MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by noefingway | 2025-08-05 18:07:25+00:00
yeah - i've been using it for several years. it's got some issues: fails to detect cars and trucks at night (apparently it doesn't know what to do with the moving headlights); also frequently fails to detect me walking past the camera with my 4 small dogs on our morning walk; confuses farm equipment for cars and continues to record even when the object is stationary. still it's better than most of the other software i've tried.
by android521 | 2025-08-05 18:08:09+00:00
If you're terrified of the risk , you're not really fit for entrepreneurship for now. Your best bet is try to increase the 45k number (changing jobs or taking on additional freelancing jobs) and invest the savings into stocks. Let time be your friends. You're still 28. It is never too late to start a business when you're 35 when you have more savings. When you have a burning desire and willing to risk everything, it's time you can quit your job.
by logicchains | 2025-08-05 18:08:12+00:00
>They did something to quantize >90% of the model parameters to the MXFP4 format (4.25 bits/parameter) to let the 120B model to fit on a single 80GB GPU, which is pretty cool

They said it was native FP4, suggesting that they actually trained it like that; it's not post-training quantisation.
by wmorgan | 2025-08-05 18:08:46+00:00
This analysis would seem to exonerate even Pat Buchanan, who by the 1990s had learned to couch all his rhetoric in terms of culture rather than race.

> I think God made all people good. But if we had to take a million immigrants in, say Zulus, next year, or Englishmen, and put them in Virginia, which group would be easier to assimilate and would cause less problems for the people of Virginia?

Nevertheless, his comments drew contemporary accusations of racism. So how modern are we talking about? This was well-trod discourse in 1992.

Buchanan and Vance had every possible culture to draw from to make their points, but they reached for Zulus and Haitians, two nations of Black people whose most famous historical event is a somewhat-successful war against White people. It strains credulity that this messaging is not fine-tuned to the electorate.
by ben_w | 2025-08-05 18:09:01+00:00
The US margin on economic power isn't all that great, by GDP/PPP it's a long way behind China.

Though from the POV of economic coercion, the question is probably more like "what's the USA's import/export market like relative to all my markets including domestic?", which is going to vary wildly by industry.

> Ally with China, Iran and Russia to fight the US?

Replace Iran with the EU, and yes, some or all of them.

> EU as much as they dislike the US, has a laundry list of urgent domestic issues like Russia,

Urgent, but affordable.

> no cheap energy, no tech industry,

Energy isn't meaningfully worse than anyone else, lots of tech but it's mostly local rather than global in scale

> ageing population, economic stagnation or even decline,

Like everyone else, including the USA

> collapsing welfare system

News to me. Also: Wasn't the USA's supposed to collapsing since Obama took power?

But also, not a unified welfare system over all member nations of the EU.

> illegal immigration leading to a rise right wing extremism leading to crackdowns on freedom of speech and censorship.

Is it, or is that a narrative? And specifically, is it doing this worse than the USA today?
by PeterStuer | 2025-08-05 18:09:44+00:00
(answer for 1 inference) Al depends on the context length you want to support as the activation memory will dominate the requirements. For 4096 tokens you will get away with 24GB (or even 16GB), but if you want to go for the full 131072 tokens you are not going to get there with a 32GB consumer GPU like the 5090. You'll need to spring for at the minimum an A6000 (48GB) or preferably an RTX 6000 Pro (96GB).

Also keep in mind this model does use 4-bit layers for the MoE parts. Unfortunately native accelerated 4-bit support only started with Blackwell on NVIDIA. So your 3090/4090/A6000/A100's are not going to be fast. An RTX 5090 will be your best starting point in the traditional card space. Maybe the unified memory minipc's like the Spark systems or the Mac mini could be an alternative, but I do not know them enough.
by paganel | 2025-08-05 18:09:51+00:00
TSMC is not going to get over the 50% threshold because it has no free will in this whole matter, as the very existence of Taiwan, and hence of TSMC, depends on the political will of the US.

Otherwise I fully agree with you, this will definitely not work out in the long run, but who cares about the long run anymore in this day and age?
by headcanon | 2025-08-05 18:10:04+00:00
I honestly just use every tool I can when trip planning: Google, Booking.com, airbnb when applicable, Expedia, Delta trips, even my credit card company has a link.

Similar to the other responder, I think Booking.com had the best dataset for some random features like a hot tub (specifically big hot tub, not bathtub). The problem is that it only searches for hotels with the big hot tub, if you want that actual room you usually need to book direct.

It also yielded some good results for Japanese ryokan (traditional spa hotel), more so than the other search engines. Google is fine as well but tends to lean more towards big hotel chains IME.

Not saying its perfect (nobody does ryokan well at all), and the more familiar I get the more I'll tend to book direct, its just one search tool out of many. If it went away tomorrow I wouldn't miss it terribly.
by jcmontx | 2025-08-05 18:10:29+00:00
I'm out of the loop for local models. For my M3 24gb ram macbook, what token throughput can I expect?

Edit: I tried it out, I have no idea in terms of of tokens but it was fluid enough for me. A bit slower than using o3 in the browser but definitely tolerable. I think I will set it up in my GF's machine so she can stop paying for the full subscription (she's a non-tech professional)
by Arrowmaster | 2025-08-05 18:10:38+00:00
I don't think you understand how FIDO2 works.

If you are using non-discoverable keys, the type where you input your username to login and then it asks for the passkey, there is no limit because they are calculated from a single master key and seeded with the url.

If you are using discoverable keys when you don't even input a username to login, the latest Yubikey has a limit of 100 but other vendors hold more.

Physical hardware keys work across most devices and browsers as long as you have the key with you.
by socalgal2 | 2025-08-05 18:10:50+00:00
I often wonder how much of 10x engineers is circumstance vs talent/skill. Separate from the issue of LLMs.

If I can write blue sky / green field, code. Brand new code in a new repo, no rules just write code, I can write tons of code. What bogs me down are things like tests. It can take more time to write tests than the code itself in my actual work project. Of course I know the tests are important and maybe the LLM can help here. I'm just saying that they slow me down. Waiting for code reviews slows me down. Again, they're super useful but coming from a place where the first 20-25 years of my career I didn't have them they are a drag on my performance. Another is just the size of the project I'm on. > 500 programmers on my current large project. Assume it's an OS. It's just hard to make progress on such a large project compared to a small one. And yet another which is part of the first, other people's code. If I write the whole thing or most of it, then I know exactly what to change. I've written features in code I know in days that someone who was not familiar with the code I believe would have taken months. But, me editing someone else's code without the entire state of the code base in my head is 10x slower.

That's a long way of saying, many 10xers might just be in the right circumstance to provide 10x. You're then compared against them but you're not in the same circumstance so you get different results.
by Alupis | 2025-08-05 18:10:59+00:00
> We will pay for it over the course of the years of paying for the service.

Yes, at like $600+ a month over 6 years... you can do the math, it's nasty.

> Plus, the economic benefits of enabling remote production/consumption of digital services probably outweighs the cost by an order of magnitude or two

ISP's aren't a charity service. Even your municipality cannot afford to run fiber to the boonies.
by exasperaited | 2025-08-05 18:10:59+00:00
How is that Tiktok forced sale going though?

The longer Trump creates a legal black hole carve-out for Tiktok, the less anyone will want to buy it. Because he is and this action is transparently corrupt, and it taints the buyer.

And that is true of the participants of any of these forced transfers; they paint targets on their back for future manipulation by the Trump executive. (Which increasingly feels like it should be described as a regime)
by NitpickLawyer | 2025-08-05 18:11:07+00:00
Weights are not binary. I have no idea why this is so often spread, it's simply not true. You can't do anything with the weights themselves, you can't "run" the weights.

You run inference (via a library) on a model using it's architecture (config file), tokenizer (what and when to compute) based on weights (hardcoded values). That's it.

> but you can’t modify

Yes, you can. It's called finetuning. And, most importantly, that's exactly how the model creators themselves are "modifying" the weights! No sane lab is "recompiling" a model every time they change something. They perform a pre-training stage (feed everything and the kitchen sink), they get the hardcoded values (weights), and then they post-train using "the same" (well, maybe their techniques are better, but still the same concept) as you or I would. Just with more compute. That's it. You can do the exact same modifications, using basically the same concepts.

> don’t have the source to recompile

In pure practical ways, neither do the labs. Everyone that has trained a big model can tell you that the process is so finicky that they'd eat a hat if a big train session can be somehow made reproducible to the bit. Between nodes failing, datapoints balooning your loss and having to go back, and the myriad of other problems, what you get out of a big training run is not guaranteed to be the same even with 100 - 1000 more attempts, in practice. It's simply the nature of training large models.
by nobleach | 2025-08-05 18:11:17+00:00
I know that was the reasoning for the Records/Tuples proposal being shot down. I haven't dug too deeply into the pipeline operators other than to get a feel for both proposals.

Most of the more interesting proposals tend to languish these days. When you look at everything that's advanced to Stage 3-4, it's like. "ok, I'm certain this has some amazing perf bump for some feature I don't even use... but do I really care?"
by zamadatix | 2025-08-05 18:11:34+00:00
And in 52 weeks we've gone 3.5->4.1 with this training improvement, meanwhile the 52 weeks prior to that were Claude -> Claude 3. The absolute jumps per version delta also used to be larger.

I.e. it seems we don't get much more than new training run levels of improvement anymore. Which is better than nothing, but a shame compared to the early scaling.
by bpt3 | 2025-08-05 18:12:17+00:00
I thought the idea was that AI would make us collectively better off, not flood the zone with technical debt as if thousands of newly minted CS/bootcamp graduates were unleashed without any supervision.

LLMs are still stochastic parrots, though highly impressive and occasionally useful ones. LLMs are not going to solve problems like "what is the correct security model for this application given this use case".

AI might get there at some point, but it won't be solely based on LLMs.
by arjie | 2025-08-05 18:12:21+00:00
This is beautiful. An incredible device that could expand people's view of history and science. We could create such immersive experiences with this.

I know that everyone always worries about trapping people in a simulation of reality etc. etc. but this would have blown my mind as a child. Even Riven was unbelievable to me. I spent hours in Terragen.
by NoMoreNicksLeft | 2025-08-05 18:12:36+00:00
>I don’t know, I went to school at 3 and I turned out fine.

This anecdote is not just as problematic as most anecdotes, I think it is more so. The point of public education is allegedly not that "kids turn out fine" (whatever that means), but that they receive a minimum education. If you got 4 years more than me, was there 4 years' more worth of advantage bestowed upon you? If you merely approximated my level of education, then it would seem the government wasted 4 years worth of resources on you. Multiplied times every student in the nation, this is absolutely enormous. And that's not even counting the potential for psychological damage... you might be fine, slightly more resilient than some, but others might be suffering from any number of disorders that can't easily be traced back to early schooling. Less time to form family bonds, less time getting a more informal education, etc.

>It is the norm here. If anything, 5 is quite old to start school.

It wasn't the norm until quite recently. Even in the 1980s, it was not the norm. That you think it is a norm shows just how much such a policy can distort an entire population's perceptions.

>At that age children need stimulating environments and learn a lot, fast by being with others in a secure environment.

Such you are told. You assume it must be true. And yet, student performance at all age levels continues to decline, even as they're sent to school younger every decade.

>You really see the difference between those who started at 3 and those who started at 6 in terms of cognitive, social, and motor development.

The numbers don't support your claim.
by internetter | 2025-08-05 18:13:51+00:00
Very much disagree. Current AI benchmarks are quite arbitrary as evidenced by the ability of a model to be fitted to a particular benchmark. Like the closest benchmark to objectivity is “does it answer this question factually” and benchmarks like that are just as failable really because who decides what questions we ask? The same struggles happen when we try to measure human intelligence. The more complex the algorithm the harder it is to quantify because there are so many parameters. I could easily contrive some “search engine benchmark”, but it wouldn’t be that useful because it’s only adherent to my own subjective definition of what it means for a search engine to be good.
by ldoughty | 2025-08-05 18:14:06+00:00
But the US government has proven to be unreliable in maintaining commitments -- even words on paper are meaningless as it doesn't seem to stop them from changing the deal later and demanding more ("I have change the terms of our agreement, pray I do not alter them further"), and then another request demanding more. Would TSMC be doing the government a favor and gaining protection, or are they being extorted? ("would sure be a shame if we doubled your tariffs again...")
Show HN: Deeb Dive – Feature your tool in this weekly newsletter for builders
by nickisyourfan | 2025-08-05 18:14:38+00:00
I just launched a weekly newsletter called Deeb Dive — it’s a short roundup of cool tools, libraries, and projects for people who love building.

Each issue highlights 3–5 things I think deserve more attention — could be a small library, a new CLI, a beautiful UI kit, or just something fun.

If you’re working on something cool, I’d love to feature it.

No forms, no fuss — just drop a link or say hi.
by blargey | 2025-08-05 18:14:42+00:00
Disagree that curation and prompts adds artistry (dense intent reflected in the output) to AI generations.

"Curation" in AI can only surface the curator's local maxima among a tiny and arbitrary grab-bag of seed integers they checked among the space of 2^64 options; it's statistically skewed 99% towards the model's whims rather than anyone's unique intent or taste.

Prompt crafting is likewise terribly low fidelity since it's a constant battle with the model's idiosyncratic interpretation of the text, plus arbitrary perturbations that aren't actually correlated with the writer's supposed intent. And lord spare me the "high quality high resolution ultra detailed photorealistic trending on artstation" type prompts that amount to a zero-intent plea for "more gooder". And when pursuing artistry, using artist names / LORAs are a meta-abandonment of personal direction, abdicating artistic control and responsibility to a model's idea of another artist's idea of what should be done.

Fancier workflows generally only multiply this prompt-and-curate process across regions/iterations, so can't add much because they're multiplying a tiny fraction by a fixed factor.
by cherryteastain | 2025-08-05 18:14:47+00:00
Tariffs kinda make sense when you have a deficit in a widely available item. Big trade deficit with Bangladesh? Sure you can buy cheap textiles from Thailand or Vietnam or something.

Unfortunately this approach does not work when you lack a viable domestic alternative and you're up against a monopoly.

What will the US do if TSMC does not blink? Not buy TSMC made chips? Obviously that is impossible, so the logical conclusion is that American consumers will end up paying the tariffs.
by BenjiWiebe | 2025-08-05 18:15:13+00:00
Our nearest town, Durham Kansas (population 100) got buried fiber optic recently. The company is actually planning/hoping to expand to the rural area around town as well, so maybe we'll get it as we're only two miles out of town. They do offer 1gig symmetric but I think it's $200/month. I'd just like the reliability and low latency of fiber vs our current WISP.
by neilv | 2025-08-05 18:15:28+00:00
I viewed academia as altruistic and relatively enlightened. And I've certainly met many who live up to that.

I've also occasionally heard of entire academic departments who should be in jail, for being pieces of crud.

Then there's what I'm guessing is the bulk of academia: care/cared about the field and their impact to some extent, try to do their jobs competently, look out for their students, maybe still try to find interest in the work, and operate within whatever hostile politics they're at the mercy of, without being cruddier than they absolutely have to be.

That's not as inspiring as it could be, but it's a lot better than the tech industry overall.
by exasperaited | 2025-08-05 18:16:13+00:00
But they have to try, right? Otherwise as you say, they are essentially operating under Rubio and Trump's control as a tool of the State Department.

The other important thing about this is that it dirties Intel almost immediately with presidential cheeto dust. So the value is going to fall over the long term, and this isn't the last sell-off they will have to do. Can you stop TSMC or a stalking horse for TSMC buying up parts of the rest?

Trump has created a powerful victim here.
by astrostl | 2025-08-05 18:16:17+00:00
With aggressive Claude Code use I didn't find Sonnet better than Opus but I did find it faster while consuming far fewer tokens. Once I switched to the $100 Max plan and configured CC to exclusively use Sonnet I haven't run into a plan token limit even once. When I saw this announcement my first thing was to CMD-F and see when Sonnet 4.1 was coming out, because I don't really care about Opus outside of interactive deep research usage.
by hollerith | 2025-08-05 18:16:23+00:00
I'm not even ready to concede that it is a good weight-loss drug -- but then I haven't really investigated much, so I'm just repeating what I heard from researcher Ben Bikman and maybe other researchers. I heard that most people choose to discontinue it after 4 or 5 years or less, regain most or all of the weight, then refuse to go back on it.
by henriquegodoy | 2025-08-05 18:16:24+00:00
Seeing a 20B model competing with o3's performance is mind blowing like just a year ago, most of us would've called this impossible - not just the intelligence leap, but getting this level of capability in such a compact size.

I think that the point that makes me more excited is that we can train trillion-parameter giants and distill them down to just billions without losing the magic. Imagine coding with Claude 4 Opus-level intelligence packed into a 10B model running locally at 2000 tokens/sec - like instant AI collaboration. That would fundamentally change how we develop software.
by amradio1989 | 2025-08-05 18:16:25+00:00
Who would look at a drowning person and say "just swim better and you'll survive"?

A drowning person can't "just swim better". That's exactly why they're drowning in the first place.

What you're saying is true but not helpful. There's a whole process that goes into "just do it" that is weirdly unpopular to talk about. You have to become capable first, and that only happens in community where you can safely make a lot of mistakes.
by freedomben | 2025-08-05 18:16:46+00:00
As a fellow (hobbyist) musician, I feel you, but after doing a lot of introspection I realized that it's the art (and the process) that I really like, not (just) the end result (though that is of course a rewarding aspect). For example, jamming out to a kickin' song is fun, even if I'm just covering something. I also realized that my own ability to produce things isn't affected by this (as long as you don't want to make money on it). As someone who loves to play bass but is generally bad at writing bass riffs, I also see some fun potential to use AI to get bass tracks that go along with my main guitar riffs. I can always throw them out and rewrite from scratch later, or just iterate on them to get them where I like them. I do think I'll feel a bit lof a loss of "artistic purity" with doing something like that, but the more I think about it, the biggest reason that might bother me is because I'd feel judged by other musicians :-D
by duxup | 2025-08-05 18:16:51+00:00
I don't think Trump cares if it "works" economically long term. He cares about what he can extract personally and what he got upset about on twitter when he woke up. That's it ...

He was quoted regarding environmental concerns something to the effect of "I'll be dead by then".

I think that's really his POV. If you plan to live longer than Trump, he's really not for you.
by IshKebab | 2025-08-05 18:17:29+00:00
Nah, I've worked with maybe 2 people I'd say were "10x", or at least 5x, and it was definitely skill.

I used to not really believe people like that existed but it turned out they're just rare enough that I hadn't worked with any yet. You could definitely go a whole career without ever working with any 10x engineers.

And also it's not like they're actually necessary for a project to succeed. They're very good but it's extremely unlikely that a project will succeed on the back of one or two very good engineers. The project I worked with them on failed for reasons nothing to do with us.
by dragonwriter | 2025-08-05 18:17:38+00:00
Titanium was proven and well-known and established for the use. You can't be a disruptive innovator challenging the dogmatic establishment and trailblaze a new way to make money by being boring and doing what is well-known and established for the domain you are working in.

You have to defy all the voices telling you are wrong and its going to fail.

(Of course, most of the time those voices are right, so if it is something with lives on the line, you also should be making sure you have the resources to test it thoroughly so even if it isn't well-establlished and known before you start on it, it is well-established and known through your team's work before you start putting it in the position to kill people.)