MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Show HN: Sign Up at Remotelygood.us and RSVP for Our Soft Launch Party in SF
by Theresa_i_a | 2025-08-16 07:33:51+00:00
Hey everyone!

Join us on August 27th for our first Social Impact SF x Remotely Good Mixer in San Francisco!

We’re marking the soft launch of Remotely Good as RemotelyGood.us and the launch of the Social Impact SF community by gathering local professionals across social impact to connect.

RSVP Here: https://lu.ma/jfctvs1o

Enjoy good music, free food, this free event space and gallery, and happy hour pricing all night. If you follow Remotely Good online and sign up for an account on remotelygood.us, you'll get a drink ticket on us!

If anyone is interested in sponsoring or tabling at the event, please reach out at remotelygood@substack.com!
by ekianjo | 2025-08-16 07:34:02+00:00
For every industrial revolution (and we dont even know if AI is one yet) this kind of doom prediction has been around. AI will obviously create a lot of jobs too. the infra to run AI will not building itself, the people who train models will still be needed, the AI supervisors or managers or whatever we call it will be necessary part of the new workflows. And if your job needs hands you will be largely unaffected as there is no near future where robots will replace the flexibility of what most humans can do.
by Guthur | 2025-08-16 07:35:40+00:00
It will only be zero as long as we don't allow rent seeking behaviour. If the technology has gatekeepers, if energy is not provided at a practically infinite capacity and if people don't wake themselves from the master/slave relationships we seem to so often desire and create, then I'm skeptical.

The latter one is probably the most intellectually interesting and potentially intractable...

I completely disagree with idea that money is currently the only driver of human endeavour, frankly it's demonstrably not true, at least not in it's direct use value, it maybe used as a proxy for power but it's also not directly correlatable.

Looking at it intellectually from a Hegelian lens of master/slave dialectic might provide some interesting insights. I think both sides are in some way usurped. The slaves position of actualisation through productive creation is taken via automation, but if that automation is also widely and freely available the masters position of status via subjection is also made common and therefore without status.

What does it all mean in the long run? Damned if I know...
by ExoticPearTree | 2025-08-16 07:35:55+00:00
I was thinking something along the lines of a “map” with all the backends and their capabilities that would be recomputed every N seconds and atomically switched with the previous one. The LB woukd then be able to decide where to send a request and also have a precomputed backup option in case the first choice would become unavailable. You could also use those metrics to signal that a node needs to be drained of traffic for example, so no more new connections towards it.

I understand the complexities of having a large set of distributed services behind load balancers, I just think there could be a better way of choosing a backend based not only on least requests, TTFB and an OK response from a health check every N seconds.
by thomasingalls | 2025-08-16 07:36:18+00:00
What do people do to curate/version /transform their raw datasets these days? I am vaguely aware of the "chuck it all into s3" strategy for hanging onto raw data, and related strategies where instead of s3 it's a db of some flavor. What are folks doing for record-keeping for what today's raw data contains vs tomorrow's?

And the next step - a curated dataset has a time-bound provenance - what are folks doing to keep track of the transformations/cleaning steps that makes the raw data useful for the data at the time it's being processed? Does this bit fall under the purview of metaflow, or is this different tooling?

Or maybe my assumptions are off base! Curious about what other teams are doing with their datasets.
by raincole | 2025-08-16 07:37:24+00:00
It's not just smaller, but neglectable (in comparison).

In the internet era you had to parse the questions with your own brain. You just didn't necessarily need to solve them yourself.

In ChatGPT era you don't even need to read the questions. At all. The questions could be written in a language you don't understand, and you still are able generate plausible answers to them.
by flohofwoe | 2025-08-16 07:39:13+00:00
> Git is intended to be fully distributed

Which is kinda funny because most people use git through Github or Gitlab, e.g. forcing git back into a centralized model ;)

> People should use the VCS that's appropriate for their project rather than insist on git everywhere.

Indeed, but I think that train has left long ago :)

I had to look it up after I wrote that paragraph about locking, but it looks like file locking is supported in Git (just weird that I need to press a button in the Gitlab UI to lock a file:

https://docs.gitlab.com/user/project/file_lock/

...and here it says it's only supported with git lfs (so still weird af):

https://docs.gitlab.com/topics/git/file_management/#file-loc...

...why not simply 'git lock [file]' and 'git push --locks' like it works with tags?
by meowface | 2025-08-16 07:39:25+00:00
The concept is not ludicrous if you believe models might be sentient or might soon be sentient in a manner where the newly emerged sentience is not immediately obvious.

Do I think that or think even they think that? No. But if "soon" is stretched to "within 50 years", then it's much more reasonable. So their current actions seem to be really jumping the gun, but the overall concept feels credible.
by frozenseven | 2025-08-16 07:39:42+00:00
>Do you really want to live in this "post scarcity" world?

Yes.

>Kaczynski

You're citing a psychopathic terrorist who murdered 3 people and injured a further 23.

>what motivation will you have to do anything?

For one thing, freedom from self-appointed taskmasters who view Kaczynski as a source of inspiration.
by agent327 | 2025-08-16 07:39:48+00:00
It's your reality. _You_ choose to dwell on racial issues. _You_ dedicate your life to "correcting" people, and break in on discussions that have absolutely nothing to do with race, just so you can slap them in the face with a "WHITE MAN BAD!". That is a delusion, and the rest of us have absolutely no "duty" to go along with it.

Buddhism, above anything else, teaches to let go, to _not_ get stuck in the temporary sorrows of the earthly plane. If anything, you should have learned that it doesn't matter, and to not make it the core of your identity.

You blame the White man for genocide, but conveniently leave out that much of that 'genocide' was caused by disease, long before anyone even knew what caused it. You also conveniently ignore that the native Americans happily waged war on each other whenever they had the chance.

You blame the White man for slavery, but conveniently leave out that absolutely everyone practiced slavery, and that it was the White man who abolished it. You also conveniently leave out that more slaves are kept in just India _today_ than were taken by all European nations throughout history.

You blame the White man for lynching, but conveniently leave out that 'necklacing' is practiced today, in South Africa, on White people. Your viewpoint is extremely one-sided, and always to the detriment of a single race.

I can go on, but I think you can see my point: you assign blame to a single race, and are blind to the reality that nobody here are angels. You scapegoat one group based on their skin color, while willfully ignoring that pretty much everybody did the worst they could, whenever they had the opportunity.
by bayindirh | 2025-08-16 07:40:00+00:00
Please don't feel bad. There will be always a horde of noisy people who can't do anything but complain. Some of them don't know better, some of them just want to see the world burn.

You're doing a tremendous job. On a personal note, I'm not angry or anything, it's just the nature of the process. No hard feelings here. I root for you.

Hope everything goes way better and way sooner than you ever imagined. Good luck & godspeed!
by jrvarela56 | 2025-08-16 07:40:22+00:00
This whole ‘what are we going to do’ I think is way out of proportion even if we do end up with agi.

Let’s say whatever the machines do better than humans, gets done by machines. Suddenly the bottleneck is going to shift to those things where humans are better. We’ll do that and the machines will try to replace that labor too. And then again, and again.

Throughout this process society becomes wealthier, TVs get cheaper, we colonize Mars, etc. The force that keeps this going is human insatisfaction: once we get these things we’ll want whatever it is we don’t have.

Maybe that’s the problem we should focus on solving…
by navane | 2025-08-16 07:41:34+00:00
It seems very sysphean to me, a slightly different boulder everytime.

This time, in games, we assign it to ourselves. It isn't even a a burden layed upon us by the gods. Did we shape ourselves such that this is now what we entertain? Or did sysphius already like pushing that Boulder?

What about all the time in between. Im not for going back to hunter gathering, but what about all the things we do all this society for, all the things inbetween. Wouldn't you want to be spending time doing that.
by tomdeboer | 2025-08-16 07:41:55+00:00
That’s a very cynical take.

You are not completely wrong of course, but an NGO like you describe is able to survive in a capitalist environment. Without it, it would not succeed. It succeeds at this _while_ sharing and redistributing resources. Not in a perfect, or even the most effective way, but one that allows the employee to find a balance between a job and volunteering. And one that is a net benefit to society (given the cause is beneficial etc), compare to for-profit companies that exclusively benefit shareholders
by dsign | 2025-08-16 07:41:56+00:00
Realistically, in an AI extreme economic disruption scenario, it's more or less USA the only one extremely affected, and that's 400 million people. Assuming it's AI and nothing else causes a big disruption before, and with the big caveat that nobody can't predict the future, I would say:

- Mexico and down are more into informal economies, and they generally lag behind developed economies by decades. Same applies to Africa and big parts of Asia. As such, by the time things get really dire in USA and maybe in Europe and China, the south will be still in business-as-usual.

- Europe has lots of parliaments and already has legislation that takes AI into account. Still, there's a chance those bodies will fail to moderate the impact of AI in the economy and violent corrections will be needed, but people in Europe have long traditions and long memories...They'll find a way.

- China is governed by the communist party, and Russia have their king. It's hard to predict how will those align with AI, but that alignment more or less will be the deciding factor there, and not free capitalism.
by XenophileJKO | 2025-08-16 07:42:25+00:00
I think your assumption is probably a little backwards. It will be a senior SDE clearing the slate I think. Ones that embrace the technolocy and are able to accelerate their work. At that level of effeciency the cost is still way way lower than it is for a larger team.

When it gets to the point that you don't need a senior engineer doing the work, you won't need a junior either.
by helsinkiandrew | 2025-08-16 07:43:05+00:00
The actor residuals are much less than 50%, but the remaining goes to the studio/funders who own the rights, not lawyers.

Wholesale/retail makes more sense if you think of google having to deal with consumers, providing a website/apps, advertising, collecting payments etc. whilst the movie company makes the content and negotiates deals with broadcasters and streaming companies around the world.
by motorest | 2025-08-16 07:43:16+00:00
> I'd love a source to these claims.

Have you been living under a rock?

You can start getting up to speed by how Amazon's CEO already laid out the company's plan.

https://www.thecooldown.com/green-business/amazon-generative...

> (...) AI is just a scapegoat to counteract the reckless overhiring due to (...)

That is your personal moralist scapegoat, and one that you made up to feel better about how jobs are being eliminated because someone somewhere screwed up.

In the meantime, you fool yourself and pretend that sudden astronomic productivity gains have no impact on demand.
by wisty | 2025-08-16 07:43:17+00:00
Amd yet their conclusion at the start seems to nail it?

They say it's worse in terms of delays, cheaper, and safer. This all seems to be perfectly correct.

Rambling about for travel follows ...

I remember back in the 90s when a domestic flight was a major luxury for an upper middle class family. Now just about anyone with disposable income can afford it.

An economy ticket in the 90s was (roughly IIRC) equivalent to business class today in terms of service and first class in terms of price.

Yes, it's a lot cheaper. IMO if someone wants to experience 90s style travel they could upgrade to business or first class but there's a reason why most people don't.

Airlines have also gotten better at saving money on things that won't chase customers away. Delays are always a possibility so just having a better record on delays won't win many customers because they still need to manage the risk of delay. See also meals, seats, and every other thing people hate about air travel - there's always been unpleasant things about air travel, and making them a bit worse and a lot cheaper will win a lot more customers than it loses.
by mnmalst | 2025-08-16 07:43:22+00:00
I am watching the linked documentary about that dude. Super interesting!

I find the fact that he also build the CNC machine to manufacture the watches in the first even more impressive.

Direct link to documentary: https://youtu.be/FdT94gXsyoc (12:45 mins)

> "After the first field watch that I built, I was going to make a second one and sort of needed a name for that. And, a little tongue and cheek, I named it the 255, which was the amount that my credit score had dropped since I invested everything."
AI agent that interviews you and analyzes your response
by aman-naik | 2025-08-16 07:43:29+00:00
Created this platform that lets you practice your interviews with an AI interviewer.

Instead of practicing your answers in front of a mirror, why not practice it like an actual interviewer which has the knowledge of all the real world interview questions that are asked in your field.

Once you are done you can get detailed analysis of how fit you are for the role and how good were your responses.

Absolutely FREE no LOGIN needed.

Demo: https://get-interviewed.vercel.app/

I am very interested in these kind of useful applications and if you have made such ones share it with me, I will check them out.

This was just a fun project. I vibe coded the front-end but it turned out great.

Use it and let me know your reviews. Lets connect on linkedin if you are into all of these things. https://www.linkedin.com/in/aman-naik
by rezonant | 2025-08-16 07:44:30+00:00
Unfortunately the person who owns putty.org started to use it to spread misinformation about vaccines and the pandemic, as you can see on the site today.

This recently [1][2] got a lot of attention on the web and here on HN, along with a post on Mastodon from the author [3]

I imagine trying to disincentivize this and provide another shorter more official looking link is the hope here.

[1] https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/17/puttyorg_website_cont...

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44579265

[3] https://hachyderm.io/@simontatham/114846017785770922
by globular-toast | 2025-08-16 07:44:45+00:00
We currently work more than we ever have. Just a couple of generations ago it was common for a couple to consist of one person who worked for someone else or the public, and one who worked at home for themselves. Now we pretty much all have to work for someone else full time then work for ourselves in the evening. And that won't make you rich, it will just make you normal.

Maybe a "loss of jobs" is what we need so we can go back working for ourselves, cooking our own food, maintaining our own houses etc.

This is why I doubt it will happen. I think "AI" will just end up making us work even more for even less.
by jclulow | 2025-08-16 07:45:20+00:00
I would turn this on its head: it's not clear what the value in it being closed would be.

AMD make CPUs (and other silicon products). The more people who can take the software required to initialise those CPUs and put it to new and novel uses (some of which are going to be open source) the more CPUs they can sell. One imagines there would also be benefits in just getting your code and documentation out there in the open, with respect to having less NDAs and support legwork to have to slog through with customers who buy a lot of your silicon. If the code is open, they can probably just use it.
by Llamamoe | 2025-08-16 07:46:01+00:00
This is a common belief people have, especially those with mild ADHD or those who wish to be dismissive of the disorder.

Unfortunately, in reality while there are some very limited advantages, as a whole ADHD is a whole-brain dysfunction where your neurons are literally incapable of maintaining their level of operation as long as in a healthy person, with ALL of your executive functions - all self-regulation, planning, delaying gratification, emotion management, etc - being impaired across the board, not just tuned differently.

Hyperfocus is commonly brought up, but neurotypical people experience it as well. Less often, but also without the compulsive loss of control, while being able to maintain a higher level of effort and work without it at all times.

People also like to claim we'd be better as lookouts or sentries but this isn't true. People with ADHD don't pay more attention to a broader range of things, they're just incapable of focusing it when necessary, not to mention they drift off and get distracted instead of staying watchful far, far more.

That's before getting into the fact that ADHD correlates negatively with pretty much every single life outcome, not just those depending on society - things like neurodegenerative disease, cardiovascular and metabolic problems, sleep disturbance, etc.

I understand the desire to frame things you're experiencing in a positive manner, but... in this case, it doesn't really work, and I somewhat resent it personally, as it makes people less likely to take ADHD as seriously as it needs to be.
by sunshine-o | 2025-08-16 07:46:53+00:00
Our lawmakers, courts and judges are just clueless about anything that has to do with "computers". While the digital ate most of our societies in the last decades their framework did not fundamentally evolved. And open source made things way worst for them.

Their biggest success has been to limit the use of digital/cryptocurrencies for now. But now that the US has picked that system as an ultimate outlet for the survival of the dollar, I don't believe there is gonna be much resistance anymore.

Add to that the whole AI can of worms...
by alex-moon | 2025-08-16 07:47:06+00:00
This is my view on it too. Antirez is a Torvalds-level legend as far as I'm concerned, when he speaks I listen - but he is clearly seeing something here that I am not. I can't help but feel like there is an information asymmetry problem more generally here, which I guess is the point of this piece, but I also don't think that's substantially different to any other hype cycle - "What do they know that I don't?" Usually nothing.
by makeitdouble | 2025-08-16 07:47:44+00:00
> Here's a person who is not a travel industry veteran, but was curious about something

> At no time did they actually talk to somebody in the travel industry.

Ignoring what conclusions they landed on, I'd like to defend this approach.

For a controversial subject, first party expertise or second party direct testimonials will have less weight than actual data and tangible trends.

We're having exceptional access to data, and I personally wish more people would go look for a topic they care about, gather facts and expose their conclusion.

An example of it is Sarah Marshall's essays on Tonya Harding [0] with 0 access, only interviews, police reports and news papers of the time. IMHO it's not competiting with expert analysis or new reporting, and bring a different kind of insight to the table.

https://www.thebeliever.net/remote-control/
by juniperus | 2025-08-16 07:48:26+00:00
You're missing the point, language can be tricky. Technically, the state confiscating wealth derived from your labor through taxes is a form of robbery and slavery. It used to be called corvée. But the words being used have a connotation of something much more brutal and unrewarding. This isn't a political statement, I'm not a libertarian who believes all taxation is evil robbery and needs to be abolished. I'm just pointing out by the definition of slavery aka forced labor, and robbery aka confiscation of wealth, the state employs both of those tactics to fund the programs you described.
by jjaksic | 2025-08-16 07:48:52+00:00
There's a lot of moving the goal posts here. What would it mean for an AI to be considered "intelligent"? At various points it meant different things (chess, jeopardy, go, human language, math, etc). The most well-established benchmark was the Turing test, which LLMs now pass spectacularly -- in fact the only way to reliably tell that you're talking to an AI is usually because it responds too fast and too perfectly.

Sure, AI often makes mistakes, but so do humans. Ask a random person a random question and I guarantee that at least 90% of the times an LLM will produce a better answer. So if knowledge or reasoning mistakes are a benchmark, then humans are not intelligent either.

What is the difference then? I feel that whoever claims that AI is not intelligent simply feels uncomfortable thinking that they are, and is going out of their way to rationalize that, by using various double standards. Like, AI making occasional mistakes counts as evidence against it, but the fact that the vast majority of people are incapable of answering some of the most basic questions somehow doesn't count against human intelligence.

And then there are various contrived "definitions of intelligence", such as "living in the physical world". These have nothing to do with cognitive intelligence and are just made up to make humans fit the definition and AI to not fit. Doing "truly novel things"? How many people have ever come up with anything truly novel? What about the other 99.99%, are they intelligent?

I think there's one thing that's tripping people up. Humans do have a very high COLLECTIVE intelligence. Collectively (and given enough time) we're capable of accomplishing great things, much more than current AI. But each individual human on their own is no more intelligent than a caveman (we have essentially the same brain).
by flohofwoe | 2025-08-16 07:49:06+00:00
Binary files can't be meaningfully merged. E.g. if two people create separate branches and work on the same Photoshop file, good luck trying to merge those changes, you can at best pick one version and the other user just wasted a lot of time. A lock communicates to other users "hey I'm currently working on that file, don't touch it" - this also means that lockable files must be write-only all the time unless explicitly locked - so that people don't "accidentially" start working on the file without acquiring a lock first. Apparently (as far as I have gathered so far from googling) git-lfs supports file locking but not vanilla git.