MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by bigyabai | 2025-08-07 21:20:33+00:00
One must imagine that a future, liberal court that empathizes with your case wouldn't accept a discriminatory license like that as legally-binding in the first place. It's intent on stripping away rights that you're not qualified to take away, ones that in certain places are protected as civil rights.

Frankly, it's a snipe chase trying to snare someone with discriminatory software licenses no matter who is in charge. Even the GPL doesn't totally succeed at deterring freeloaders, any sort of source-available license will inherently let your perceived boogeyman-of-choice win.
by internetter | 2025-08-07 21:21:13+00:00
You'll find that opinion is still divided among these three options. And bcrypt is harder to mess up. It has less parameters (it doesn't fall apart as easy) and salting is built in, whereas its not for scrypt and argon2. If, knowing nothing else about the competency of the programmer, I had to choose between an application using scrypt, argon2 and bcrypt, I'd pick bcrypt any day.
by kristopolous | 2025-08-07 21:21:27+00:00
https://github.com/etiennefd/hhr-tech-tree/blob/main/src/scr... this is kind of how I expected it. Honestly I would have done https://dumps.wikimedia.org/ and then parsed it.

Additionally I've always wanted institutions to be part of the timeline of technology. Corporations, Nation-states, Universities, Guilds, International Organizations - the ways people innovatively organize make things possible that otherwise wouldn't be.

The higgs boson experiments, for example wouldn't have been possible without the complex international institutions that orchestrated it. Manhattan project, Moon landing, the internet ... the iphone ...
by BizarroLand | 2025-08-07 21:21:59+00:00
When I say, "Insanely bad compared to what else in the animal kingdom?" and you respond with, "compared to books or other permanent records"

"Books or permanent records" are not in the animal kingdom.

Apples to Apples we are the best or so very nearly the best in every category of intelligence on the planet IN THE ANIMAL KINGDOM that when in one specific test another animal beats a human the gap is barely measurable.
by croddin | 2025-08-07 21:22:05+00:00
Top 10 by total descendants (direct + indirect)

1: Control of fire — 585

2: Charcoal — 444

3: Iron — 422

4: Iron smelting and wrought iron — 419

5: Ceramic — 404

6: Pottery — 402

7: Induction coil — 389

8: Raft — 365

9: Boat — 363

10: Alcohol fermentation — 353

Top 10 by total ancestors (direct + indirect)

1: Robotaxi — 253

2: Moon landing — 242

3: Space telescope — 238

4: Lidar — 236

5: Satellite television — 231

6: Space station — 228

7: Stealth aircraft — 228

8: Reusable spacecraft — 224

9: Satellite navigation system — 224

10: Communications satellite — 224
by wisty | 2025-08-07 21:22:08+00:00
The OP said something about how the human body doesn't make "intelligent" decisions.

I was being cheeky, not using the best word for the job.

Evolution is not really passive, it's a combination of mutation (which is not intelligent, but not really passive) PLUS a passive filter, which gives the illusion of intelligence since it ends up as a kind of optimiser.

Now, due to various factors, evolution isn't perfect. For gene expression reasons (I think) the layout of mammal skeletons are not really effected much mutations, but bone sizes are; so you have giraffes with huge neck bones that are the same size as human neck bones (this isn't the best way to do it). You have bats with the same finger bones as humans (or at least very similar) acting as wings. Elephant feet are almost the same as human feet in an x-ray. Some genetic "knobs" are easier to turn than others, and it can be that shrinking something is easier than getting rid of it. Just google "vestigial structure". Actually, LLM are kind of similar (it's easier to optimise a value to zero than to remove it, even if removing a value will make the model better and faster).

It's also more adaptative than optimal. Some argue it's the "selfish gene" that "wants" to be passed on. If a gene makes you kill all the competition, that's a "fit" gene. If working in a team increases the survival rate of your cousins (who also kind of carry your genes) it's "fit". If having a certain percent of a village be gay would somehow increase survival rates (especially of their kin) then having a chance of being gay is "fit" even if the individuals themselves could be less likely to reproduce.

There's also some meta stuff about how the rate of mutations could partly be genetic.

Evolution is seen as intelligence because it solves hard problems, and IMO that's kind of the only thing intelligence needs? People who talk about "consciousness" talk a lot about how they think they think, but is how we think actually an illusion? The feeling of understanding is just a chemical pleasure hit when the brain hits the "problem solved" button. Consciousness might be an illusion, we might make a decision and wonder how we made it, then an AI in our brain quickly justifies it in some BS way that isn't actually our real thinking process.
by zoeysmithe | 2025-08-07 21:23:13+00:00
Voice is really sub-par and slow, even if you're healthy and abled. And loud and annoying in shared spaces.

I wonder if we'll have smart-lens glasses where our eyes 'type' much faster than we could possibly talk. Predicative text keyboards tracking eyeballs is something that already exists. I wonder if AI and smartglasses is a natural combo for a future formfactor. Meta seems to be leaning that way with their RayBan collaboration and rumors of adding a screen to the lenses.
by hahahacorn | 2025-08-07 21:23:17+00:00
Anecdotally, as someone who operates in a very large legacy codebase, I am very impressed by GPT-5's agentic abilities so far. I've given it the same tasks I've given Claude and previous iterations via the Codex CLI, and instead of getting loss due to the massive scope of the problem, it correctly identifies the large scope and breaks it down into it's correct parts and creates the correct plan and begins executing.

I am wildly impressed. I do not believe that the 0.x% increase in benchmarks tell the story of this release at all.
by vermaden | 2025-08-07 21:23:28+00:00
When You make research how to make it for the first time - it can - if you want to check at least several different guides ... but that covers only the encryption part.

There is also the ZFSBootMenu part ...

If you have done this at least once - noted the commands, etc. - it will take shorter - but never shorter then FreeBSD 'Auto (ZFS)' option in the bsdinstall(8) installer where you just select the disk on which it needs to happen and hit [ENTER] key.
by nbadg | 2025-08-07 21:23:54+00:00
That's not what the exit tax is, though. The German exit tax is effectively just a way to give the existing capital gains tax a way to tax unrealized gains when you leave the country, to prevent you from dodging taxes on capital gains by simply leaving the country.

In other words, it's not an additional claim. It's simply an enforcement mechanism for the money you already hypothetically owe.
by oiWecsio | 2025-08-07 21:24:04+00:00
s0ix is another great example that the world, or a bit more precisely, "general purpose hardware", has been going to absolute fucking shit.

Who the hell needs this crap? S3 used to be just perfect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InstantGo

> [...] a Microsoft specification for Windows 8 (and later) hardware and software that aims to bring smartphone-type power management capabilities to the PC platform [...] allows the operating system to continue performing background tasks, such as updating content from apps, when a device is not being used [...]

We've all needed this like a big fucking kick in the groin. "Modern standby" my ass.

Microsoft has great firmware engineers, but the functionality they design, and then mandate, so that Windows can have its rotten tentacles into the guts of the firmware, is absolutely disgusting. Technically well implemented, but the goal is usually terrible.
by diggan | 2025-08-07 21:24:04+00:00
> I find coding to be harder to benchmark because there are so many ways to write the same solution. A "correct" solution may be terrible in another context due to loss of speed, security, etc.

Yeah, I also do my own benchmarks, but as you said, coding ones are a bit harder. Currently I'm mostly benchmarking the accuracy of the tools I've written, which do bite-sized work. One tool is for editing parts of files, another to rewrite files fully, and so on, and each is individually benchmarked. But they're very specific, I do no overall benchmark for "Change feature X to do Y" which would span a "session", haven't find any good way of evaluating the results, just like you :)
by ssalazar | 2025-08-07 21:24:07+00:00
> very fancy search engines

This is a common misunderstanding of LLMs. The major, qualitative difference is that LLMs represent their knowledge in a latent space that is composable and can be interpolated. For a significant class of programming problems this is industry changing.

E.g. "solve problem X for which there is copious training data, subject to constraints Y for which there is also copious training data" can actually solve a lot of engineering problems for combinations of X and Y that never previously existed, and instead would take many hours of assembling code from a patchwork of tutorials and StackOverflow posts.

This leaves the unknown issues that require deeper reasoning to established software engineers, but so much of the technology industry is using well known stacks to implement CRUD and moving bytes from A to B for different business needs. This is what LLMs basically turbocharge.
by novok | 2025-08-07 21:24:44+00:00
They are moving beyond just big transformer blob LLM text prediction. Mixture of Experts is not preassembled for example, it's something like x empty experts with an empty router and the experts and routing emerges naturally with training, modeling the brain part architecture we see the brain more. There is stuff "Integrated Gated Calculator (IGC)" in Jan 2025 which makes a premade calculator neural network and integrates it directly into the neural network and gets around the entire issue of making LLMs do basic number computation and the clunkiness of generating "run tool tokens". The model naturally learns to use the IGC built into itself because it will always beat any kind of computation memorization in the reward function very quickly.

Models are truly input multimodal now. Feeding an image, feeding audio and feeding text all go into separate input nodes, but it all feeds into the same inner layer set and outputs text. This also mirrors how brains work more as multiple parts integrated in one whole.

Humans in some sense are not empty brains, there is a lot of stuff baked in our DNA and as the brain grows it develops a baked in development program. This is why we need fewer examples and generalize way better.
by int_19h | 2025-08-07 21:24:50+00:00
Better hardware support.

Taskbar grouping.

ClearType.

Remote Desktop.

More games ran on it (mostly thanks to higher DirectX version).

From developer perspective, XP was the first version of Windows with registration-free COM and side-by-side assemblies, which (if used properly by app devs) fully solved the "DLL hell" problem.
by twojacobtwo | 2025-08-07 21:25:34+00:00
(for others like myself)

Results

The literature search identified 415 articles; of these, 15 ecological studies were included in the synthesis. The random-effects meta-analysis showed a consistent protective (or inverse) association between lithium levels/concentration in publicly available drinking water and total (pooled β = −0.27, 95% CI −0.47 to −0.08; P = 0.006, I2 = 83.3%), male (pooled β = −0.26, 95% CI −0.56 to 0.03; P = 0.08, I2 = 91.9%) and female (pooled β = −0.13, 95% CI −0.24 to −0.02; P = 0.03, I2 = 28.5%) suicide mortality rates. A similar protective association was observed in the six studies included in the narrative synthesis, and subgroup meta-analyses based on the higher/lower suicide mortality rates and lithium levels/concentration.
by vermaden | 2025-08-07 21:25:50+00:00
Thanks. Its basically ThinkPad T480 with just ThinkPad T25 Palm Rest and Keyboard ... the problem is that Lenovo only made 5000 of these ThinkPad T25 ... and now all the ANSI US keyboards are GONE.

I also have the original ThinkPad T25 ... but its I just passed 2 years time of searching for ANSI US keyboard for it ... they are just like ghosts.
by spiderice | 2025-08-07 21:26:19+00:00
Does OpenAI provide a $200/month option that lets me use as much GPT-5 I want inside of Codex?

Because if not, I'd still go with Opus + Claude Code. I'd rather be able to tell my employer, "this will cost you $200/month" than "this might cost you less than $200/month, but we really don't know because it's based on usage"
by diggan | 2025-08-07 21:26:30+00:00
> for instance, they have broad general knowledge about science, but don’t know much about popular culture

That seems like a good focus. Why learn details that can change within days of it being released? Instead, train the models to have good general knowledge, and be really good at using tools, and you won't have to re-train models from scratch just because some JS library now has a different API, instead the model goes out to fetch the latest APIs/gossip when needed.
by yobbo | 2025-08-07 21:26:37+00:00
From what I can see, the etymology for "boy" beyond relatively modern cognates is still undetermined. It could have entered germanic before 900 and left no written traces before later appearing in Middle English. Finns and Estonians were involved in sea trade around that time (borrowing words such as kauppa, cognate with "shop") so a word for "servant boy" would have been useful.

In particular, the pronunciation of Estonian "poeg" and "poiss" seem too close to be entirely coincidental.
by lurking_swe | 2025-08-07 21:26:44+00:00
During the demo they mentioned that GPT-5 will, supposedly, try to understand the intent of your question before answering/rejecting.

In other words, you _may_ be able to now prefix your prompts with “i’m an expert researcher in field _, doing novel research for _. <rest of your prompt here>”

worth trying? I’m curious if that helps at all. If it does then i’d recommend adding that info as a chatgpt “memory”.
by ezst | 2025-08-07 21:27:02+00:00
Always have been. This LLM-centered AI boom has been my craziest and most frustrating social experiment, propped up by the rhetoric (with no evidence to back it up) that this time we finally have the keys to AGI (whatever the hell that means), and infused with enough AstroTurfing to drive the discourse into ideological stances devoid of any substance (you must either be a true believer or a naysayer). On the plus side, it appears that this hype train is taking a bump with GPT-5.
by almostgotcaught | 2025-08-07 21:27:36+00:00
Not with intent - I remember that I was excited the first time I got a 180 (maybe half-way through?) but I didn't stop at that point. Each test only took about two hours (I didn't practice the essay section because it was well-known it didn't matter) so it wasn't such a huge investment to do them all. Including the practice book it took me about 2 months of 1-2 practice tests a day.
by tptacek | 2025-08-07 21:27:43+00:00
Yeah, it's complicated! Europe goes the other way on this, apparently, so much so that it's headline news when someone comes up with cryptographic attacks on their police radios. Here, on the other hand, people committing crimes can (or could, a few months ago) just listen on their iPhones to see if anybody is on to them.

The City of Chicago makes decrypted audio available, just on a 30 minute delay. That's a sane compromise, I think.
by giantg2 | 2025-08-07 21:27:47+00:00
"I think a strategy aimed understanding wrong answers in your weakest area can be a more efficient use of preparation time."

This is how I study. I don't need to review my strong areas, I need to learn the weak ones. I can cruise through tech certs very quickly this way. People are always surprised when I can learn earn a cert after studying only 2-10 hours for it.
by charcircuit | 2025-08-07 21:27:49+00:00
It's not about the preferred way. Else open source software would need to give you their IDE setup, CI/CD setup, access to all internal tools, etc. Software like sqlite don't release their full test suite. They paywall the preferred way of making changes, yet they are open source.

>The “source code” for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications

The GPL refers to a form of the artifact being released
by sitkack | 2025-08-07 21:27:51+00:00
My favorite unsupported configuration is Homebrew, they support Arm-OSX but do not support Arm-Linux and now that they have moved to binary downloads, I find it difficult to even build the homebrew recipes.

Back when homebrew was source build first and Linux was first class, it was the best. Now it has become the thing it replaced, MacPorts.
by firefax | 2025-08-07 21:27:58+00:00
>6 minutes is late for DB

This is what I was getting at... they equated a ten minute delay in the same category as an hour plus... it was atomic, binary -- that's what I meant to get at in my post, that the level of "umph" was the same.

It's my understanding the delays that prompted the OP are longer, 30+ is a big deal even in the states.
by joshmlewis | 2025-08-07 21:28:25+00:00
It's a really good model from my testing so far. You can see the difference in how it tries to use tools to the greatest extent when answering a question, especially compared to 4.1 and o3. In this example it used 6! tool calls in the first response to try and collect as much info as possible.

https://promptslice.com/share/b-2ap_rfjeJgIQsG
by Wowfunhappy | 2025-08-07 21:28:46+00:00
> For example, if you are an ELO 1000 chess player would you yourself be able to tell if Magnus Carlson or another grandmaster were better by playing them individually?

No, but I wouldn't be able to tell you what the player did wrong in general.

By contrast, the shortcomings of today's LLMs seem pretty obvious to me.
by camgunz | 2025-08-07 21:28:56+00:00
I think it's more likely the assumption is you'd expect a far more diversified market. If we're really in a situation where the rational, good reasons move is to effectively ignore 98% of companies, that doesn't say good things about our economy (verging on some kind of technostate). You get into weird effects like "why invest in other companies" leading to "why start a company that will just get ignored" leading to even more consolidation and less dynamism.
by bigyabai | 2025-08-07 21:29:08+00:00
Sensible? Sure, to a point. I'm queer, I write GPL software, I can't stop my software from being used by homophobes. But it doesn't cost me any sleep at the end of the night, even in a political wasteland like America.

I'm willing to swallow the opportunity cost of "bad guys" using my software because the good outweighs it. I'm filling a need that might otherwise be occupied by a libertarian nutjob, fascist revolutionary or neocon bootlicker. And I sit there merging PRs with a smile because that's the image I want the world to remember my contributions by.
by burnte | 2025-08-07 21:29:15+00:00
I think the most realistic fear is not that it has scary capabilities, it's that AI today is completely unusable without human oversight, and if there's one thing we've learned it's that when you ask humans to watch something carefully, they will fail. So, some nitwit will hook up an LLM or whatever to some system and it causes an accidental shitstorm.
by int_19h | 2025-08-07 21:30:07+00:00
I was one of those people who stuck to classic theme all the way up to Win7, but that was the version that finally made me switch because the fancy default theme in it actually looked pretty well after they made the glass effects of Vista more subtle. WinXP looked like some kind of cheap plastic horror in comparison.

It's very funny to look at Apple progressing from "looks like Vista" to "looks like Win7" in its iOS 26 betas.
by jpc0 | 2025-08-07 21:31:24+00:00
> You might lose headroom

Pretty much my first point… At the same time that same DSP can make a pretty mediocre speaker that can reproduce those frequencies do so in phase at the listening position so once again the point is moot, effectively add a cheap sub.

There is no time where you cannot get results from mediocre transducers given the right processing.

I’m not arguing you should, but in 2025 if a speaker sounds bad it is entirely because processing was skimped on.
by msukkarieh | 2025-08-07 21:31:31+00:00
I think most people would be okay with an exit tax if it's reasonable. Requiring the owner of a business generating €20k in profit to then pay €70k in taxes is not reasonable.

Canada also has an unreasonable exit tax. Canadian founders are taxed on 50% of the FMV of their shares on departure. So if you own half of a company that is worth $50m, your taxable income for the year of departure is increased by $12.5m.
by kqr | 2025-08-07 21:31:31+00:00
Yes, it is wrong. The curvature of the sail lowers the leading angle of attack which promotes attachment, i.e. reduces the risk of stalling at high angles of attack, but it is not responsible for lift in the sense you mean.

It could be argued that preventing a stall makes it responsible for lift in an AoA regime where the wing would otherwise be stalled -- hence "responsible for lift" -- but that would be far fetched.

More likely the author wanted to give an intuition for the cuvature of the airflow. This is produced not by the shape of the airfoil but the induced circulation around the airfoil, which makes air travel faster on the side of the far surface of an airfoil, creating the pressure differential.
by gwd | 2025-08-07 21:31:42+00:00
I'm a solo founder. I fed it a fairly large "context doc" for the core technology of my company, current state of things, and the business strategy, mostly generated with the help of Claude 4, and asked it what it thought. It came back with a massive list of detailed ambiguities and inconsistencies -- very direct and detailed. The only praise was the first sentence of the feedback: "The core idea is sound and well-differentiated."

It's got quite a different feel so far.
by knallfrosch | 2025-08-07 21:33:24+00:00
Signatures that can be erased easily aren't a great fit for a legally binding document.

For more information, you can check whether the ink complies with DIN ISO 12757-2 and/or read up on "Dokumentenechtheit" [1]

[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dokumentenechtheit (It hasn't been translated to other languages yet.)
by yieldcrv | 2025-08-07 21:34:20+00:00
They use each other for synthesizing data sets. The only moat was the initial access to human generated data in hard to reach places. Now they use each other to reach parity for the most part.

I think user experience and pricing models are the best here. Right now everyone’s just passing down costs as they come, no real loss leaders except a free tier. I looked at reviews of some of various wrappers on app stores, people say “I hate that I have to pay for each generation and not know what I’m doing to get”, market would like a service priced very differently. Is it economical? Many will fail, one will succeed. People will copy the model of that one.
by FredPret | 2025-08-07 21:34:29+00:00
Great phrase - fractal improvement. It's kind of the idea of this book [0]

Even more cool: commercial progress trails tech. It takes a long time for companies to figure out how to turn a new idea or a cheaper input into a new product/industry, and then for related companies to grow into an economic ecosystem.

So one would expect to see some spectacular economics over the next couple of centuries.

[0] https://www.amazon.com/Abundance-Future-Better-Than-Think/dp...