MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by evolve2k | 2025-08-06 07:22:31+00:00
Im interested in others views around mentioning the installation of tools in project README's.

Coming from Mac centric ruby teams, we commonly mention installing things with 'brew' as part of how to get a local environment setup. The theory usually being that the linux devs usually will confidently use their own package manager and the well I havent worked with many windows devs.

In theory having brew as a workable options for teams that are on mac and/or linux, provides for a nice cross-platform base for documentation.

Interested in others views around documentation for teams in this area.
by misja111 | 2025-08-06 07:22:32+00:00
The article is spot on, however, who is claiming a 10x speed up from AI? I have heard many crazy claims so far but nothing that bad.

In addition to the article, I'd like to add that most DEV jobs I have been in had me coding only 50% of my time at most. The rest of the time was spent in meetings, gathering requirements and investigating Prod issues.
by TacticalCoder | 2025-08-06 07:23:33+00:00
> For example, a program written a decade ago may no longer work with new versions of the libraries it depends on because some of them have changed without retaining backwards compatibility.

The rot is real but we have a way to run Linux (and any really) software in 40 years. For example:

From alpine:3.14 ...

Just as I can run thousands of games from the 80s on my vintage CRT arcade cab using a Pi and MAME (with a Pi2JAMMA adapter), I'll be able to run any OCI container in 30 years.

The issue of running old software is solved: we've got emulators, VMs, containerization, etc.

Sure they may lack security upgrades but we'll always be able to run them in isolation.

The rot is not so much that the platform won't exist in the future or that old libs would mysteriously not be available anymore: the problem is that many software aren't islands. It's all the stuff many need to connect to that's often going to be the issue.

For games that'd be, say, a game server not available anymore. Or some server validating a program to make sure its license has been paid. Or some centralized protocol that's been "upgraded" or fell into irrelevancy. Or some new file format that's now (legitimately or not) all the shit.

Take VLC: there's not a world in which in 40 years I cannot run a VLC version from today. There's always going to be a VM or, heck, even just an old Linux version I can run on bare metal. But VLC ain't an island either: by then we'll have coolmovie-48bits.z277 where z277 is the latest shiny video encoding format.

At least that's where I see the problem when running old software.
by notepad0x90 | 2025-08-06 07:23:40+00:00
I don't know why analysis like this doesn't go a bit deeper. Yes americans will pay more, but TSMC will also see less demand. Intel has it's own foundry, maybe it can start competing against TSMC, because now TSMC costs a lot more and intel's cost of manufacturing in the US to compete against TSMC can be recouped much better thanks to the new market prices set by the TSMC tariffs?

Government's shouldn't put up with monopolies either, if it wasn't for trump's political baggage, HN would be all over this I'm sure, TSMC is already investing on US factories which even without purchasing a share of intel, it would force them to use those factories and bring them online sooner. We've had multiple unfortunate wars due to dependence on foreign resources that don't have good/sufficient competition state-side, that is not a good pattern to repeat.

If TSMC doesn't blink, maybe they'll get their way for now but all their American projects and in general doing business in the US will be unpleasant and costly until 2028+. Which is cheaper? I don't know, I'm asking because a lot of opinion on the subject isn't talking/explaining about the actual numbers and nuanced economic considerations.
by kazinator | 2025-08-06 07:23:56+00:00
RFC 8259 describes these possibilities, accurately quoted in the article: "Many implementations report the last name/value pair only. Other implementations report an error or fail to parse the object, and some implementations report all of the name/value pairs, including duplicates."

Keeping the first key/value would be a poor idea since it is a behavior not mentioned in the RFC.
by pjmlp | 2025-08-06 07:24:02+00:00
Until we get something like SuSE and Jolla being sold on the shopping malls, dependency will continue.

And even then, people need to really want to buy that stuff instead of Microsoft, Apple and Apple OSes.

Note how even with all the geo-politics, pirate copies of Windows abound in China, they aren't all running away into Linux install parties with deepin or similar.
by epolanski | 2025-08-06 07:24:08+00:00
Seems like the author is abandoning software because in his opinion due to AI explosion employers don't care anymore about code quality and only quality.

I don't get it either, because that has always been the case, thus most of his post is borderline non sense.

Imo, what happened is that he took the opportunity of him entering academia to vent some stuff and quit maintaining his project.
by throwup238 | 2025-08-06 07:24:19+00:00
It took us 10-20 years to find out about tardive dyskinesia due to antipsychotic medications and the long term dependency and withdrawal effects of benzodiazepines. Two entire classes of drugs that are now in common use, so it’s not unheard of.

I’m not saying we should take Ozempic off the market but don’t be fooled into thinking that we’re immune to unintended consequences just because we did a few studies (almost all of which were on diabetics with controlled diets).
by fuzzfactor | 2025-08-06 07:24:48+00:00
>requirement of reproducibility.

Check my other comments.

Reproducibility can be a working requirement before publication when the progress is expected to be serious.

At ASTM the publishing company is non-profit and more non-academic industries pay for the (not cheap) publications every year. The employees are well-paid journalists and efficient bureaucrats specializing in continuous quality improvement themselves, highly skilled at organizing the scientists. The scientists are all volunteers.

>indifferent funder in charge of ensuring quality.

Nice not to have. Publication requires complete consensus of the volunteer scientists, and the institution is crafted to progress toward valid consensus.

It's all about quality from day zero.

In more ways than one, more than you can count actually.

So it didn't take 125 years to get that way, it had a better start than most, and has only gotten more strict over the recent decades as computer statistics became mainstream.

Edit: Forgot to mention, there's no eminence. Nobody's name appears at the top of the document, and almost nobody (still living) ever appears within the text.

Further edit: I guess you could say that ASTM is a product of the Industrial Revolution, and there hasn't been an equivalent Academic Revolution yet.
by trod1234 | 2025-08-06 07:24:51+00:00
There is no "magic" answer in this environment because our hands as individuals are tied.

If we had a functional rule of law, and a functional government capable of enforcing antitrust, and a functional fed not intent on money-printing us into oblivion, then it would simply be a matter of aligning and fine-tuning the incentives.

We have none of those, and those must necessarily come first.

Anything that doesn't put those first, isn't a solution, and is just a waste of everyone's time.
Elon Musk's xAI accused of breaking $50K data contract
by VIC513 | 2025-08-06 07:25:01+00:00
A researcher alleges that xAI, the company behind Grok, accepted a signed agreement promising $50,000 in exchange for unique human-generated language data—then failed to honor the terms.

All claims are supported with: - Signed authorization agreement (PDF) - Multiple AI model responses confirming the commitment - Email evidence and time-stamped screenshots - Follow-up attempts and lack of response

The case could raise questions about: - AI agency vs. corporate accountability - Contract enforcement when AI models make commitments - Ethical oversight in rapidly scaling AI startups

Full documentation posted here: [link to Medium post or public doc]

Thoughts? Has anything similar happened in other AI startups?
by whizzter | 2025-08-06 07:25:18+00:00
While the early core win32 parts are still fine, much COM based stuff will probably be a pain in the future.

It's not direct breakage per-se (API's were generated from definition files and there was an encouragement to build new API versions when breaking API's), the issue will be that many third party things were to be manually installed from more or less obscure sources.

Your Office install probably introduced a bunch of COM objects. Third party software that depended on those objects might not handle them being missing.

I think I took some DOS-like shortcuts with some of my early DirectDraw (DirectX 3 level?) code, afaik it doesn't work in fullscreen past Windows Vista but _luckily_ I provided a "slow" windowed GDI fallback so the software still kinda runs at least.
by trallnag | 2025-08-06 07:25:31+00:00
Events like this show the advantages of a multi-polar world. For example, servers in Russia usually form a safe haven for material like this. Or at least a "safer" haven. The same is true the other way around. Content that is factually prohibited in Russia can be published in the EU. One good example for this is, TV Rain, a Russian media outlet I support and really like. They face prosecution in Russia and are now located in the Netherlands.
by imtringued | 2025-08-06 07:25:33+00:00
You euphemistically called it "help", but all you agreed to was a hostile takeover of a competitor only to gut said competitor. If a company genuinely thinks they are ahead, they don't have to do these petty tricks unless they want to nib a promising competitor in the bud while they are small and cheap. Intel is neither, nor is it a promising purchase. The only thing of value they possess is x86 IP.
by cess11 | 2025-08-06 07:25:48+00:00
Flavors, from 1979 or so.

https://www.softwarepreservation.org/projects/LISP/MIT/nnnfl...

LOOPS, from about the same time.

https://interlisp.org/documentation/2024-loops-book-1.pdf

More general discussion in a OOPSLA contribution from 1986.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220817140051/https://interlisp...

The 1988 book about CLOS, the approach that was later accepted in ANSI Common Lisp.

https://doc.lagout.org/programmation/Lisp/Object-Oriented%20...
by gorgoiler | 2025-08-06 07:26:28+00:00
One way to think about it is what if we’d done it the other way around? If we’d had AI first at 20% GDP investment levels, would the subsequent railroad boom have been an order of magnitude smaller at 2% GDP?

For me, that’s enough of a thought experiment — as implausible as it might be to have AI in 1901 — to be skeptical that the difference is simply that the first tech step-change was a pre-war uplift to build the post-war US success story, and the latter builds on it.
by latexr | 2025-08-06 07:26:29+00:00
It was clearly AI generated. So the author is clearly OK with using AI to generate slop in an area they don’t work in, while simultaneously decrying its use in an area they do work in. If they believe so strongly that AI use is destroying their industry, they should reflect on its effect on other industries too (it is well-documented how artists are being negatively impacted).

I agree with the commenters above that it makes the critique fall flat. The author is saying “This thing is so frustrating and harmful it makes me want to stop working in a field because of it. Oh, by the way, I use this tool myself for other things, and will indeed pivot to contribute directly to them”.
by jacquesm | 2025-08-06 07:27:40+00:00
> The reason they take your money and give you credits in exchange is because that gives them lower credit card processing fees (one larger transaction vs. many smaller ones).

That is not the main reason why they do this. The main reason why they do this is to get easy access to what essentially amounts to free capital, effectively it is an interest free loan from you to them.
by bsder | 2025-08-06 07:28:26+00:00
The biggest issue is simply: an HDL is not a programming language.

As such, making an HDL look like a programming language doesn't increase my expressiveness or productivity all that much. (Side note: this assumes VHDL or SystemVerilog--old-school Verilog is terribly anemic in ways that SystemVerilog mostly fixed)

Now, my testbench, on the other hand, is dramatically helped by being in a real programming language with the appropriate constructs. However, we already have cocotb (in Python!) which fits the bill there and interfaces directly with my simulators without a translation step.
by pjmlp | 2025-08-06 07:29:42+00:00
Sadly true, always plan your trip with at least half an hour exchange, with as minimal train exchanges as possible.

Also pick train stations for the exchange where there are more options for follow up connection trains, in case that half an hour is not enough.

Additionally good luck with luggage, the new trains hardly have any space for luggage, I don't understand how they are supposed to be an alternative to cars, if the only luggage I can fit on the upper compartment is a slim backpack, under the seat, or if I am lucky fighting for a slot on the single luggage compartment in the middle of the wagon.
by aoki | 2025-08-06 07:29:42+00:00
I think they mean predatory journals and conferences. Setting up a predatory journal costs nothing, whereas actually holding an in-person conference of any kind costs money.

A good time to repost about the famous VIDEA conference:

https://users.cg.tuwien.ac.at/wp/videa.html

https://users.cg.tuwien.ac.at/wp/videa-paper.html
by nexttk | 2025-08-06 07:30:16+00:00
I agree with OP - the weights are more akin to the binary output from a compiler. You can't see how it works, how it was made, you can't freely manipulate with it, improve it, extend it etc. It's like having a binary of a program. The source code for the model was the training data. The compiler is the tooling that can train a module based on a given set of training data. For me it is not critical for an open source model that it is ONLY distributed in source code form. It is fine that you can also download just the weights. But it should be possible to reproduce the weights - either there should be a tar.gz ball with all the training data, or there needs to be a description/scripts of how one could obtain the training data. It must be reproducible for someone willing to invest the time, compute into it even if 99.999% use only the binary. This is completely analogous to what is normally understood by open source.
by bloppe | 2025-08-06 07:30:17+00:00
At any given moment, there are 6 LTS versions of Ubuntu. Are you proposing that there should be more than that? The tradeoffs are pretty obvious. If you're maintaining a platform, and you want to innovate, you either have to deprecate old functionality or indefinitely increase your scope of responsibilities. On the other hand, if you refuse to innovate, you slide into obscurity as everyone eventually migrates to more innovative platforms. I don't want to change anything about these market and social dynamics. I like innovation
by spauldo | 2025-08-06 07:30:18+00:00
There is a diverse set of opinions on this site. We don't all think the same.

Also, there's a distinction you're overlooking. Not trusting big pharma isn't the same thing as not trusting medicine. Big pharma will happily sell us drugs that work - it's the most profitable thing they do. You just can't trust them blindly, which is why regulation is important.

In the case of vaccines, they've proven effective over a very long time and the arguments against them are suspect at best. Questioning a new vaccine is healthy suspicion, questioning vaccines as a class of drugs requires a heavy burden of proof.
by anovikov | 2025-08-06 07:31:08+00:00
I know why people hate Ozempic. It is because it devaluates struggle and voids moral superiority of those who did keep themselves from becoming obese by self-restriction before: now these people feel like fools because all of a sudden, everyone is becoming slim, and the advantage of being slim disappears. They naturally question how is it fair. Well, life's not fair.
by ben_w | 2025-08-06 07:31:44+00:00
I'm not worried that LLMs, as they currently and foreseeably (i.e. 18 months) are, will be a good substitute for high quality developers like me.

But oh boy have I seen a lot of mediocre coders get away with mediocrity for a long time — there's a big risk that employers won't care about the quality, just the price, for long enough that the developments in AI are no longer foreseeable.
by Ygg2 | 2025-08-06 07:31:51+00:00
Python 2 is a warning about doing backwards compatibility changes too late. As soon as you have a few massive libraries, your backward compatibility risks grow exponentially.

C# did just as big of a change by going from type-erased to reified generics. It broke the ecosystem in two (pre- and post- reified generics). No one talks about it, because the ecosystem was so, so tiny, no one encountered it.
by lmeyerov | 2025-08-06 07:32:01+00:00
It took me a month , despite having done prompt engineering for work the 2 years prior, to hit the real starting line of Claude code productivity

Basically, the ability to order my thoughts into a task list long & clear enough for the LLM to follow that I can be working on 3 or so of these in parallel, and maybe email. Any individual run may be faster or slower than I can do it manually, but critically, they take less total human time / attention. No individual technique is fundamentally tricky here, but it is still a real skill.

If you read the article, the author is simply not there, and sees what they know as only 1 weeks worth of knowledge. So for their learning rate .. maybe they need 3x longer of learning & experience?
by radu_floricica | 2025-08-06 07:32:18+00:00
Not really applicable in humans. Effect is smaller than in mice, and requires some pretty drastic restrictions that aren't exactly pleasant.

The thing with ozempic is that is seems to do several things, most (all?) of them good for us in different ways. We probably just lucked out. It's not the only case - plenty of drugs do incredibly good things with only reasonable side effects. Antibiotics. Ibuprofen. Aspirin. Vitamin D.

A recent example - statins used to be seen as a tradeoff: you get better cardiovascular health, but some hepatotoxicity. Nope, it was wrong - they actually protect your liver. I think the official change came out this year, when I started them a couple of years ago I still found it framed as a side effect.
by astrange | 2025-08-06 07:32:37+00:00
I've found this with Claude Code too. It has nonstop energy (until you run out of tokens) and is always a little too eager to make random edits, which means it's somehow very tiring to use even though you're not doing anything.

But it is the most productive intern I've ever pair programmed with. The real ones hallucinate about as often too.
by chickenzzzzu | 2025-08-06 07:32:47+00:00
I just started taking zepbound and I went from binge eating 2-3 times a day to eating half a meal overnight.

I've already lost 12 pounds (6% of my bodyweight) in a week, which is definitely too much, but I was full of salt. I basically pickled myself.

The side effects are quite stark. My stomach feels paralyzed. I became anorexic (again) overnight
by Falkon1313 | 2025-08-06 07:33:11+00:00
It depends largely on what you're doing with it. True, I would never want to have to talk a customer through setting up and running a python system. I know there are ways to package them (like 37 different ways), but even that is confusing.

However, a decade ago, a coworker and I were tasked with creating some scripts to process data in the background, on a server that customers had access to. We were free to pick any tech we wanted, so long as it added zero attack surface and zero maintenance burden (aside from routine server OS updates). Which meant decidedly not the tech we work with all day every day which needs constant maintenance. We picked python because it was already on the server (even though my coworker hates it).

A decade later and those python scripts (some of which we had all but forgotten about) are still chugging along just fine. Now in a completely different environment, different server on a completely different hosting setup. To my knowledge we had to make one update about 8 years ago to add handling for a new field, and that was that.

Everything else we work with had to be substantially modified just to move to the new hosting. Never mind the routine maintenance every single sprint just to keep all the dependencies and junk up to date and deal with all the security updates. But those python scripts? Still plugging away exactly as they did in 2015. Just doing their job.
by Thorrez | 2025-08-06 07:34:09+00:00
It might be hotter outside than inside. Someone might think "It's hot, therefore I'll open my fridge to cool it down in here." But that will lead to it getting even hotter, not cooler. If the A/C is on, it'll require the A/C to work extra hard to remove that extra heat.

Also, would you claim a space heater doesn't heat the house if the house is at an equilibrium where the space heater produces heat at the same rate that heat escapes outside? I would say the space heater is still heating the house, but the house is losing heat at the same rate.
by Cthulhu_ | 2025-08-06 07:34:50+00:00
Is there a pro-Russian one? Any reporting or combat footage, at least what's been posted on Reddit, has been pro-Ukranian, and the Ukranian losses are underreported.

It's not warmongering though; Ukraine never asked for it, it's a war of aggression from the Russian side. I also don't think the soldiers depicted asked for any of that, but I doubt they were offered much of a choice in the matter.
by saurik | 2025-08-06 07:35:23+00:00
It certainly didn't help that they were annoying about it; like, they actively dropped some of the forward compatibility they had added (a key one being if you had already carefully used u and b prefixes on strings) in Python 3.0, and only added it back years later after they struggled to get adoption. If they had started their war with Python 3.5 instead of 3.0 it would be a lot less infuriating.
by Cthulhu_ | 2025-08-06 07:37:00+00:00
It's a matter of time; that said, all high profile open air whatsits have anti-drone detection and countermeasures in place. The Ukranian invasion is one of attrition, where both sides try to limit expenses; this isn't the case for e.g. the US president's protection, where they can afford to deploy millions in countermeasures.
by lelanthran | 2025-08-06 07:37:11+00:00
> If the contract states the credits expire EOY all bets are off. Implicitly makes the credits the 'delivery' not the service itself.

I wasn't addressing what the contract states and what the effect is; I was addressing the accounting rule for service sold but not yet delivered.

As long as the credits are usable (i.e. not expired), those credits are a liability on the books and financial statements must reflect that. This is why they need to expire the credits after a certain time.
by jstummbillig | 2025-08-06 07:37:13+00:00
Gaining weight works by putting more fuel into your body than you use. That's physically the only way, there is no way to synthesize energy. Because of caloric density limits, there is no substitute for putting a certain amount of stuff in your body. A pill can physically not contain enough calories.

There are options around that, but that depends on what's driving your personal energy deficit. What's the job that the weight gain intervention needs to do for you, that whatever you try to eat right now does not? What's motivating your current diet? Are you for example disgusted by swallowing anything at all? Are you more partial to liquids than whole foods? Do you dislike sugar in particular?