MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by tomrod | 2025-08-14 17:05:01+00:00
> The other religious texts you mentioned are not part of the western civilization canon and did not have much effect on western literature.

Incorrect.

> To deny that contemporary American culture has its roots in European culture (i.e. western culture) is to deny [my] reality

FTFY, otherwise an ignorant and frankly naive take. There are dozens to hundreds of cultures that have influenced and rooted American culture, and you'd do kindly to remember that:

- The American Southwest is __heavily__ influenced by Spain and Mexican culture

- Louisiana is __heavily__ influenced by French and African culture

- Oklahoma, Alaska, Hawaii, the Dakotas, much of New England, and many others are __heavily__ influenced by Native American culture (Way down on the Chatahoochee, anyone?)

- The Black belt and most of cities are __heavily__ influenced and rooted in the reformation of Black culture after being ripped out of their homelands by slavery

- Blues, Rock, and Jazz all stem from African

- What you call "European" is probably English (so, wrong) or a confusing and tangled mess of different cultures that get grouped as "European/Western" and assumed to be one strand of "Christian" or another (I note you missed the Torah being listed, Catholic scripture being listed, etc.).

I strongly, strongly recommend that, if you are a citizen of the US, that you take pride in your own culture and learn where it _actually_ sources from -- of which you clearly care, given that you have chosen to make it _the_ supporting argument for why book bannings are okay and why an irrelevant text should be standard, non-optional reading in high school. The roots matter much less than what the culture currently is.
by ActorNightly | 2025-08-14 17:05:37+00:00
All of these statements are based around very loose definition of mechanic vs mechanical engineer.

A mechanic for example can just memorize a bunch of procedures on how to service a car or a bike, and follow them. An engineer can memorize a bunch of advanced stuff like CAD and Stress analysis, and never really work with his hands.

So in this case, your statement would be correct. But both of these would just be average good, not exceptional, like SpaceX hiring makes it seem.

In general, as a mechanical engineer, your expertise is putting different materials together in certain shapes, matter states, and so on to make them do things. You may not know specifically how a bearing assembly works if you have never worked with it, but you should realize that a bearing is designed to provide rotational freedom to a part, and that mechanically, the thing that is connected to the inner part that rotates should be fully separate from the part that does not.
by anonu | 2025-08-14 17:05:45+00:00
https://rulings.cbp.gov/ruling/H335304 maybe this - from January 2025

It appears the patent is for "User-Worn Device for Noninvasively Measuring a Physiological Parameter of a User". So Apple is simply moving the logic to a non user-worn device - like a phone - to get around the problem. (this is my quick read / conjecture)

Here is the original patent https://patents.google.com/patent/US10912502B2/en
by jph | 2025-08-14 17:05:59+00:00
OpenUK is a good starting point: https://openuk.uk/

TLDR "OpenUK is a UK not for profit organisation committed to develop and sustain UK leadership in Open Technology, being open source software, open source hardware and open data, across the UK. OpenUK promotes businesses, projects and people, who use Open and strives to collaborate across all existing organisations for Open by creating a clear and loud voice for the Open Communities in the UK; influencing UK Legal and Policy to make the UK a great place for Open business and by promoting education and learning in skills in Open Technology."
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF | 2025-08-14 17:06:19+00:00
> big brained developers are many, and some not expected to like this, make sour face

> THINK they are big brained developers many, many more, and more even definitely probably maybe not like this, many sour face (such is internet)

> (note: grug once think big brained but learn hard way)
by strongpigeon | 2025-08-14 17:06:25+00:00
I'm very much against putting unnecessary regulation, but I do think chatbot like this should be required to state it clearly that they are indeed a bot and not a person. I strongly agree with the daughter in the story that says:

> “I understand trying to grab a user’s attention, maybe to sell them something,” said Julie Wongbandue, Bue’s daughter. “But for a bot to say ‘Come visit me’ is insane.”

Having worked at a different big tech, I can guarantee that someone suggested putting disclaimers about them not being a person or putting more guardrails and that they have been shut down. This decision not to put guardrails needlessly put vulnerable people at risk. Meta isn't alone in this, but I do think the family has standing to sue (and Meta being cagey about their response indicates so).
by nebezb | 2025-08-14 17:06:34+00:00
Every CPU that isn’t pegged at 100% all the time is leaving money on the table. Some physical CPU capacity is reserved, some virtual CPU capacity is reserved, the rest goes to ultra-high-margin elastic compute that isn’t sold to you as a physical or virtual CPU. They sell it to you as “serverless,” it prints cash, and it absolutely depends on juicing every % of performance out of the chips.

edit: “burstable” CPUs are a fourth category relying on overselling the same virtual CPU while intelligently distributing workloads to keep them at 100%.
by mlyle | 2025-08-14 17:06:47+00:00
The problem is, the opposite approach is...

"We're scot free, because we told *wink* people to not sell us sensitive data. We get the benefit from it, and we make it really easy for people to sign up and get paid to give us this data that we 'don't want.'"

Please don't sell me cocaine *snifffffffff*

> The fault should still lie with the entity that passed on the sensitive data.

Some benefits to making it be both:

* Centralize enforcement with more knowledgable entities

* Enforce at a level where the misdeeds can actually be identified and have scale, rather than death from a million cuts

* Prevent the central entity from using deniable proxies and cut-throughs to do bad things

This whole notion that we want so much scale, and that scale is an excuse for not paying attention to what you're doing or exercising due diligence, is repugnant. It pushes some cost down but also causes a lot of social harm. If anything, we should expect more ownership and responsibility from those with concentrated power, because they have more ability to cause widescale harm.
by xorcist | 2025-08-14 17:06:47+00:00
All of your examples did tank the stock market. At least in the meaning a 20+% drop over a time period in the order of months of less.

They are however not examples of long depressions. Which I think is reasonable to expect we'll see less of, given that more and more regular people feel the need to put their money in the stock market. There is simply no alternative. And every time we reach new heights. This is also expected.

Will this go on forever? Probably not. But it won't look like the 1930s. The stock market is a crowd, not a science.
by andrewmcwatters | 2025-08-14 17:06:59+00:00
You can buy a fingertip pulse oximeter for like $10. I understand the benefits of having all of these biometric readers directly on your personal device, but the perceived stress over getting this back into the watch seems... I don't know, not wise? In poor taste? Something, but I can't articulate it well.

I mean, we don't have IR blasters on any of our personal devices anymore, and arguably it would be nice to be able to control my TV with my phone like I could with my Palm Pilot forever ago, but that's not in vogue anymore.
by abirch | 2025-08-14 17:07:09+00:00
This is from Kodak's Q2 Financial report:

As a result, these conditions raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern as of the issuance date of the Company’s second quarter financials.

https://www.kodak.com/en/company/press-release/q2-2025-finan...

As Walter Bagehot said "Every banker knows that if he has to prove that he is worthy of credit, however good may be his arguments, in fact his credit is gone..."
by lotyrin | 2025-08-14 17:07:11+00:00
What I've come to realize (despite avoiding such a negative conclusion) is that the dominant culture's experience with sex seems to be mostly limited to that which includes problematic power dynamics (e.g. mainstream porn, captive housewives as an ideal). They do not have a solid concept of consent. Sex is shameful to them because their concept of sex is, literally, shameful and exploitation is at the core of it.

Concrete and overt examples being unable to imagine someone being sexually liberated, a woman, and a feminist all at the same time (they see sex as inherently demeaning to women), or seeing male sexual success on a "nice guy virgin" (unsuccessful through insufficient exploitation) or "man-slut womanizer" (success through excessive exploitation) spectrum. (Even the word "womanizer" bakes this assumption in, to be made a woman, woman-ized, is to be exploited?)

It appears in popular discourse around trans individuals (choosing to present as a woman means you must have a sexual fantasy about being exploited, we can't expose that idea to children). Around homosexuality (so which one of you is the exploitative one). And around polyamory (you must have a cuckold kink because nobody would let someone exploit their partner otherwise).

But this same dynamic also appears in a more subtle form in daily interactions in the culture and shuts down sexual topics or behavior. It's somewhat analogous to the situation of shushing a white toddler that points out the race of a non-white person because it's "rude" - you've made it apparent that you think non-whiteness is something inherently uncomfortable for a non-white person to have pointed out so you try to "spare" them this.
by Teever | 2025-08-14 17:07:32+00:00
Apple is able to do what they do now because of the shit they got away with in the Jobs era.

Because they hobbled competitors and innovation then they're able to do it now.

It's really hard to determine how detrimental their actions have been to the job market for software engineers.

It is entirely possible that every software engineer is worse off because Apple severely distorted the market and prevented many competitors from growing to be competitors to Apple and what ever offer Apple made to these people pales to what they could be making if Jobs hadn't done what he did.
by chrismustcode | 2025-08-14 17:07:45+00:00
I’d be stunned if a 270m model could code with any proficiency.

If you have an iPhone with the semi-annoying autocomplete that’s a 34m transformer.

Can’t imagine a model (even if it’s a good team behind it) to do coding with 8x the parameters of a next 3/4 word autocomplete.
by mauvehaus | 2025-08-14 17:07:51+00:00
I don't know what Garmin you have, but I'm about half convinced that my Instinct's heart rate measurement is implemented by a PRNG. It's frequently off by 50% from a count/time cross-check.

It does not inspire me to move up their range when this watch eventually dies: if they can't get the basic feature working, I have a hard time seeing how they're going to manage anything trickier.
by momojo | 2025-08-14 17:08:05+00:00
I like the agar plate analogy. Of course, the yeast is the star of the show, but so much work goes into prepping the plate.

As someone in biotech, 90% of the complaints I hear over lunch are not about bad results, but about bad mistakes during the experiment. E.G. someone didn't cover their mouth while pipetting and the plates unusable now.
by ryandrake | 2025-08-14 17:08:44+00:00
To your first point, I'll just say this isn't the first time in history various groups of people (however you want to group them) have by a wide margin voted for a politician who is actually antagonistic towards them. This behavior seems to rhyme all throughout history.

Weird to have to define dehumanization but OK. Dehumanization is to deprive people of their positive human qualities. We're about to get political so this is likely way off topic at this point.

A common, recurring theme in Republican "culture war" rhetoric and policy is to carve out and target various groups (however they/we want to define that group), ignore those groups' positive qualities, amplify their negative qualities, and portray those groups as "lesser humans than us," ultimately for the purpose of depriving them of rights/freedoms/wealth/livelihoods/etc. Evidence of this target -> dehumanize -> disenfranchise cycle abounds. If we can't agree on at least that baseline, then there's probably no productive way to proceed with a discussion.

Yes, the other side divides and groups people, too, and we might not like that. But I'd argue it's for the purpose of uplifting already-vulnerable groups rather than knocking them down. I'd love to live in a world where nobody does this grouping, but we're obviously not there yet.
by skadamou | 2025-08-14 17:09:00+00:00
That's definitely a danger zone for healthy people but interestingly enough people with things like COPD may have a blood oxygen level in the 80s and while that is indicative of the disease, they may be totally stable and may not even need oxygen [1].

[1] https://www.drugs.com/medical-answers/normal-oxygen-level-so...
by yalogin | 2025-08-14 17:09:01+00:00
I hear you, but they could have chosen performant crypto or low power crypto or some variant like that. For many lightweight reminds them of low effort ciphers. I see your point though

For me if it comes from NIST, I trust it (even with their past shenanigans) because I know the process they use and also they only produce these standards to be used for federal governent software. So they will do a good job.
by srean | 2025-08-14 17:09:18+00:00
Heard the word 'nepers' after many decades. Are you by any chance an Electrical major ?

Thanks for your comment. To be fair, I had not done due diligence before asking. There's a Wikipedia pages on quaternion calculus.

Complex analysis (calculus on functions from 2D rotations to 2D rotations) is beautiful -- Once differentiability guarantees infinite differentiability. Wondering what would the analogue of that be for quaternions
by cubefox | 2025-08-14 17:09:26+00:00
Yes, though that would mean they need to stack three drops for red, green and blue, rather than two as in CMYK. Which might create some quality issues. At least CMYK printers avoid the triple stacking for black which CMY printers would have to do. With CMYRGBKW there would be no dot stacking (subtractive color mixing) required at all, resulting in less required ink. Though needing eight base inks rather than the five in CMYKW might be a larger disadvantage.
by FireBeyond | 2025-08-14 17:09:28+00:00
I agree. I had this argument here previously, that I supposedly "owe" it to "the other side" to listen to their arguments (in this case on abortion).

No, I don't. Not when the other side just openly uses lies (that they know to be lies) like "post-birth abortion" to argue their cause.

They're not discussing things in even a modicum of good faith. Saying that I have some moral imperative to engage with them as if they are is horseshit.
by lysecret | 2025-08-14 17:09:35+00:00
Bit of a click baity title since thy can definitely help in building software.

However, I agree with the main thesis (that they can’t do it on their own). Also related to this this whole idea of “we will easily fix memory next” will turn out to be the same as “we can fix vision in one summer” turned out it’s 30 years later, much improved but still not fixed. Memory is hard.
by Closi | 2025-08-14 17:09:53+00:00
I assume you don’t use these models frequently, because there is a staggering difference in response quality from frontier LLMs compared to GPT 3.

Go open the OpenAI API playground and give GPT3 and GPT5 the same prompt to make a reasonably basic game in JavaScript to your specification and watch GPT 3 struggle and GPT 5 one-shot it.
by ants_everywhere | 2025-08-14 17:09:58+00:00
> The moat is not in computer architecture. I'd say the real moat is in semiconductor fabrication.

In the longer run, anything that is very capital intensive, affects entire industries, and can be improved with large amounts of simulation will not be a moat for long. That's because you can increasingly use AI to explore the design space.

Compute not a commodity yet but may be in a few years. Semiconductor fab will take longer, but I wouldn't be surprised to see parts of the fabrication process democratized in a few years.

Physical commodities like copper or oil can't be improved with simulation so they don't fall under this idea.
by Vegenoid | 2025-08-14 17:10:02+00:00
> Saying kids have to have access to books about how to perform bj's is a losing argument.

This isn't the argument, which is why it didn't lose. The argument is that the law was too broad and banned books that have long been considered to have great literary value. Did you see the list of books that have been banned as a result of this bill in the article? The bill does not allow consideration of literary value (a.k.a. the rest of the book, and its role in history), it only considers some sexual content in the book in isolation. It also applied to the entire school system, these books were being banned from high school libraries.
by Enginerrrd | 2025-08-14 17:10:17+00:00
The transformer architecture absolutely keeps state information "in its head" so to speak as it produces the next word prediction, and uses that information in its compute.

It's true that if it's not producing text, there is no thinking involved, but it is absolutely NOT clear that the attention block isn't holding state and modeling something as it works to produce text predictions. In fact, I can't think of a way to define it that would make that untrue... unless you mean that there isn't a system wherein something like attention is updating/computing and the model itself chooses when to make text predictions. That's by design, but what you're arguing doesn't really follow.

Now, whether what the model is thinking about inside that attention block matches up exactly or completely with the text it's producing as generated context is probably at least a little dubious, and its unlikely to be a complete representation regardless.
by simonw | 2025-08-14 17:10:43+00:00
This model is a LOT of fun. It's absolutely tiny - just a 241MB download - and screamingly fast, and hallucinates wildly about almost everything.

Here's one of dozens of results I got for "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle". For this one it decided to write a poem:

+-----------------------+ | Pelican Riding Bike | +-----------------------+ | This is the cat! | | He's got big wings and a happy tail. | | He loves to ride his bike! | +-----------------------+ | Bike lights are shining bright. | | He's got a shiny top, too! | | He's ready for adventure! | +-----------------------+

There are a bunch more attempts in this Gist, some of which do at least include an SVG tag albeit one that doesn't render anything: https://gist.github.com/simonw/25e7b7afd6a63a2f15db48b3a51ec...

I'm looking forward to seeing people fine-tune this in a way that produces useful output for selected tasks, which should absolutely be feasible.
by Ccecil | 2025-08-14 17:10:49+00:00
Not at all stable from my experience.

Plus, it is in no way tied to what the "average renter makes". In my state there are very few laws about rent increases. It can basically happen within 1 month of lease renewal IIRC. Which does not allow (most people) time to move and typically the surrounding rents have increased higher than the proposed increase so it often does not save money.

It really depends on the landlord or property management company involved though. Some do 5-10% increases every time they can because "that's the way it is"....some don't.

If I would have bought a house 6 years ago I would be spending ~$500/mo less than I am for the house I currently rent.
by rayiner | 2025-08-14 17:11:25+00:00
> there's certainly a chunk of Trump supporters who would like to go back to the 40s and 50s version of US "not talking about race" (or the 1910s for not talking about women).

This is a relatively small number in comparison to the chunk of Harris supporters who would call color blindness “racist.” In my own experience, “brown” ethno-narcissism and ethnic tribalism is more accepted, and even encouraged, among liberals than white ethno-nationalism is tolerated among conservatives.

This is a result of the political incentives of the respective parties. Republicans don’t need white nationalism, they can win when minorities are assimilated into the what the dominant Anglo-American culture (what the left might call “multiracial whiteness”). That’s basically what’s happened in Florida: Hispanics retain their culture in the way Irish and Italian Americans do, but don’t have a strong ethnic identity that is politically motivating.
by stouset | 2025-08-14 17:11:42+00:00
> For an advanced git user, it doesn't offer all that much.

As a (former) advanced git user, nothing could be further from the truth. We are always the most passionate cohort of jj users in these threads. This is almost certainly because jj unlocks a bunch of additional abilities and workflows that we've been torturing out of git (or given up on, or didn't even conceive was possible) for years.

On the flip side if all you ever do it git pull, git commit, git push, jj is probably not going to offer you much.
by thicktarget | 2025-08-14 17:11:49+00:00
Laser links would make everything more complicated and expensive. Radio antennas can share the same hardware to link with many terminals, not so with laser systems. They are point to point, so you need many more. They also require precise pointing, you can forget passive spacecraft. The number of 42 PB per day is about three orders of magnitude lower than the data rates required by SKA Low.

>I don't see why couldn't put that in space, today.

Because the electronics are not built for space. Space rated electronics is about a decade behind their ground based siblings. Radiation is one of the most problematic, degrading electronics and disrupting digital memory. You also need petabytes of temp storage. Which, again, doesn't exist. For reference, JWST carries a 70 GB solid state recorder, I think Roman has about 1 TB. Then there is all the cooling, which is difficult in space. Saying there are some start-up considering computing is not the same as it being possible to order a system like this today.

The question is not could it theoretically be done, but can it be done on even the sorts of budget of a space science mission. And the answer to that is no. SKA pushes computing and technology to the limit on the Earth, where these things are much more advanced.
by MarkusWandel | 2025-08-14 17:11:51+00:00
So the pension fund thing. My accrued pension value took a significant haircut when my own former company went out of business. In this case, they can take $0.5B out and still "meet all their obligations" without a haircut? So their pension fund was significantly overfunded and all their retirees still get all that was promised to them?
by parsimo2010 | 2025-08-14 17:11:52+00:00
Masimo does not have an overarching patent on pulse oximetry, as the overarching technology is several decades old. There are many manufacturers of sensors being used in many applications with various implementations, many of which are not covered by Masimo's patents. Masimo could not write a patent to cover significantly more implementation variations because they would not be granted the patent in that case.

Masimo does have patents on specific implementations of pulse oximetry and sued Apple for implementing specific patented features. This made their legal case pretty solid, but it also made it possible for Apple to continue providing pulse oximetry as long as they avoided the specific IP owned by Masimo.