MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by al_borland | 2025-08-16 05:33:55+00:00
Have we really overproduced elites, or have social media and credit card companies convinced non-elites that they should spring for ad-hoc entry into a lounge with money they don’t have?

It seemed that lounges used to require some kind of membership that had a decent vetting process. Not only has the bar been significantly lowered, but I believe many simply let you buy your way in. These luxury experiences are being sold to people who want to cosplay and elites while on holiday. Charge it and worry about it later. It’s not much different than people paying for 20 minutes on fake jet to make videos for instagram or TikTok.

The simple solution would seem to be to stop letting people buy their way into lounges. I see this at hotels too. Getting a certain status for 60 nights stayed in a year gets you in the lounge… or pay an extra $10/night on your room for the same thing.
by zxcb1 | 2025-08-16 05:34:05+00:00
No, it's the equivalent of when a human refuses to answer — psychological defenses; for example, uncertainty leading to excessive cognitive effort in order to solve a task or overcome a challenge.

Examples of ending the conversation:

- I don't know - Leaving the room - Unanswered emails

Since Claude doesn't lie (HHH), many other human behaviors do not apply.
by walrus01 | 2025-08-16 05:34:40+00:00
Yes, there's already Ukrainian fpv flown quadcopters which are optimized to intercept, as a munition, common flying wing camera surveillance platforms. I've seen probably 20 or 30 different videos now taken from the view of the quadcopter, with detonator contact wires sticking out the front, diving into the rear of a large Russian flying wing UAV.
by vunderba | 2025-08-16 05:35:14+00:00
Other than LMArena and a website I can't verify is authentic, it's hard for me to run tests on this new model but I have serious doubts that it'll pass my more difficult prompts such drawing a valid 2d maze with clearly marked exit and entrance.

gpt-image-1 is in a class all of its own with regards to prompt adherence in the "text to image" category.

Once it hits GA I'll put it through its paces and add it to the site!
by jongjong | 2025-08-16 05:35:18+00:00
People thought it was the end of history and innovation would be all about funding elaborate financial schemes; but now with AI people are finding themselves running all these elaborate money-printing machines and they're unsure if they should keep focusing on those schemes as before or actually try to automate stuff. The risk barrier has been lowered a lot to actually innovate, almost as low risk as doing a scheme but still people are having doubts. Maybe because people don't trust the system to reward real innovation.

LLMs feel like a fluke, like OpenAI was not intended to succeed... And even now that it succeeded and they try to turn the non-profit into a for-profit, it kind of feels like they don't even fully believe their own product in terms of its economic capacity and they're still trying to sell the hype as if to pump and dump it.
by itsalotoffun | 2025-08-16 05:35:19+00:00
When you discuss caching, are you talking about caching the LLM response on your side (what I presume) or actual prompt caching (using the provider cache[0])? Curious why you'd invalidate static content?

[0]: https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/build-with-claude/prompt-...
by ZYbCRq22HbJ2y7 | 2025-08-16 05:35:22+00:00
> AI has already rendered academic take-home assignments moot

Not really, there are plenty of things that LLMs cannot do that a professor could make his students do. It is just a asymmetric attack on the professor's (or whomever is grading) time to do that.

IMO, credentials shouldn't be given to those who test or submit assignments without proctoring (a lot of schools allow this).
by ChrisArchitect | 2025-08-16 05:36:04+00:00
Related recent context/controversy that maybe fueled some of this:

putty.org is not run by the PuTTY developers

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44558328

Hijacking Trust? Bitvise Under Fire for Controlling Domain of FOSS Project PuTTY

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44579265
by strogonoff | 2025-08-16 05:37:12+00:00
As any other technology, at the end of the day LLMs are used by humans for humans’ selfish, driven by mental issues and trauma and overcompensation, maybe even paved with good intentions but leading you know where, short-sighted goals. If we were to believe that LLMs are going to somehow become extremely powerful, then we should be concerned, as it is difficult to imagine how that can lead to an optimal outcome organically.

From the beginning, corporations and their collaborators at the forefront of this technology tainted it by ignoring the concept of intellectual property ownership (which had been with us in many forms for hundreds if not thousands of years) in the name of personal short-term gain and shareholder interest or some “the ends justify the means” utilitarian calculus.
by _aavaa_ | 2025-08-16 05:37:20+00:00
I won’t call 1000$ a person before the reactor was even built and then a cumulative >20% increase in electricity price “minute”.

More importantly for California it is also a wildfire Mecca, which is what is driving a large amount of those cost increases. You can see if if you grab electricity prices and plot them versus renewable penetration and notice the lack of a trend: https://www.sustainabilitybynumbers.com/p/us-states-electric...
by spangry | 2025-08-16 05:37:31+00:00
Pretty sure that's what I have too (and am diagnosed ADHD). I used to complain to my Mum that I couldn't hear what people were saying on the bus back home from school. She took me to get a hearing test and it turns out I have bat-like hearing. I'm just not able to seperate out speech from background noise - noisy restaurants and bars are a nightmare.
by SamuelKatsaros | 2025-08-16 05:37:33+00:00
when catching up on my weekly watch of the social network

I wanted to do smt like facemash

having just applied to yc. I though ycmash was the natural + perfect idea

so, here it is: https://ycmash.vercel.app/

it's as simple as that

clean + retro ui

elo ranking algo

postgresql, well, supabase bc who doesn't use that

---

rlly just a late night thing

don't judge

but pls rank

id actually be interested to see who ranks 1st after a week or so
by tomhow | 2025-08-16 05:38:06+00:00
> Blocked from being able to post new comments by HN because I am getting heavily downvoted for posting inconvenient facts

This is not how HN works. Rate-limiting only happens when an account posts high volumes of comments that break the guidelines. It's nothing to do with downvotes or the political/idological flavor of what you post (we don't care and often don't know; all we care about is whether you're filling up threads with guideline-breaking comments, which is what ruins threads).

If you want rate-limiting turned off you can email us at hn@ycombinator.com and we can discuss it.
by itsalotoffun | 2025-08-16 05:38:11+00:00
Also, regarding your agents (primary and sub):

- Did you build your own or are you farming out to say Opencode? - If you built your own, did you roll from scratch or use a framework? Any comments either way on this? - How "agentic" (or constrained as the case may be) are your agents in terms of the tools you've provided them?
by crazylogger | 2025-08-16 05:38:33+00:00
Today’s AI systems probably won’t excel, but they won’t completely fail either.

Basically give the LLM a computer to do all kinds of stuff against the real world, kick it off with a high level goal like “build a startup”.

The key is to instruct it to manage its own memory in its computer, and when context limit inevitably approaches, programmatically interrupt the LLM loop and instruct it to jot down everything it has for its future self.

It already kinda works today, and I believe AI systems a year from now will excel at this:

https://dwyer.co.za/static/claude-code-is-all-you-need.html

https://www.anthropic.com/research/project-vend-1
by lll-o-lll | 2025-08-16 05:39:37+00:00
This is a garbage summary and it really highlights the thrust of the article. My summary: “Human beings have a strong tendency to anthropomorphise and that leads to us granting LLMs human like qualities incorrectly.”

You can see where the LLM has gone wrong. It’s hooked in to “summary” and therefore given excessive emphasis to this part of the article. The plato’s cave analogy is stupid; and what on earth is it going on about with ghosts?

It’s not shortening, sure, it’s dribbling nonsense.
by d1sxeyes | 2025-08-16 05:40:03+00:00
In the bluntest possible sense, who cares if we can make roads safer?

Solving liability in traffic collisions is basically a solved problem through the courts, and at least in the UK, liability is assigned in law to the vendor (more accurately, there’s a list of who’s responsible for stuff, I’m not certain if it’s possible to assume legal responsibility without being the vendor).
by Mabusto | 2025-08-16 05:40:44+00:00
I have a Plex/Radarr/Sonarr setup on my home server. I've made a landing page so it's extra easy for my parents and friends to add media.

It's been really wonderful, everyone knows everyone by one degree of separation (me) and are adding to the library like a sort of group project. You can just hop on and see a somewhat currated library in the sense that someone you'll probably run into IRL thought this was worth watching.

So just to add to your point, you can't get this with a streaming service.
by qingcharles | 2025-08-16 05:40:49+00:00
I know almost nothing of Chinese languages, but some Japanese, and when I see boxes and instructions for some random item from Temu that is all in Chinese I'm amused by being able to understand bits of it.

I saw a face mask box that was all in Chinese and had 非医 on it (which means non-medical) which, depending on your font would be written exactly the same in Japanese: 非医.
by comp_throw7 | 2025-08-16 05:40:53+00:00
> It doesn't follow logically that because we don't understand two things we should then conclude that there is a connection between them.

I didn't say that there's a connection between the two of them because we don't understand them. The fact that we don't understand them means it's difficult to confidently rule out this possibility.

The reason we might privilege the hypothesis (https://www.lesswrong.com/w/privileging-the-hypothesis) at all is because we might expect that the human behavior of talking about consciousness is causally downstream of humans having consciousness.

> We have reason to assume consciousness exists because it serves some purpose in our evolutionary history, like pain, fear, hunger, love and every other biological function that simply don't exist in computers. The idea doesn't really make any sense when you think about it.

I don't really think we _have_ to assume this. Sure, it seems reasonable to give some weight to the hypothesis that if it wasn't adaptive, we wouldn't have it. (But not an overwhelming amount of weight.) This doesn't say anything about the underlying mechanism that causes it, and what other circumstances might cause it to exist elsewhere.

> If GPT-5 is conscious, why not GPT-1?

Because GPT-1 (and all of those other things) don't display behaviors that, in humans, we believe are causally downstream of having consciousness? That was the entire point of my comment.

And, to be clear, I don't actually put that high a probability that current models have most (or "enough") of the relevant qualities that people are talking about when they talk about consciousness - maybe 5-10%? But the idea that there's literally no reason to think this is something that might be possible, now or in the future, is quite strange, and I think would require believing some pretty weird things (like dualism, etc).
by thaumasiotes | 2025-08-16 05:41:53+00:00
> and then when traveling, people could at a basic level read the signs and menus, and communicate at a basic level by writing, without having to know anything about the language

Well, you have to be careful; something that actually happened to me was recognizing that the first element of 牛蛙 meant "cow", without recognizing that the second part made it "bullfrog".

> We could do the same thing in English as in Japanese -- replace loads of letters with Chinese characters: Write "跑ing" instead of "running", and so on.

Interesting choice. Japanese doesn't do that - it follows classical Chinese by using the character 走 for the sense "run". 跑 is Chinese-specific.

> Just for kicks, I asked Claude to try its hand at writing the opening lines of Pride and Prejudice in this manner

This comes off weirdly to me because it's so Japanese. But I guess that was the idea. I have some particular questions:

>> this 真理 is so 好 固定ed in the 心s

I haven't checked on the English text, but it's difficult for me not to read this as "this truth is so well fixed in the hearts...". But I'm not sure that that sense of 好 is available in Japanese, where I'd expect it to be a verb meaning "like".

>> he is 考慮ed as the 正当 財産 of some 一 or 他 of their 娘s.

This doesn't appear to be a problem, but I still felt the need to call out what looks like the use of an exclusively masculine pronoun (in modern Chinese) to refer to "daughters".

>> Mr. Bennet 返答ed that he had 不.

This seems wrong; I feel sure that 未 would be more appropriate than 不.

>> Mr. Bennet 作 no 答.

This would appear to render the English "Mr. Bennet made no reply." I'm not comfortable with the use of 作; just because the word in the idiom is make doesn't mean that any making is involved.

Do you know whether Japanese use of kanji focuses more on establishing that a kanji corresponds to some Japanese syllables and using that kanji wherever those syllables occur [as suggested by "作 no 答"], or more on using kanji to represent certain semantics however those semantics might be pronounced [as might suggest "言 no 答"]?
by nojs | 2025-08-16 05:42:12+00:00
"Subagent orchestration" is also a really quick win in Claude. You can just say "spawn a subagent to do each task in X, give it Y context".

This lets you a) run things in parallel if you want, but also b) keep the main agent's context clean, and therefore run much larger, longer running tasks without the "race against the context clock" issue.
by thaumasiotes | 2025-08-16 05:42:26+00:00
> One interesting thing I learned while researching this comment was that a big reason Hanja disappeared was because Koreans gained literacy during the typewriting era, but before computer auto-suggested keyboards, and it was just substantially easier to make and use a letter-based typewriter.

If you look in the right places, you can find people complaining about how it's impossible to dynamically render hangul blocks, which means that a Korean font needs to define glyphs for every possible Korean syllable as opposed to just defining the elements of the system and letting a word processor assemble them as appropriate.

If that's true, I don't see how hangul could have had any typewriter-based advantage over hanja. From the typewriter's perspective, there's no difference.

The Chinese used typewriters by defining a typewriter code. Assuming that that was necessary for hanja, and also for hangul, why would it promote the disappearance of hanja?

If a typewriter code wasn't necessary for hangul, how did we forget how to lay out the blocks in between then and now? Hangul have been in continuous use for all that period.
by simoncion | 2025-08-16 05:43:21+00:00
Speaking of human-level capabilities, it looks like I totally failed to correctly read the section of your comment that I quoted. Shame on me.

However, I'd expect that "Appearing to fail to reason well enough to know how to always fail to lose, and -if the opportunity presents itself- win at one of the simplest games there is." is absolutely not a desired outcome for OpenAI, or any other company that's burning billions of dollars producing LLMs.

If their robot was currently reliably capable of adequate performance at Tic Tac Toe, it absolutely would be exhibiting that behavior.
by kyboren | 2025-08-16 05:43:40+00:00
I wouldn't consider it a threatening act. But I am not Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces.

I am not advocating an invasion of Canada. I deplore the annexation rhetoric coming from POTUS. I don't believe there is a serious intention to annex Canada through military force, but I do believe loose talk like what we've seen harms our national security interests and understandably frightens our utterly vulnerable neighbors.

However, I also believe that in this new Great Game it's important to understand the actual state of the board and the likely actions/reactions of the other players.

Deluding oneself that Canada can resist a full-scale invasion by their only neighbor with overwhelming military, economic, industrial, financial, and diplomatic advantages because foreign nations will be obliged to join the war on Canada's side is unwise.

Deluding oneself that developing nuclear weapons would not be an easy casus belli for an actually hostile US is similarly unwise.
by Waterluvian | 2025-08-16 05:43:50+00:00
> Canada would be much better off just surrendering and trying to maintain a national identity post-annexation in the hope of a future peaceful secession.

I think the difference between American values and real values is that there’s nothing tolerable about surrendering to Nazis in hope of some sort of better deal. For a nation that’s been a freedom and liberty cosplayer, I can understand why this idea seems sensible, logical even.
by econ | 2025-08-16 05:43:53+00:00
For me it maps elegantly on previous happenings.

When the radio came people almost instantly stopped singing and playing instruments. Many might not be aware of it but for thousands of years singing was a normal expression of a good mood and learning to play an instrument was a gateway to lifting the mood. Dancing is still in working order but it lacks the emotional depth that provided a window into the soul of those you live and work with.

A simpler example is the calculator. People stopped doing it by hand and forgot how.

Most desk work is going to get obliterated. We are going to forget how.

The underlings on the work floor currently know little to nothing about management. If they can query an AI in private it will point out why their idea is stupid or it will refine it into something sensible enough to try. Eventually you say the magic words and the code to make it so happens. If it works you put it live. No real thinking required.

Early on you probably get large AI cleanup crews to fix the hallucinations (with better prompts)
by dagmx | 2025-08-16 05:44:48+00:00
They’re not sacred but changing them gives a much lower payoff than the pain of changing.

None of your suggestions actually improve the situation. They’d just not scale the way you think they would to other display types when you query the safe area.

For example, Apple specifically calls out why they use the safe area term to correspond to different display types

> In tvOS, the safe area also includes the screen’s overscan insets, which represent the area covered by the screen’s bezel.

Unobstructed is longer, and provides no extra information of value. Go work in a visual industry and see how long before you get tired of saying title unobstructed and action unobstructed.

Again, you’re coming at this form the perspective of a lay person in the realm of displays and getting angered that the term isn’t immediately intuitive to you personally, rather than the entire industry that has a standard term that they use and have for many decades.
by platevoltage | 2025-08-16 05:44:52+00:00
I'll take "lawless" California over seeing the same Rankin cop watching a stop sign at the entrance to Braddock in order to write "rolling stop" tickets every 15 minutes. I also like that I don't have to worry about a police chief holding me at gunpoint because the fire alarm happened to go off while I was alone in a warehouse space that I was renting.

I'm going to guess that the people who think the entire state looks like LA in 1992 probably weren't going to vacation here in the first place.
by supertrope | 2025-08-16 05:45:27+00:00
People prefer a teleological explanation. It has the allure of a simplistic solution. Having a direct and complete solution out there is emotionally satisfying. Just like how subduing the villain saves the day, why not tax/ban landlords/immigrants/Wall Street/your favorite outgroup here? If there’s no simple solution available that’s not nearly as hopeful of a message. Politicians and marketers peddle simplistic “solutions” to a willing audience.
by daxfohl | 2025-08-16 05:45:39+00:00
And old unicorns like airbnb and uber now having to compete with traditional hotels and taxis again.

I think Elon's takeover of twitter set something of a precedent too: if he could reduce headcount as much as he did and still have a functioning product, then why can't I?

BTW I also don't think it has much to do with that engineering tax deferral code change that people keep talking about. My cynical hunch is that that topic keeps getting seeded by the billionaires who have the most to gain by reversing it, and hey maybe they'll hire an extra engineer or two afterward just to be good sports, but it's not going to reverse any major employment trends.
by imsh4yy | 2025-08-16 05:45:51+00:00
Not sure if I understand the question, but I'll do my best to answer.

I guess Agents/Agentic are too broad of a term. All of this is really an LLM that has a set of tools that may or may not be other LLMs. You don't really need a framework as long as you can make HTTP calls to openrouter or some other provider and handle tool calling.

I'm using the AI sdk as it plays very nicely with TypeScript and gives you a lot of interesting features like handling server-side/client-side tool calling and synchronization.

My current setup has a mix of tools, some of which are pure functions (i.e. database queries), some of which handle server-side mutations (i.e. scheduling a changelog), and some of which are supposed to run locally on the client (i.e. updating TipTap editor).

Again, hopefully this somewhat answers the question, but happy to provide more details if needed.
by tomhow | 2025-08-16 05:46:05+00:00
> WHICH IS A HUGE REASON WHY TRUMP IS ASKING FOR RATES TO COME DOWN!!!!! The guy freaking knows business, whether your little minds can accept it or not, the people in charge right now actually are trying to fix this crap.

Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.

Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.

When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."

Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.

Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes.

Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.

Please don't use uppercase for emphasis. If you want to emphasize a word or phrase, put asterisks* around it and it will get italicized.*

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
by mindcrime | 2025-08-16 05:47:08+00:00
Maybe something in Hacker's Delight[1]? Or Swartzlander's Computer Arithmetic[2] series? There's probably also some coverage somewhere in the Knuth's The Art of Computer Programming, but no idea which volume off-hand.

And if you really want to go down a rabbit hole, there's the Computer Arithmetic[3] conference[4] proceedings[5].

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker%27s_Delight

[2]: https://www.amazon.com/Computer-Arithmetic-Volumes-Earl-Swar...

[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_arithmetic

[4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARITH_Symposium_on_Computer_Ar...

[5]: https://www.acsel-lab.com/arithmetic/