MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by gizmo686 | 2025-07-06 17:45:36+00:00
Vectors are an abstract notion. If you have two sets and two operations that satisfy the definition of a vector space, then you have a vector space; and we refer to elements of the vector set as "vectors" within that vector space.

The observation here is that set of real value functions, combined with the set of real numbers, and the natural notion of function addition and multiplication by a real number satisfies the definition of a vector space. As a result all the results of linear algebra can be applied to real valued functions.

It is true that any vector space is isomorphic to a vector space whose vectors are functions. Linear algebra does make a lot of usage of that result, but it is different from what the article is discussing.
by __MatrixMan__ | 2025-07-06 17:46:43+00:00
I agree that it's currently paranoid to hide your activities so that the algorithm profiling companies see you as several different people, or see the activities of millions as if they're just one... Automated misdirection on the part of the users is, so far, minimal.

But the point of such a company is to sell data on individuals, and a problematic use case for such data is to kill the ones who say things that you don't like. As that becomes cheaper and easier to do I think we'll find that it's not so paranoid to hide.
by sfn42 | 2025-07-06 17:47:19+00:00
Playwright is essentially a programmable headless browser. It sends a request to a page, waits for the response to load and then for things like React rendering, secondary requests etc, then once the page is ready you can do whatever you want. You can interact with the DOM, fill in forms, scroll, click things, get a div and check its size and location, anything you want. Testing special symbols and such should be no problem at all, provided that you actually think to write that test.
by testudo22 | 2025-07-06 17:47:56+00:00
News of mass layoffs in the technology industry and reduced hiring of college graduates are invariably followed up with pieces blaming these issues on technological change, namely AI. That narrative is misleading, however. This article discusses whether AI is capable of actually displacing software engineers, what is actually responsible for mass layoffs and reduced hiring in the tech sector, and why this is happening and how to fix it.
by Jtsummers | 2025-07-06 17:48:17+00:00
And ironically they invite you to study Beowulf with them for their first summer book club:

> You’ll also be able to join the very first Dead Language Society summer book club(!), where we’ll be reading Beowulf together. We’ll compare translations against the original Old English and explore the historical and cultural context of the poem. Along the way, I’ll explain all the deep lore that most readers miss.

That said, there's nothing wrong with including Beowulf in a course teaching Old English. When I studied it in college it was one of many texts that we read, which was helpful because a lot of people had read parts of Beowulf in modern English previously so there was a lot of context in reading it that was absent in some of the other texts.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-07-06 17:48:52+00:00
> Providing material support is, which is a gray area when it comes to recruitment

It’s absolutely not a grey area, what source do you have that’s claiming this?

> What if I post information that indirectly support terrorist groups such as justifying their actions?

That’s fine. That’s speech. Terrorist or freedom fighter is like mandatory freshman dorm banter.

> What if I post information that supports groups indirectly connected with terrorist groups (say a fund raising arm the US government hasn't listed as a terrorist group)?

If it links to a listed group you’re fucked. Even if you didn’t know about the connection.

Grey areas resolve differently depending on context. When it comes to terrorism, we tend to be fine being more brutal. Debating Hamas is fine. Waving their flag is questionable, potentially fair grounds to deny visa entry (or at least do a very deep dive into whether actual support occurred). Encouraging folks to join Hamas, directly or indirectly, should result in immediate detention and incapacitation.
by skotobaza | 2025-07-06 17:49:26+00:00
> I don't think the companies should be required to release server executables ever

I still don't get why. If the company stops profiting from the product, they shouldn't care if people self-host it. Unless, of course, the company wants to force their playerbase to another project that does currently generate profit.

> Are these server builds downloadable online somewhere?

Not that I know of.

>once a reliable build exists, inevitably it will be hosted in China and Russia and so on, and now you have a serious competitor to deal with who doesn't need to follow the same laws as you

That's true, but it's not a problem for Blizzard, rather for those who host those unofficial servers. Because the main competition will be among them.

>why would you pay a quite high monthly price for the official thing

Mainly because of the quality. The official servers are fully functional, get regular maintenance and updates. While unofficial servers can go offline easily, they lack latest content, not all quests might work etc.

So if, for some reason, Blizzard can't keep their servers in good shape, but the community can, then it's Blizzard's fault if people start leaving official servers. And what if Blizzard intentionally starts making the service worse and worse to shift people to their other game (whatever it may be)? In this case I think that having an option like unofficial servers is good for community. Not good for Blizzard, yes, but good for people that just want to play the video game that they've been playing for 20+ years. This is what SKG is about.
by ethbr1 | 2025-07-06 17:49:40+00:00
History says that would be a dumb bet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_of_United_Stat...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/40th_United_States_Congress#...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/74th_United_States_Congress#...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/76th_United_States_Congress#...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/89th_United_States_Congress#...
by eslaught | 2025-07-06 17:49:59+00:00
I'd try to find ways to stack everything else in your favor as much as possible. If X is difficult, you try to optimize Y, Z, etc. so that at least you're not coping with multiple adverse environmental factors at the same time.

For me personally, the best-case scenario seems to be intentionally scheduled, one-on-one interactions in "clean" environments (i.e., quiet, unscented, no smoke/incense, dressed casually for maximum comfort, etc.). The next best would be some sort of group setting with structured, intentional sharing (i.e., not just doing something together but explicitly organized for the purpose of sharing). It can be a bit hit or miss to find these, so it can take some iteration to figure out what actually works.

Otherwise, "escalating" (i.e., inviting someone into a deeper/more meaningful interaction) is a skill you can practice, but if you're dealing with the rest of it at the same time, you're basically playing with a handicap. So incrementalize your goals as much as possible, practice in small, regular intervals with sufficient breaks for recovery, and don't compare yourself to anyone else, no matter how tempting that might be.

Hope that helps, and feel free to contact me on Keybase (in profile) or email (run the Perl script on my website) if you want help brainstorming.

Disclaimer: not a therapist.
by throw10920 | 2025-07-06 17:50:06+00:00
> You proved my point: "voting with your wallet" will never work. DLCs, microtransactions, lootboxes... They all got normalized alarmingly quickly, despite numerous calls to "vote with your wallets" every single times.

Factually incorrect. There are numerous instances of consumers complaining, leaving bad reviews on Steam, refunding games, or stopping buying games because of their values, and the studios/producers actually changed the thing. Helldivers 2's mandatory PSN account is one of the most recent instances of that happening.

Factually, consumers will band together to take collective action, and when they do, there are positive effects. The problem is apathy, not lack of power.

> We need regulations, isolated individuals have no power against a system built to extract the most out of them

This is literally self-contradictory. If individuals can't "vote with their wallets" to achieve change (which, as I described above, empirically does happen), then individuals in a democracy also can't vote to enact their will on the system - and those regulators are appointed by those elected representatives.

Make up your mind - does voting work, or does it not?
by mehdibl | 2025-07-06 17:50:13+00:00
My extension in vscode have auto resume already, you use GUI to write workflows and run them right them. https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=Codingwo...

You can even pause. I will public a CLI that is doing same base on same syntax. And it use github claude action yaml syntax: https://github.com/codingworkflow/claude-runner/blob/main/.g...
by simpaticoder | 2025-07-06 17:51:19+00:00
The author asserts vectors are functions, specifically a function that takes an index and returns a value. He notes that as you increase the number of indices, a vector can contain an arbitary function (he focuses on continuous, real-valued functions).

It's fun to simulate one thing with another, but there is a deeper and more profound sense in which vectors are functions in Clifford Algebra, or Geometric Algebra. In that system, vectors (and bi-vectors...k-vectors) are themselves meaningful operators on other k-vectors. Even better, the entire system generalizes to n-dimensions, and decribes complex numbers, 2-d vectors, quaternions, and more, essentially for free. (Interestingly, the primary operation in GA is "reflection", the same operation you get in quantum computing with the Hadamard gate)
by xg15 | 2025-07-06 17:51:57+00:00
Sounds as if she even has a potential supervisor:

> “It took me a while to convince Ruixiang Zhang [the professor of the course where the problem had been posed] that my proposal was actually correct,” Cairo says

> At the University of Maryland, she will continue working under the supervision of Zhang. “He helped me so much, and I’m really grateful. Beyond his class, which I loved, he spent countless hours tutoring me,” she recalls.
by rmilk | 2025-07-06 17:53:15+00:00
I’m going to give a HARD disagree with this type of hand waving for a bug in pow(). First, how was a change allowed in such a fundamental function without significant justification and validation. It’s exponentiation. That’s like saying you want to fix multiplication. Sure, but it better get higher scrutiny that a higher-level function. Second, where is regression testing. It’s a trivial function to write tests for, which means MS never created real test plans for basic UCRT functions. This is where the outrage should placed.
by sfn42 | 2025-07-06 17:54:19+00:00
There are tools that can analyze a page for accessibility. I don't have experience with them but I wouldn't be surprised if you could include them in a CI/CD pipeline. I don't know whether they specifically control for color blindness and myopia but I wouldn't be surprised if they do. I know they check for contrast and stuff like that.

You could also check things like colors etc using Playwright but I would say it's probably the wrong tool for that job. It's more about testing functionality - make sure a page has the right content and works correctly on a technical level.

Without automated tools this type of thing can take a lot of time - in order to ensure quality you would basically have to click through the entire application for every release. Otherwise you might end up with some minor changes to one page breaking a different page and you'd never know until a tester checked it out or a user complained. With Playwright and similar tools you can catch regressions like this automatically.
by diggan | 2025-07-06 17:54:22+00:00
> rely more on snapshot testing are spot on

Never quite liked "snapshot testing" which I think has a better name under "golden master testing" or similar anyways.

Reason for the dislike, is that it's basically a codified "Trust me bro, it's correct" without actually making clear what you are asserting with that test. I haven't found any team that used snapshot testing and didn't also need to change the snapshots for every little change, which obviously defeats the purpose.

The only things snapshot testing seems to be good for, is when you've written something and you know it'll never change again, for any reason. Beyond that, unit tests and functional/integration tests are much easier to structure in a way so you don't waste so much time reviewing changes.
Show HN: Simple wrapper for Chrome's built-in local LLM (Gemini Nano)
by kstonekuan | 2025-07-06 17:54:27+00:00
Chrome now includes a native on-device LLM (Gemini Nano) starting in version 138. I've been building with it since it was in origin trials, it's powerful but the official Prompt API is still a bit awkward:

- Enforces sessions even for basic usage

- Requires user-triggered downloads

- Lacks type safety or structured error handling

So I open-sourced a small TypeScript wrapper I originally built for other projects to smooth over the rough edges:

github: https://github.com/kstonekuan/simple-chromium-ai

npm: https://www.npmjs.com/package/simple-chromium-ai

- Stateless prompt() method inspired by Anthropic's SDK

- Built-in error handling and Result-based .Safe.* variants with neverthrow

- Token usage checks

- Simple initialization that provides a helper to trigger downloads (must be triggered by user action)

It’s intentionally minimal for hacking and prototyping. If you need fine-grained control (e.g. streaming, memory control), use the native API directly:

https://developer.chrome.com/docs/ai/prompt-api

Would love to hear what people build with it or any feedback!
by yorwba | 2025-07-06 17:55:04+00:00
The original whisteblower article in Chinese at the bottom (but not the English version at the top) has this part:

实际上，对于后续训了很久很久的这个模型，Honestagi能够分析出这个量级的相似性我已经很诧异了，因为这个模型为了续训洗参数，所付出的算力甚至早就足够从头训一个同档位的模型了。听同事说他们为了洗掉千问的水印，采取了不少办法，甚至包括故意训了脏数据。这也为学术界研究模型血缘提供了一个前所未有的特殊模范吧。以后新的血缘方法提出可以拿出来溜溜。

In fact, I'm surprised that HonestAGI's analysis could show this level of similarity for this model that had been post-trained for a long time, because the computing power used to train-wash the parameters of this model was enough to train a model of the same size from scratch. I heard from my colleagues that they took many measures to wash off Qwen's watermark, even deliberately training on dirty data. This also provides an unprecedented case study for the academic community studying model lineage. If a new lineage method is put forward in the future, you can take it for a spin.
by pyman | 2025-07-06 17:55:48+00:00
I agree Simon. With the little time I have these days for side projects, LLMs have become my new best friends. I'm more worried about the future of my students than my own. I'm sure I'll grow old gracefully alongside the machines that helped me graduate and build a career.

I run Python workshops on weekends, and honestly, I'm speechless at the things students are already doing. But is it realistic to encourage them to study computer science in a year or two, when it's still a 4-year degree? By the time they start uni, LLMs will be 100 times more powerful than they are today. And in 6 years?

Any advice?
by Levitating | 2025-07-06 17:55:49+00:00
Imagine you're an indie game studio developing an MMORPG, both your server and client is likely under constant development and you may only have one or two actual production servers running your server code.

Now this proposal requires you to also continually release your server code.[1] While adding documentation, support for different systems, while ensuring safety as the server can now be reverse engineered and while possibly being liable to abuse created through those servers. Even though your game (and its clients) aren't tailored to working on any server other than the official one anyway.

At least that's my understanding of the issue.

This proposal is obviously aimed at big publishers like EA and Ubisoft, but it hurts small developers. I argue we should just stop playing EA and Ubisoft games, who are the only ones who continue to pull this crap.

[1]: As TheFreim pointed out, this isn't necessarily required. But the server program has to be released when the official servers are shut down. Which means this possibility has to be prepared for throughout development.
by diggan | 2025-07-06 17:55:53+00:00
> but the increased overall system complexity

I think this happens because people don't treat the testing code as "production code" but something else. You can have senior engineers spending days on building the perfect architecture/design, but when it comes to testing, they behave like a junior and just writes whatever comes to mind first, and never refactor things like they would "production code", so it grows and grows and grows.

If people could spend some brain-power on how to structure things and what to test, you'd see the cost of the overall complexity go way down.
by js2 | 2025-07-06 17:56:14+00:00
> Everyone developing in Python for a long time has felt it a bit too often when breaking changes (even between minor version updates) once again ruins the day

No, not everyone. I've been using Python as my primary language since 2000 (that's 1.5.2 days). It has been the least troublesome language that I work with, and I work with (or have worked with) a bunch (shell, perl, python, ruby, lua, tcl, c, objective-c, swift, java, javascript, groovy, go and probably others I'm forgetting).

Even all the complaints about the Python packaging ecosystem over the years... I just don't get it. Like, have you ever tried working with CPAN or Maven or Gradle or even, FFS, Ruby Gems/bundler? The Python virtual environment concept is easy to understand and pip mostly does its job just fine, and these days, uv makes all that even faster and easier.

Anywho, just dropping a contrarian comment here because maybe I'm part of the generally silent majority that is just able to use Python day in and day out to get their job done.
by benreesman | 2025-07-06 17:56:47+00:00
Five years ago I got flagged on HN and heard back channel that I was getting passed over for stuff via some little whisper in the right ear because I've been calling this shit out since my come to Jesus moment around it nearly a decade ago.

Today? I don't feel like criticizing Thiel-adjacent authoritarian goons changes my net prospects all that much. It hurts me with 65 and helps with 45 (or something), instead of 95/5 like a few years ago.

I think the burnout is real: the consequences are too obvious and most people are reasonable deep down even if we all get carried away sometimes.
by babymetal | 2025-07-06 17:57:09+00:00
Very recently their "advanced search" page was redone with a totally different and slightly more modern styling (prior to addition of the chat expert overlaid in the corner). The rest of Ingram's ordering site is still the same as five years ago and is clearly older than that.

That's objective; subjectively, it feels like there are individuals who were given the ability to "try new stuff" and "break things" who chose to follow the hype around features that look like this. The chat button seems to me to be an exercise in following-the-herd which actually sucks for me as a user with it blocking my old buttons.
by alwillis | 2025-07-06 17:57:46+00:00
> Lastly, I use it to ask questions about my codebase, refactor code, let it document my code, even make meaningful commits.

I've found that CC writes really good commits; I added info about Conventional Commits [1] to the CLAUDE.md file with a few examples.

[1]: https://www.conventionalcommits.org/en/v1.0.0/#summary
by skydhash | 2025-07-06 17:57:54+00:00
> For the first time in history, computers don't need precise instruction to be useful.

They still do. What we've done mostly is extracting common meaning out of textual languages so that we can map out a prompt to an interpretation. But the issue is that a single sentence can have many and some are plainly wrong. The training data is also not so clean.

The computer is still using precise instructions. Now we only have a mapping program that's using probability and weights to match natural languages to those instructions with no limit on the gap between what it chooses and what was needed (aka error).

The standard way was to have the idea going through multiple people (or persona), each refining it until it's precise enough to be done by a computer. Yes, the final result, the program, is restrictive. But like checklist, the dependability matters more than creative flexibility. Especially in cases like "Transfer N dollars from account X to account Y". You don't want LLMs to decide it's fine for N to be negative or for N to be greater than the balance of account X.
by everybodyknows | 2025-07-06 17:58:01+00:00
> forget even the most basic configuration options after a month of inactivity

So do I. ChatGPT4o and the like of course do not forget, and they've read more documentation, library code, and message forum postings than any human could. They know all the five or so ways to initialize per-buffer variables and will write you little snippets of Elisp to add to your .emacs or .dir-locals.el or per-file headers/trailers.

So, if Org-mode or multi-occur aren't doing what I want, and `M-x info-emacs-manual` doesn't make it obvious, ChatGPT4o is my next recourse.
by sfn42 | 2025-07-06 17:59:26+00:00
I would highly recommend using a specialized library like BenchmarkDotNet. It's more relevant for microbenchmarks but can be used for less micro benchmarks as well.

It will do things like force you to build in Release mode to avoid debug overhead, do warmup cycles and other measures to avoid various pitfalls related to how .NET works - JIT, runtime optimization and stuff like that, and it will output nicely formatted statistics at the end. Rolling your own benchmarks with simple timers and stuff can be very unreliable for many reasons.
by crote | 2025-07-06 18:01:25+00:00
You don't need it in the city or in the countryside, you just need it on the highways. The overhead wires will directly power the cross-country legs, a small battery can cover last-mile delivery and interruptions in overhead wire coverage due to things like complex highway interchanges.

Besides, it's not like this kind of electrification is unheard of. Most of the world has electrified rail with a density higher than the US highway system, and India has been electrifying its railways at a pace of over 4000 miles per year. Electrifying the main cross-country freight corridors by the end of the decade should be quite doable.
by _heimdall | 2025-07-06 18:02:01+00:00
I've never understood the end goal of a UBI. If the expectation is that everyone should be able to eat (seems like a noble goal), why obfuscate that by giving people money rather than access to free food?

If we really wanted a system where we deem certain items essential and went everyone to have access to them, it makes no sense to pay for them. Money may still make sense for nonessential or luxury items, but it just gets in the way if the government has to give me money so I can go spend it on the food they actually want me to have.