MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by fuckaj | 2025-08-24 11:03:29+00:00
What if once the 100k dev jobs are gone the equivalent value in terms of AI is nowhere near that. Say it is 5k instead?

Due to oversupply. First you needed humans who can code. But now you need scalable compute.

Equivalent would be hiring those people to wave a flag infront of a car. They are replaced bt modern cars, but you dont get to receive the flag wavers wage as captured value for long if at all.
by samrus | 2025-08-24 11:04:43+00:00
i think thats a bit too defensive. the reasonable take has been that AI is definitely a game changer, like the internet was, but it was still in a bubble because people extrapolated the S-curve as though it was an exponential explosion. just like they did with the internet.

so yeah, targeted well thought out usecases that are handled well by LLMs will deliver value, but it wont replace developers or anything like that, which is what these people with barely an understanding of the tech's limitations have been claiming.

OpenAI hasnt "internally achieved" AGI. thats what people are calling bullshit on
by mort96 | 2025-08-24 11:04:53+00:00
I don't know when the deal was agreed. Two weeks ago, on august 8th, the share price was $19.95, so if the price was set then, the US over-paid a bit.

I don't know how long it takes between when the price is set and when the deal becomes public. If the final price was set on friday, then yeah, there was a slight discount (though even then, the discount was within Intel's normal random short term share price fluctuations).

Maybe it's completely fair to call this a proper discount, I'm genuinely not familiar enough with the finance world to say. Regardless, I feel that this is important context; it's not like Intel's share price has been stable at between $24 and $25 per share for years and then the US comes in and buys at $20.
by Hendrikto | 2025-08-24 11:05:05+00:00
> I'm not sure why Steam always seems to be exempt from the "perils of digital ownership" arguments

Because they have been consistently good citizens for more than 2 decades. They built a reputation. Something other companies are eager to piss away at the first opportunity to sell out or squeeze their customers.

It’s not surprising that Valve is successful and trusted with this approach. What is surprising is that it is apparently so incredibly hard for other companies to understand this very simple fact.

1. Build a good product.

2. Consistently act in good faith.

3. Profit.
Show HN: Clean for Slack – bulk delete Slack messages directly from the browser
by velikii | 2025-08-24 11:05:57+00:00
Slack makes it really hard to clean up old messages. Even if you’re an admin, there’s no built-in way to bulk delete channels, DMs or general history.

I built /clean for Slack, a Chrome extension that runs entirely in your browser and lets you bulk delete messages without OAuth or external servers.

How it works: • Uses your existing Slack web session (no tokens to paste, no servers in the middle) • Calls Slack’s API endpoints directly from your browser • Respects rate limits (safe for large jobs, just takes time) • Admins/owners can delete all messages, non-admins can delete only their own

Features: • Delete across channels, DMs, and group chats • Filter by date, user, or skip pinned/starred messages • Progress tracker so you can see it working • Everything happens locally — nothing leaves your browser

Why I built it: I had the same pain many teams do: Slack workspaces full of old clutter, but no practical way to wipe things clean without scripts, legacy tokens, or paying for tools that don’t work.

Link: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/clean-for-slack/efn...

I’d love feedback on the approach. Do you think browser-only extensions like this (no servers, no OAuth) are the right way to go for these kinds of tools?
by SpecialistK | 2025-08-24 11:05:57+00:00
That doesn't pass the sniff test. If a masked assailant in the street is going to rob me, but has to say a certain sentence before so and almost uniformly does, that speaks to the legal priorities of those making the laws.

If hoovering up my data is bad, make it illegal. Don't wrap it up in niceties and then deflect the blame.
by antonvs | 2025-08-24 11:06:21+00:00
> Is the cooling off because industry leadership promised agi last year and it’s not here yet?

Exactly. The business world isn't remotely close to being rational. The technology is incredible, but that doesn't mean it's going to translate to massive business value in the next quarter.

The market reaction to this is driven by hype and by people who don't understand the technology well enough to see through the hype.
by rsynnott | 2025-08-24 11:07:21+00:00
I mean, “it works occasionally, in extremely restrictive circumstances” could be said of nearly any previous tech bubble (crypto may be the one example that just never really delivered anything much at all); this even works for the _previous_ AI bubbles. Expert systems are still, slightly, a thing, say.

LLMs are receiving a level of investment that appears to be based on them being world-changing, and that just doesn’t seem to be working out.
by SpecialistK | 2025-08-24 11:07:59+00:00
I'm 90% sure that this wouldn't pass, even in jurisdictions like Washington State where mutual combat is legal.

The EU passed laws regarding cookies. Were they so inept as to not understand how cookies are used, or are they in cahoots with the bad actors to give them an out? Hanlon's Razor is not kind to the regulations (/regulators) either way.
by squigz | 2025-08-24 11:08:06+00:00
> I'm not sure why Steam always seems to be exempt from the "perils of digital ownership" arguments

They're not, really, but they've given us little reason to distrust them.

I'm also fairly confident there would be some fun legal stuff going on if Steam tried that. People have thousands - tens of thousands - of dollars worth of stuff on Steam. That isn't really the same as, say, having to watch ads even after paying for a subscription.
by andyjohnson0 | 2025-08-24 11:08:11+00:00
> Is this about money? is this ideological? what is this, what's going on?

The proximate cause is that the fossil fuel lobby went all-in on getting Trump elected. They paid big miney [1] and they expect a payback for that. Moves against renewables, electric vehicles, regulation, etc. are part of the transaction.

More widely, renewables occupy an adjacent space in the conservative worldview to environmentalists and the liberal left. Being seen to destroy them reinforces Trump's leadership of his base. And emphasising use of traditional, domestic, fossil-based energy sources appeals to nationalist/traditionalist sentiment.

So its money and ideology.

[1] https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2025/01/the-fossil-fuel-i...
Show HN: Clean for Slack – bulk delete Slack messages directly from the browser
by velikii | 2025-08-24 11:08:48+00:00
Slack makes it really hard to clean up old messages. Even if you’re an admin, there’s no built-in way to bulk delete channels, DMs or general history.

I built /clean for Slack, a Chrome extension that runs entirely in your browser and lets you bulk delete messages without OAuth or external servers.

How it works: • Uses your existing Slack web session (no tokens to paste, no servers in the middle) • Calls Slack’s API endpoints directly from your browser • Respects rate limits (safe for large jobs, just takes time) • Admins/owners can delete all messages, non-admins can delete only their own

Features: • Delete across channels, DMs, and group chats • Filter by date, user, or skip pinned/starred messages • Progress tracker so you can see it working • Everything happens locally — nothing leaves your browser

Why I built it: I had the same pain many teams do: Slack workspaces full of old clutter, but no practical way to wipe things clean without scripts, legacy tokens or paying for tools that don’t work.

Chrome Web Store link: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/clean-for-slack/efn...

I’d love feedback on the approach. Do you think browser-only extensions like this (no servers, no OAuth) are the right way to go for these kinds of tools?
by Gigachad | 2025-08-24 11:09:56+00:00
The old way was not really that you would spend 2 hours googling for the exact procedure you need, but that you would spend time following getting started tutorials, following along with example projects, and generally learn the entire program. Then when you go to make something specific, you'd be able to come up with the steps required yourself because you know the program.

I'm not discounting the value of having ChatGPT just hand you the answer straight up. If you just want to get the task done as fast as possible that's a pretty cool option that didn't used to exist. But the old way wasn't really worse.
by 9dev | 2025-08-24 11:10:41+00:00
The blunt Trump praise ("This is Trump going bigger than Nixon") is just the icing on the cake.

Is this really all that’s left of the United States, that were once built on big ideas and ideals? A nation of immigrants that distilled the best of all nations, now folding in on itself, a nation of freedom and equality now going after those with the wrong opinion, a nation of science now dictating research?
by ThatPlayer | 2025-08-24 11:11:05+00:00
Steam is currently being sued by Wolfire for being anti-competitive by allegedly having a "platform most-favored-nations" clause. Preventing games on other platforms from being priced lower.

According to the developer:

> [Valve] would remove Overgrowth from Steam if I allowed it to be sold at a lower price anywhere, even from my own website without Steam keys and without Steam’s DRM.

> I believe that other developers who charged lower prices on other stores have been contacted by Valve, telling them that their games will be removed from Steam if they did not raise their prices on competing stores.

https://www.wolfire.com/blog/2021/05/Regarding-the-Valve-cla...
by b112 | 2025-08-24 11:13:18+00:00
Best as I can tell, the weird, broken logic is "these funds were already allocated via the chips act and another act, but we axed that, so buying the shares instead is free".

So sure, no new funds, of which "free" is a nutty, insane interpretation, but whatever.

Weird ways to convey it aside, I do like shares as a guarantee for grants, which is not a new thing, but I'd still like to enforce funds allocation for those funds. Not sure if that's happening still.
by gdbsjjdn | 2025-08-24 11:13:28+00:00
NorthGuard looks like a clean sheet redesign of Kafka. The OSS Kafka community has taken a long time to implement things like KRaft, which addressed metadata scalability concerns by storing metadata in the brokers themselves (it used to be in a separate data store called ZooKeeper which was operationally complicated). NorthGuard also supports splitting and merging ranges of keys without repartitioning the entire existing dataset. The way records are assigned to partitions is a big problem in running Apache Kafka at scale because it requires predicting the key distribution and number of partitions ahead of time.

Confluent is 11 years old and IPOed several years ago. It was founded by 3 ex-LinkedIn people who originally designed Kafka. 2 of the 3 founders are still at the company. LinkedIn never used Confluent, Confluent was a company founded to sell an enterprise version of the open source project (and later a cloud version).
by mattmanser | 2025-08-24 11:13:29+00:00
I feel TDD ended up fizzling out quite a bit in the industry, with some evangelists later admitting they'd taken to often writing the code first, then the tests.

To me it's always felt like waterfall in disguise and just didn't fit how I make programs. I feel it's just not a good way to build a complex system with unknown unknowns.

That the AI design process seems to rely on this same pattern feels off to me, and shows a weakness of developing this way.

It might not matter, admittedly. It could be that the flexibility of having the AI rearchitect a significant chunk of code on the fly works as a replacement to the flexibility of designing as you go.
Show HN: Digital Wardrobe – Track your daily outfit cost
by Jasperio | 2025-08-24 11:14:43+00:00
*The Problem:* A $200 jacket worn twice = $100 per wear. A $50 t-shirt worn weekly = $2.50 per wear. Most wardrobe apps focus on outfit planning, but none track the actual cost of what you wear.

*The Solution:* Digital Wardrobe lets you: - Upload photos of your clothes - Track how often you wear each item - Calculate cost-per-wear for every piece - Get data-driven insights for smarter buying decisions

*Tech Stack:* - Next.js + TypeScript - Supabase for auth & storage - Tailwind CSS + shadcn/ui - Deployed on Vercel

*Why I Built This:* I wanted a simple way to make fashion choices based on data rather than impulse. Now I can see what’s truly worth keeping and plan outfits smarter.

MVP built in 2 days. Looking for feedback on: - UX/UI improvements - Additional metrics to track - Feature ideas for future releases

Try it out and let me know what you think: https://digital-wardrobe-ivory.vercel.app/
by aeonik | 2025-08-24 11:15:13+00:00
Even novel thoughts are rarely original.

Every time I come up with an algorithm idea, or a system idea, I'm always checking who has done it before, and I always find significant prior art.

Even for really niche things.

I think my name Aeonik Chaos might be one of the only original, never before done things. And even that was just an extension of established linguistic rules.
by Pooge | 2025-08-24 11:15:24+00:00
The priority of the GDRP was that you needed your users' consent to process their personal data. The industry answer—cookie banners—is something that the industry created because their tracking incentives were higher than their users' experience.

Do Not Track was a thing since basically forever and the industry willfully chose to ignore it.

If you want to keep using websites that have dark patterns and track you, that's on you. I would argue it's even better than before because at least the average user would notice he's being tracked and the website makes it clear that the user's interests are not aligned with the website's owner.

Blaming it on the lawmakers—which I use as mockery as much as the next guy—is of bad faith, in my opinion.
Show HN: Bicyclopedia
by lemoing | 2025-08-24 11:15:26+00:00
Hey folks!

A bit of background: I'm a software engineer by trade, but I'm currently on sabbatical doing a year-long working holiday in Australia. I love riding bikes but only had the most beginner-level knowledge of them before I found a job at a bike shop. This was a fun personal project to try to capture some of what I've learned so far, targeted at fellow beginners. It's going to be incomplete/lacking if you already have some bike knowledge, but I hope you all enjoyed it all the same.

Please keep the feedback coming; it's late in Australia, but I want to make sure the bike info is at least accurate, if not comprehensive!
by thro1 | 2025-08-24 11:15:36+00:00
for documents, stylesheets are enough, KISS.

no, it don't wont :) that's the point

---

WWW made of interlinked documents,

yet making it to be interlinked code too.. may not last, as codes like changing and finding new ways.

Fancy stuff as JS may be very useful and I like it too, momentary, when well applied, but it needs: an effort to use it, keep working, adapting, if interoperating, all specific, for the purpose - and power, can't open 1000s tabs. Different kind of being. More fun, like with the hammer for everyhthing - not shy like XSLT trying be transparent.
by zuInnp | 2025-08-24 11:15:46+00:00
What I don't get about all the "if you plan it out first, it gets better" approach is, how did they work before?!

For anything bigger than small size features, I always think about what I do and why I do things. Sometimes in my head, sometimes on paper, a Confluence page or a white board.

I don't really get it. 80 % of software engineering is to figure out what you need and how to achieve this. You check with the stake holders, write down the idea of what you want to do and WHY you want to do it. You do some research.

Last 20 % of the process is coding.

This was always the process. You don't need AI for proper planning and defining your goals.
by axiolite | 2025-08-24 11:15:46+00:00
Land in Texas and Arizona *is* rather cheap.

They already have fabs nearby, and so, fab suppliers/services in the area.

They have a large employee pool in the vicinity, with modest salary expectations.

The southern US mostly doesn't have blizzards and ice that regularly knocks out electric supply lines, and/or makes it impossible for employees to get to/from work for days/weeks at a time.

Water is about the cheapest resource around. Even in water-stressed areas (while it may cost several times what it would in wetter parts of the US) it's still an insignificant expense for any industry that doesn't need an absolutely obscene continual supply.

Roof-top PV solar power works out a lot better in the southern US than further north.
by samrus | 2025-08-24 11:15:56+00:00
interesting. that living plan document is something humans learn to make and update themselves. these problems are dynamical, requiring the solver to maintain state, and the plan is what records that.

doing it for the LLM really highlights that limitation. they arent trained statefully, not at the foundation model, where it matters. that state gets reproduced on top of the model in the form of "reasoning" and "chain of thought" but that level of scaffolding is a classic example of the bitter lesson. like semantic trees of old.

the representation learning + transformer model needs to be evolved to handle state, then it should be able to do these things itself
by SXX | 2025-08-24 11:16:17+00:00
As consumer I very much agree with you, but as game developer 30% is abysmal amount of money. Imagine you're indie developer or owner of a small 3-10 people studio that finally released reasonably successful game:

1 - Let's say you invested $100,000 of your own money for vertical slice and managed to find a publisher to give you $200,000 to complete the game. 2 - Ignore that you had some failed games before, but this time you let's say sold 100,000 copies for $10 each average. 100k sold is a big success really.

But here is the math:

1 - Valve got $1,000,000 as gross revenue for 100,000 sales. 2 - Usually 16% is VAT and immenient refunds. So now $840,000 left. 3 - Now Valve took their 30% cut. $588,000 left. 4 - Now your publisher took $200,000 to recoup invested money. $388,000 left. 5 - Now publisher split remaining $388,000 by honest 50/50.

Now your company sold 100,000 copies of a game, but only get $194,000 gross income as royalties. And if you will make any profit you'll likely pay at least 20% corporate or divident taxes so yeah at best your profit gonna be $155,000.

So you did all the work, somehow managed to fund it, worked on game for a year and got $155,000 while Valve made $252,000 for payment processing and CDN. Steam do not provide marketing - it only boost already successful products.

PS: This is best case scenario. Usually your publisher will also recoup whatever expenses they had on their end for marketing and whatever.
by notahacker | 2025-08-24 11:16:25+00:00
Also notable that in the centuries following Mercator projection, Africa, the Indian subcontinent and the northern parts of South America actually shrunk by the map were regarded as vast, unexplored wildernesses full of resources to plunder (and the northern realms expanded by the projection as inaccessible icy wasteland). Difficult to imagine the Gall-Peters projection making conquistadors and colonists from little European countries more respectful of the inhabitants of the equatorial realms, though I guess they might have got lost more using it...
by perihelions | 2025-08-24 11:17:07+00:00
Additional context missing in the NPR: Denmark is the majority owner of the offshore wind company, Ørsted, holding 50.1% of its shares (has to hold a majority by law[0]). This is could be Trump retaliating against or pressurizing the Danish government—likely his ongoing attempt to anschluss Greenland.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ørsted_(company)#Shareholders

edit to add: Moreover, Denmark's foreign minister visited California this Friday, and met with Gavin Newsom[1]—obviously a provocation to Trump, given Newsom's political actions. A connection FT also made[2].

I don't know why I'm being mass-downvoted. This is a perfectly valid theory—it'd be a continuation of a retaliation threat Trump himself made, overtly [3].

[1] https://www.nbcbayarea.com/california-3/newsom-partnership-d... ("Newsom signs partnership with Denmark on climate and tech" (Aug. 22))

[2] https://www.ft.com/content/27bce438-9008-4c46-979a-26217e75a... ( https://archive.is/r2FfQ ) ("Ørsted hit by US stop-work order on Rhode Island wind farm")

[3] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2025-01-07/trump-... ("Trump Threatens Denmark With Tariffs Over Greenland" (Jan. 7))
by mrkeen | 2025-08-24 11:17:18+00:00
Adding onto this.

> LinkedIn used site activity data (e.g. someone liked this, someone posted this)1 for many things - tracking fraud/abuse, matching jobs to users, training ML models, basic features of the website (e.g who viewed your profile, the newsfeed), warehouse ingestion for offline analysis/reporting and etc.

Who controls the database? Is it the fraud/abuse team responsible for the migrations? Does the ML team tell the Newsfeed team to stop doing so many writes because it's slowing things down?
by monkeyelite | 2025-08-24 11:18:12+00:00
Your management is so effective you are not even aware of the structure around you! there is a place you come to ready with goals and tasks, and those tasks are prepared for you to apply your engineering skill (other departments will apply their skills separately and be added to yours). And there are ways to communicate if you need resources or support.

Think about how common it is for someone to be effective at work and totally confused and aimless in their personal life. They might have trouble sticking to projects, or not know what goals are worthwhile, or make bad decisions - all while performing great at work.

I am an IC at the lowest rung of any org chart with no aspirations to change that.
by ViewTrick1002 | 2025-08-24 11:18:35+00:00
It is sad to see someone fall to logical inconsistencies because you know you are wrong, but can't bring yourself to admit it.

Do we live in 2005 or 2025? We live in 2025 and can not influence past actions.

Solar power was expensive a decade ago. Today it is not. We build it based on 2025 costs and not 2005. I would suggest you stop crying over spilled milk and instead start looking forward.

Today renewables are the cheapest source of energy in human history, why don't you celebrate that we over the coming decades finally are able to let go off fossil fuels for all but emergency and niche use cases?

How much money has been spent on extra subsidies on top of what a fossil based system would cost for Energiewende? Say €200B? Please do not link the Norwegian professor double counting costs as a source, that would just prove how desperate you are.

As per modern western nuclear construction costs that would result in about 10-15 GW of nuclear power. But somehow that would be enough to power a grid which over the year averages 56 GW. Does not sound very logical does it? Or do you suggest the now phased out fleet could be running today without spending enormous sums on LTO upgrades?

And then you round it all off with crying about perfect. Missing the forest for the trees.

Who cares if the emergency reserves are a tiny bit of fossil fuels when we have an entire economy to decarbonize? The costs to switch the reserves to biofuels, synfuels or pure hydrogen are negligible and trivial to do when they become the most pressing matter to decarbonize.

Take the US and ethanol mix in for gasoline. That is enough energy to run the entire US grid without any other source for 16 days. What happens as we switch the car fleet to BEVs? The ethanol becomes available for emergency reserve duties.