MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by thewebguyd | 2025-08-13 19:01:00+00:00
I'm almost confident it'll slow down, or regress a little bit, historically that's what happens when it grows and then it'll equalize again around 2-3%.

The moment another or a few new AAA titles with kernel-level anti-cheat come out, people go back to Windows.

Gaming could, and probably will, be the key to the "Year of the Linux desktop" but the anti-cheat problem needs solved.
by uecker | 2025-08-13 19:01:01+00:00
No, but jemalloc uses a kernel API that has the behavior and IMHO is is then non-conforming (when using this API, which I think is configurable). The Facebook bug should be taken as a clear sign that this behavior is a terrible idea and not something to be even blessed by modifying the standard. When the original kernel API was introduced, it was already pointed out that the behavior is not ideal. There is no fundamental reason (including performance reasons) this has to behave in this way. It is just bad engineering.
by insane_dreamer | 2025-08-13 19:01:10+00:00
> Tech layoffs by year:

> 2022: 93,000 employees laid off

> 2023: 200,000 employees laid off (peak)

> 2024: 150,000 employees laid off

> 2025: 70,000 employees laid off (through July)

Any figures on how this compares with the COVID surge in hiring? As in, are we at a net-negative and if so by how much?
by Razengan | 2025-08-13 19:01:15+00:00
Slight tangent: The enduring charm of "retro" games (whether actually old or just imitating old games) and the cults around old platforms, shows that there is some value in "constrained computing" environments. The PlayDate has also been moderately successful hasn't it?

The constraints often seem to encourage increased creativity. Maybe partly because of the challenge of pushing those constraints, the level playing field (when competing vs all the other developers on such platforms), and/or the lack of "pressure" (i.e. you don't have to make a game that looks like the latest Unreal 69 tech demo or whatnot)..

Maybe it's time for a new current-day platform that's similarly "constrained" on purpose?

The capabilities of the DS seem like a sweet spot. Put it in a Switch form factor and throw in a Commodore 64-like OS, complete with Python or Lua or some other language that's easy to pick up and also relevant in the broader world.
by cyberax | 2025-08-13 19:01:25+00:00
> For example Graphcore gave people options, which if exercised became stock in graphcore. If you then found a buyer and asked GC to approve the sale, they declined. Not public. Later they revalued that stock at zero.

From looking at Wiki, the company is basically bankrupt with just $2.7m revenue for 450 employees. So their stock is literally worth nothing.

If they do get acquired by Softbank, employees will get a portion of the sale according to the amount of shares they own. The company valuation won't make any difference.
by bityard | 2025-08-13 19:01:59+00:00
The company I work for has a published map with pay tiers on it. It's all admittedly a bit arbitrary and they are always careful to repeat often that employee pay does NOT scale with nor adjusted for the cost of living in your location, or inflation. (Basically to communicate that all raises are given based on merit and performance alone.)

Nevertheless, the highest tiers on the map are of course on the coasts, with mid-level tiers being parts of Colorado, Texas, Florida, etc. And the lowest tiers reside in flyover country where I live. But they say if you DO move permanently from one tier to another, your pay will be adjusted accordingly.
by unyttigfjelltol | 2025-08-13 19:02:10+00:00
The US medical system practically requires patients to steer their care among specialists. If the gentleman steered himself to a liver doctor, he’d hear liver advice. Psychologist, he’d talk about his feelings. Can one really blame him for taking it one step further and investigating whatever he was worried about on his own too?

Plus, if you don’t have some completely obvious dread disease, doctors will essentially gaslight you.

These researchers get up on a pedestal, snicker at creative self-help, and ignore the systemic dysfunction that led to it.
by Dylan16807 | 2025-08-13 19:02:28+00:00
I don't think you can make a chain of logic f∘g∘h where the probability of the combined function is higher than the probability of f or g or h on their own.

Chain of logic meaning that only the last function updates the probability you care about, and the preceeding functions give you intermediate information that is only useful to feed into the next function.

It is an absolute rule you can follow, as long as you're applying it the way it was intended, to a specific organization of functions. It's not any kind of combining, it's A->B->C->D combining. As opposed to multiple pieces that each independently imply D.

Just because you can use ∘ in both situations doesn't make them the same. Whether x∘y∘z is chaining depends on what x and y and z do. If all of them update the same probability, that's not chaining. If removing any of them would leave you with no information about your target probability, then it's chaining.

TL;DR: ∘ doesn't tell you if something is a chain, you're conflating chains with non-chains, the rule is useful when it comes to chains
by cortic | 2025-08-13 19:02:41+00:00
I'm not sure humans are any different;

Humans don't think. At all. They do next token prediction.

If they are [raised in environments] that includes lots of examples of the result of people thinking, what they produce will look sort of like the results of people thinking, but then if they were [raised in an environment] of people repeating the same seven knock knock jokes over and over and over in some complex pattern (e.g. every third time, in French), what they produced will look like that, and nothing like thinking.

I believe this can be observed in examples of feral children and accidental social isolation in childhood. It also explains the slow start but nearly exponential growth of knowledge within the history of human civilization.
by metalliqaz | 2025-08-13 19:03:19+00:00
no, not really. I think they are massively over-valued but in the tech world... what else is new? I view those tools as mostly a convenience. They are integrating things into nice easy packages to use. That's the value.

With this... eh. Most people don't need to make more than one or two explainer videos, so are they going to take on a new monthly fee for that? And then there are power users who do it all the time, but almost surely have their own workflow put together that is customized to exactly what they want.

At any point, one of the big players could introduce this as a feature for their main product.
by incomingpain | 2025-08-13 19:03:29+00:00
ive been getting annoyed at it. It's hallucinating way more? Like doesnt websearch and/or think?

It seems to be just making educated guesses. My most recent one, it told me I could run 'aider --diff' and then i do

aider: error: unrecognized arguments: --diff

It replies: Ah — if --diff isn’t recognized, then you’re definitely on a whole-file-only build of Aider.

but the actual arg is 'aider --edit-format diff'

I feel like 4 mini would have gotten it right.
by JonChesterfield | 2025-08-13 19:03:38+00:00
It takes a tiny bit of lateral thinking in C.

What if "build" hacked all the source into a single text file, instead of hacking it all into a single archive of object files?

Roughly, write static in front of most functions, don't reuse names between source files, cat them together in some viable order.

Now you can do whatever crazy codegen nonsense you want in the build and the users won't have to deal with it. The sqlite amalgamation build is surprising, using the result is trivial.
by shadowgovt | 2025-08-13 19:04:14+00:00
Beginning to use a CPU opcode that is 19 years old doesn't feel like planned obsolescence. if anything, it feels like unplanned obsolescence... "Oh hell what do you mean your CPU doesn't have that opcode no we've just been running the compiler with the default flags and that opcode got added to the default two months ago after a 10-year fight about the possible consequences of changing defaults!"

Although I'm a little surprised to learn that the binary itself doesn't have enough information in its header to be able to declare that it needs SSSE3 to be executed; that feels like something that should be statically-analyzed-and-cached to avoid a lot of debugging headaches.
by al_borland | 2025-08-13 19:04:16+00:00
I think we’ve lost a lot as a society as we’ve moved away from shared experiences. Recently I heard Weird Al say this is why he doesn’t make many songs these days. Everyone has their niche, fed by their algorithm, and there aren’t as many artists/songs that are universally known anymore. The same is true in many areas (TV is becoming a big one). Growing up, I wasn’t an N’Sync fan, but due to the monoculture, I still knew who they were and several of their bigger hits.

I think the same is true with children’s stories that teach them about life. There is a lot of value in the shared experiences to get society on the same page, and to be able to understand metaphors as an adult. I would find it quite odd if I referenced a boy crying wolf, and someone didn’t know what I was talking about because they grew up with bespoke AI stories to try to teach them that lesson. Or flip it, if they tried to reference a story from their childhood and they found out they were the only one who had ever heard it. That would feel quite isolating. I think that makes the world a less connected place, which isn’t a good direction, imo.

People can say what they will about the monoculture, and it isn’t perfect, nor should it be the only option, but I do think it has a lot of value when it comes to binding society together and helping people find common ground. That was/is the value in religion as well, a shared set of stories that can bind large groups together to teach them about the world and operate together with some harmony through shared understanding. Throwing that away in favor of AI at such a young age seems like it would be problematic at scale.
by searine | 2025-08-13 19:04:25+00:00
>I am moderately pessimistic about the state of research because I do hear things I don't like, but this is compensated by my belief that US academia has a ridiculous amount of institutional entropy, and I'm perfectly willing with temporary issues if this means at least some of the long term problems will be improved

I am confused how 'burn it all down' will solve any problems, let alone long term ones.

You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of how innovation works. The 'deal' of basic science in the US is that the government funds broadly and without prejudice. Topics are decided by experts and overseen by experts. These experts are taking large pay-cuts (compared to their worth in industry) to have the freedom to investigate their own interests. In return the public gets a vast amount of R&D on the cheap, much of which doesn't seem to have immediate ROI, but as we well know, has tremendous long term ROI.

Yes sometimes those ideas are dead-ends or don't replicate. Yes sometimes fraud/plagiarism happens. Yes sometimes people research minorities or marginalized people. Certain interests have made some people believe that these are symptoms of a broken system when in reality they are all just parts of the scientific process and freedom of thought. These interests mostly have used culture war issues as a wedge to defund science broadly.

So no, we should not destroy tomorrows cancer treatment (which could save you or the ones you love) because some tech-oligarch wants more money/power.
by volkadav | 2025-08-13 19:05:02+00:00
Open Maryland, Not Indiana :) (So named in this case because the company that released it, OmniTI, is based in Maryland. Source: worked there at the time) It's a good OS, as I imagine the other Illumos derivatives are, but sometimes the relatively small size of the community can be felt, e.g. in breadth/depth of available third party packages and update availability/timelines.
by Karrot_Kream | 2025-08-13 19:05:03+00:00
The problem that Poeterring tried to address with things like systemd is very obvious when you fire up emacs.

There's so, so much old code. There's very few tests because it was all written hacker style. Because of this "hackable to the core" philosophy these codebases are piles of unmaintainable tech debt. Someone had an itch to scratch, wrote code to scratch it, then submitted a diff for merging. But nobody took a step back and said: "Wait! We need to rearchitect <this> to accommodate this new functionality." This is understandable because GNU projects are volunteer projects and it's a lot more fun to submit a diff than do a refactor to get a small change in.

Old Unix init systems, much like Emacs, were just piles and piles of kludges that kept things going. The insight that Poeterring had was that if you reduce the hacking surface to mere configuration then you only need to maintain the configuration layer and not a huge kaleidoscope of functionality.

The modern Unix layer of having opinionated, config-driven tools talk over pipes won out in this environment because you only really need to maintain the contract at the pipes (even if you are just outputting terminal escape codes.) Beyond that tools can be composed, but the surface area of each tool is small. This is why vim is so much more commonly used and easily maintained than emacs.

(This is distinct from the "Unix philosophy" stuff that was popular before where folks wrote small, composable tools instead of larger, monolithic, config driven ones.)

A more modern approach of "hackable to the core" I feel would be to standardize around a sturdy, opinionated, well maintained core and then to allow extensibility around this core. Helix is exploring this (using Scheme as its extensibility layer.) But I think Helix and other projects (maybe Lem?) need to prove this approach out before it can come close to challenging the modern configuration-driven ecosystem of tools.

(I say this as a user of emacs and Zed by the way and someone who recently started hacking on Lem, so this comes from some experience.)
by bookofjoe | 2025-08-13 19:05:24+00:00
>do you type a lot on your phone, or mostly on a computer or similar?

You know, I've never really thought about the comparison until you asked. I estimate 99% on MacBook Pro/1% on iPhone w these 2 phone use cases:

1) Captions for my YouTube videos https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCd6EjvCDRRWlkHjEYvSfOkA)

2) Replies to emails/texts

Thanks for the kudos!

I'm glad I brought some joy to someone today!
by dgfitz | 2025-08-13 19:05:49+00:00
>> LLMs don't think. At all.

>How can you so confidently proclaim that?

Do you know why they're called 'models' by chance?

They're statistical, weighted models. They use statistical weights to predict the next token.

They don't think. They don't reason. Math, weights, and turtles all the way down. Calling anything an LLM does "thinking" or "reasoning" is incorrect. Calling any of this "AI" is even worse.
by babyshake | 2025-08-13 19:05:50+00:00
One thing I'll add to this, from more than one personal experience. A refusal to provide compensation info without first doing a reference check. The reference check should be the last thing after there is a conditional offer with at least a comp range provided. The reasoning I have been given is that they would need to see what the references say in order to determine the correct role or comp range. So when I suggest they provide the comp range assuming I have good references and they decline to, that's a nonstarter and demonstrates they are acting in bad faith IMO. This is clearly the type of negotiation tactic where you want your counter party to invest as much as possible (by providing their references) so you have more leverage.
by reikonomusha | 2025-08-13 19:05:53+00:00
Since a macro is a definition of syntax, I think you'd essentially need something like typing judgments to show how the typed elements of the syntax relate to one another, so that the type checker (e.g., a typical Hindley-Milner unifier) can use those rules. These are usually written as the fraction-looking things that show up in PLT papers. This is, as GP says, essentially extending the type system, which is a task fraught with peril (people write entire papers about type system extensions and their soundness, confluence, etc.).
Show HN: AI Interoperability to the Max – The Intelligence Hub
by Applied-AI-Dev | 2025-08-13 19:05:56+00:00
I’ve turned my open-source Intelligence Hub into a hosted service so teams can ship reliable, model-agnostic LLM features without wrestling infra.

The service includes a robust free tier, and until October 1st, all free user's will automatically have access to the "developer" paid tier features.

What you get:

One API for Azure OpenAI, OpenAI, Anthropic, allowing you to swap models on the fly

AI Agent "Profiles" for consistent and secure prompting and configuration

RAG pipeline setup for Weaviate (Azure AI Search is also supported for enterprises) + tool calls running in parallel

Tool Call Execution, allowing you to send tool call arguments directly to 3rd party APIs

Built-in conversation history retrieved via a conversation id

Baked-in security and resiliency; retries, backoff, fallbacks ensuring your apps are secure and never fail

Don't worry, the open source version isn’t going anywhere—DIY folks can still self-host. But if you want boringly reliable, production-ready LLM plumbing, the managed service is for you.

Live service: https://theintelligencehub.azurewebsites.net/ Open-source repo: https://github.com/AppliedAI-Org/IntelligenceHub

If you’re building with AI, I’d love to hear your use cases, feedback, or any features you'd like added.
by anonym29 | 2025-08-13 19:06:31+00:00
Tested this morning. Worked wonderfully, except ran into output issues. Attempted to patched the minified Claude file's CLAUDE_CODE_MAX_OUTPUT_TOKENS hard limit of 32000 on Sonnet to 64000, which worked, and I was able to generate outputs above 32000 tokens, but this coincided with a breakage of the 1m context window for me. Still testing and playing around with this, but this may be getting patched?
by 8f2ab37a-ed6c | 2025-08-13 19:06:49+00:00
What's the best way to play Settlers II as of 2025 on a PC or macOS? Is there a GOG-style version that still works as of today? It's unclear how well this version still does: https://www.gog.com/en/game/the_settlers_2_gold_edition

Actually same for Settlers III, I remember that one fondly as well. They lost me a bunch around the switch-to-3D era.
by sagolikasoppor | 2025-08-13 19:07:37+00:00
Yes I think so. Most big tech companies are American and very over-valued compared to what the profits are. The American stock exchange is worth about double that of the European. I think the American stocks and companies will see a downturn in valuation and European and Asian companies will see an increase.

Other sectors that people today find is boring will have an upswing.
by monster_truck | 2025-08-13 19:07:59+00:00
I've been burned too many times by embracing open source products like this.

We've been fed promises like these before. They will inevitably get acquired. Years of documentation, issues, and pull requests will be deleted with little-to-no notice. An exclusively commercial replacement will materialize from the new company that is inexplicably missing the features you relied on in the first place.
by shadowgovt | 2025-08-13 19:08:00+00:00
It's interesting to me how people panicked about the idea that 23AndMe's bankruptcy implies that some unknown, untrusted third-party will have their genetic information, but people are also crowing at the idea that a company that has purchase history on all your smartphone apps (and their permissions, and app data backup) could be compelled by the government to divest that function to some unknown, untrusted third-party.
by yndoendo | 2025-08-13 19:08:07+00:00
When I think of the _Paradox of Tolerance_ I always think of Gödel's _incompleteness theorems_.

Say you are restaurant owner that is tolerant of any consumer, it brings in money. Left, right, center, no matter the political spectrum; gay, straight, bisexual, no matter the sexuality. You provide them a good meal and they gladly pay. Now comes in a client and he starts trashing the place, tipping over tables, spitting in people's food. Do you stay tolerant and let it happen or brake your tolerance and deal with the situation and get him out? Your clients will no longer be tolerant of you and your business if you keep letting having is way.

Reality, you have defined "tolerance of others" with axioms that they do not maliciously destroy the property in our restaurant and they don't spit in the food of your clients. _Paradox of Tolerance_ highly resembles an inconsistent formal system pertaining to the proof of tolerance. "Tolerance of others" is a constant formal system in order to be tolerant.

Both you and your clients have agree upon definition of tolerance. It is the man destroying your property, you, and your clients that have differences in the definition of behavioral tolerance. The three do not share the same axioms. A universal definition of tolerance cannot be obtained.

Tolerance is also contextual, based on set and setting; who else is around, making it a malleable definition. This means _tolerance_ is a set / highly parameterized function. Location of public or private is just one parameter of many. For instant the scenario above about the business would most likely be accept if the setting was on set for a scene in a move.
by loxs | 2025-08-13 19:08:48+00:00
I migrated from OCaml to Rust around 2020, haven't looked back. Although Rust is quite a lot less elegant and has some unpleasant deficiencies (lambdas, closures, currying)... and I end up having to close one one eye sometimes and clone some large data-structure to make my life easier... But regardless, its huge ecosystem and great tooling allows me to build things comparatively so easily, that OCaml has no chance. As a bonus, the end result is seriously faster - I know because I rewrote one of my projects and for some time I had feature parity between the OCaml and Rust versions.

Nevertheless, I have fond memories of OCaml and a great amount of respect for the language design. Haven't checked on it since, probably should. I hope part of the problems have been solved.
by quietlycoder | 2025-08-13 19:09:07+00:00
Speaking as a non profit, this is extremely bad. Without this functionality, our advocacy tools have essentially broken overnight. My organization would engage with our supports to encourage action on important issues relevant to our mission. Many non profits operate with that same strategy. Click here to submit a comment on this important docket is the gist of it. This is going to silence a lot of voices who won't be willing or able to go through this process manually. Just my two cents as a non profit.
by pembrook | 2025-08-13 19:09:28+00:00
Gartner isn't going anywhere.

How do I know?

Because they aren't actually selling software advice; they're laundering personal-responsibility for corporate decision makers.

That's the real business of most brand-name B2B "advice."

Very few people are dumb enough to believe the 22yr-old new grad from Ohio that created the powerpoint you're buying is an expert in Software (or management in the case of McKinsey/BCG/Bain, or law in the case of overpriced white shoe law firms, or accounting in the case of the big 4, etc).

But John Executive with the big house and 3 kids doesn't care what the actual advice is, or if your software will save the company millions. He just wants to keep his job.

Being able to point to a "trusted brand" like Gartner as the escape hatch for why you made a large decision with downside risk is priceless. That's the real grift.

"...so that software implementation didn't turn out well for us? Wow..who could have known? I followed what the trusted experts at Gartner said!"