive voice) suggests that it is a passive-voice verb, but I'm not sure.

In sibling comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44493969 jcranmer says it's something called a "bare passive", but I'm not sure.

It's certainly a hilarious thing to put in a comment deploring the passive voice, at least.
by prats226 | 2025-07-07 19:19:36+00:00
Isn't it because there is a difference in your field and other fields?

1) Scope - Other fields like law, medicine atleast are impacting one unit at a time, vs software which is impacting large number of users through your work. I am sure research interviews will go through similar process?

2) Feedback - Just basis past work, you would get a good sense of their aptitude. Very hard to do it in programming without you spending a lot of time going through their work?

3) Subjectivity - Wrt coding, very good way to get objective output in interview by getting other person to write code, can't do that in medicine for example?
by CGMthrowaway | 2025-07-07 19:19:44+00:00
Idk how much experience you have with catholics outside of the northeast. I have a fair amount with all of the regions I mentioned (northeast, south, midwest, west coast). You cannot really find any American Catholic parish that is not dominated by at least one of Italians, Irish, Eastern Europeans or Hispanics. The catholic church in the US is mostly "immigrants," that is, people whose ancestors were not in the US prior to ~1850
by AirMax98 | 2025-07-07 19:19:59+00:00
Seriously agree — try using something like Sonnet 3.7 and then switching to Gemini 2.5 Pro. The code that both output is fine enough — especially given that I mostly use LLMs as a fancy autocomplete. Generally a better prompt is going to get me closer to what I want than a more robust model. The speed hit with Gemini 2.5 Pro is just too substantial for me to use it as a daily driver.

I imagine the speed difference might not matter so much if you are performing seismic updates across a codebase though.
by readthenotes1 | 2025-07-07 19:20:14+00:00
It is generally illegal in the USA to be accused of a crime without being "confronted by the witnesses against him".

Red light cameras foundered on that obligation since they were generally run out of State and fly the camera operators in was not cost effective.

Also, just because your car broke the law doesn't mean you did, which was another defense that worked.

I'm surprised that the citations aren't thrown out...
by acegod | 2025-07-07 19:21:11+00:00
Right, that's exactly what I'm saying.

>The point is to measure fluid intelligence in a way which supports comparisons between models and between models and humans. It's not the obligation of the test to be tailored to the form of model that's most popular now.

The problem is that the test may not be giving an accurate comparison because the test is problematic when used to assess LLMs, which are the kind of model that people are most interested in assessing for general capabilities.
by simonw | 2025-07-07 19:21:11+00:00
That explains your results. 3B and 8B models are tiny - it's remarkable when they produce code that's even vaguely usable, but it's a stretch to expect them to usefully perform an operation as complex as "extract the dataclasses representing events".

You might start to get useful results if you bump up to the 20B range - Mistral 3/3.1/3.2 Small or one of the ~20B range Gemma 3 models. Even those are way off the capabilities of the hosted frontier models though.
by colesantiago | 2025-07-07 19:21:36+00:00
Would it be best to make an open source company to challenge Dyson?

Everything will be worker and independently owned (bootstrapped and no VCs), no patents (we don't care about clones)

Just make great product that is open has free software.

If there would be significant interest Dyson could have a direct competitor just like many other open source companies like System72 and Red Hat
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-07-07 19:21:38+00:00
That's for criminal laws where prosecutorial discretion can then (in principle) be used in borderline cases to prevent unjust outcomes.

If you give people a claim for damages which is an order of magnitude larger than their actual damages, it encourages litigiousness and becomes a vector for shakedowns because the excessive cost of losing pressures innocent defendants to settle even if there was a 90% chance they would have won.

Meanwhile both parties have the incentive to settle in civil cases when it's obvious who is going to win, because a settlement to pay the damages is cheaper than the cost of going to court and then having to pay the same damages anyway. Which also provides a deterrent to doing it to begin with, because even having to pay lawyers to negotiate a settlement is a cost you don't want to pay when it's clear that what you're doing is going to have that result.

And when the result isn't clear, penalizing the defendant in a case of first impression isn't just either, because it wasn't clear and punitive measures should be reserved for instances of unambiguous wrongdoing.
by andrewmcwatters | 2025-07-07 19:22:19+00:00
I have mostly found that all app store apps, no matter what app store, are 100% garbage unless they come from a Fortune 500 company and even then, a lot of those are garbage.

It seems like if you’re big enough, you’re obligated to be on an app store, and incidentally your software quality is only going to be on par because you’re large enough to afford designers who actually adhere to design guidelines, maybe.

I will never forget how Schiller wanted the App Store to be a Nordstrom experience but instead it always feels like a dollar store. Because the quality of the apps are bottom-tier, there’s overwhelming amounts of Chinese knockoffs, and the apps, if paid, are literally sometimes at dollar store prices.

The app stores are ghetto. Don’t publish there. It’s mere coincidence that large companies like Spotify are there. And they’re not there because the app stores are good.