MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by teemur | 2025-08-31 21:34:12+00:00
> People will have less or no motivation to create them

Not sure if we surf the same internets... In the web I am surfing, the more "motivation" (trying to get ad revenue) the author has, the crappier the content is. If I want to find high quality information, invariably I am seeking authors with no "motivation" whatsoever to produce the content (wikipedia, hacker news, reddit with a heavy filter etc.) I'm pretty sure we would be better off if the whole ad industry vanished.
by machinemusic | 2025-08-31 21:34:34+00:00
Loved that idea — I went ahead and shipped it. Sharable Profiles + a Leaderboard are now live right inside Profiles.

So now anyone can cook up their own agent mix, share it, and see how it stacks up on the leaderboard week-to-week. Would love for you to check it out →

fantasyfootballneuron.app
by dedup-com | 2025-08-31 21:36:07+00:00
First of all, AR/VR is a tough problem space, often for reasons not immediately obvious to common folk. Second, Facebook in my opinion is a wrong home for long-term efforts that may not bear fruit for many years, with its 6-month attention span of employee performance management and its "move fast and break things" culture (both of which clashed with the meticulous hardware-oriented Oculus culture). And finally, a significant portion of people working in AR/VR didn't believe in AR/VR as a product. Some were there for the gravy train, some were there for interesting OS work, some were there for bleeding-edge technology, but I'd say less than half would say "we're working on something that people will love and pay money for". To me it felt more like well-funded academia even and less like a startup (which it was supposed to be).
by lisper | 2025-08-31 21:36:46+00:00
I'm sympathetic to this argument, but nearly every technological breakthrough in history has been accompanied by plausible-sounding arguments as to why it should have been impossible. I myself left my career as an AI researcher about 20 years ago because I was convinced the field was moribund and there would be no major breakthroughs in my lifetime. That was about as well-informed a prediction as you could hope to find at the time and it was obviously very wrong. It is in the nature of breakthroughs that they are rare and unpredictable. Nothing you say is wrong. I would bet against QC is 5 years (and even then I would not stake my life savings) but not 75.
by neehao | 2025-08-31 21:36:53+00:00
As Tyler Cowen says, solve for the equilibrium.

"Many widely used machine-learning models rely on copyrighted data. For instance, Google finds the most relevant web pages for a search term by relying on a machine learning model trained on copyrighted web data. But the use of copyrighted data by machine learning models that generate content (or give answers to search queries than link to sites with the answers) poses new (reasonable) questions about fair use. By not sharing the proceeds, such systems also kill the incentives to produce original content on which they rely. For instance, if we don’t incentivize content producers, e.g., people who respond to Stack Overflow questions, the ability of these models to answer questions in new areas is likely to be lower. The concern about fair use can be addressed by training on data from content producers who have opted to share their data. The second problem is more challenging. How do you build a system that shares proceeds with content producers?"

https://www.gojiberries.io/generative-ai-and-the-market-for-...
by andsoitis | 2025-08-31 21:37:06+00:00
> And why would Trump - a former president - provide more change than Harris?

Famously, Kamala Harris said in an interview on The View that she was a biggest part of the impactful decisions in the Biden administration AND that there’s nothing she would have done differently! https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/08/politics/video/kamala-harris-...

Making matters worse, when she went on Colbert she said nothing would change other than she would be president rather than Biden: https://youtu.be/6eZw3GzmPGc?feature=shared

Trump has already done many things very differently than in his own first term, and undoubtedly different from the prior administration.
by vunderba | 2025-08-31 21:37:33+00:00
> You could only buy licensed software (in the form of cartridges) even though technically it was of course a programmable computer.

In fact just the opposite. Activision was one of the first third-party game manufacturers and Atari tried to sue them into the ground for it.

It's widely believed that the massive glut of 3rd party games (with effectively zero quality control) for the 2600 partially contributed to the video game crash of 83 [1].

It's also one of the reasons Nintendo learned from this mistake and enforced everything from limitations around the total number of games a company could produce per year, to the seal of approval, etc. on their Nintendo Entertainment System.

Also having grown up with the Atari 2600 - I don't know anybody who would have described it as home computer. It was a video game console first and foremost. Are you possibly thinking of the Atari ST line? [2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_crash_of_1983

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari_8-bit_computers
by lazide | 2025-08-31 21:39:37+00:00
If you think the UK gov’t was in any position to piss China off then (or now!) without it costing them and anyone else involved far more than it’s worth, I don’t know what to say.

It’s honestly amazing that China didn’t apply more ‘direct’ pressure to get HK bad sooner. There is nothing the UK likely would have done about it. Bad for business I guess? Macau transferred over around the same time.

The Qing dynasty ‘remnants’ in Taiwan would have just been steamrolled if they’d gone anywhere near it. And not like there was any real cultural reason why HK’ers would accept them anyway, or that the Qing were well loved. CCP steamrolled them in mainland China like they did because they were, by all accounts, terrible.

Sometimes, life just sucks.
by galangalalgol | 2025-08-31 21:39:46+00:00
It just seems that way because people had been researching neural networks from before the time they had floating point units in processors. So there were all these ideas people were waiting tp try when we finally had the speed. Then it was a matter of trying them all to see which worked the best. But yes, there is the point that even a bad ai model can learn most anything if you give it enough parameters. So the emergent property isn't far off either.
by yodsanklai | 2025-08-31 21:40:00+00:00
Seems about right for me (older developer at a big tech company). But we need to define what it means that the code is AI-generated. In my case, I typically know how I want the code to look like, and I'm writing a prompt to tell the agent to do it. The AI doesn't solve any problem, it just does the typing and helps with syntax. I'm not even sure I'm ultimately more productive.
by slug | 2025-08-31 21:40:07+00:00
I think we are confusing the perfect from the good enough.

If there's an ecosystem that allows converting old hw, lot of people will less resources can make reuse of that e-waste.

Installing ubuntu nowadays is a few clicks that anyone minimally proficient on computers is able to do, not much more difficult than installing a browser "or an app on their phone".

Sure, there's "dozen of apps" for that iOS/Android, but if the HW+OS combination is no longer supported, how can we continue using it or update it ? $50 might not seem a lot to you or me, but it's a lot to many people in the world, specially with something they already have. Using cloud for inference, which is also not free or private, bringing again dependency from some entity, where local HW is perfectly capable of basic object detection. I personally have "professional" PoE cameras with built-in object detection for surveilance, but see a use case where cheap access can also be useful.

I'm still mystified why there's so much push back from people to own and make use of old HW for whatever purpose they see fit.
by observationist | 2025-08-31 21:41:01+00:00
Content producers that publish their "content" to the public web aren't entitled to dictate what's done with that material.

There's a simple solution. People that publish things can put up a paywall and people can pay what the content is worth.

The thing that AI endangers is not valuable content, it's the SEO clickbait cashcow, and as far as I'm concerned, the faster AI kills that off, the better.

That monetization model is corrupt as hell, produces all sorts of perverse incentives, and is the epitome of the enshittification of the web.

Burn, baby, burn.
by lordnacho | 2025-08-31 21:41:45+00:00
> Meanwhile many of the seniors around me are stuck in their ways, refusing to adopt interactive debuggers to replace their printf() debug habits, let alone AI tooling...

When I was new to the business, I used interactive debugging a lot. The more experienced I got, the less I used it. printf() is surprisingly useful, especially if you upgrade it a little bit to a log-level aware framework. Then you can leave your debugging lines in the code and switch it on or off with loglevel = TRACE or INFO, something like that.
by WillDaSilva | 2025-08-31 21:42:56+00:00
There are times when a cache is appropriate, but I often find that it's more appropriate for the cache to be on the side of whoever is making all the requests. This isn't applicable when that is e.g. millions of different clients all making their own requests, but rather when we're talking about one internal service putting heavy load on another one.

The team with the demanding service can add a cache that's appropriate for their needs, and will be motivated to do so in order to avoid hitting the rate limit (or reduce costs, which should be attributed to them).
by nabla9 | 2025-08-31 21:43:46+00:00
The general idea is that with N fault-tolerant qubits, you can find the ground-state energy of an electronic system with N spin orbitals. 100 spin orbitals is the practical upper limit of current computers, so when you get into several hundred qubits, you can start seeing gains.

In some special problems hybrid methods start giving gains in 100 qubits or below.

Gate count estimates for performing quantum chemistry on small quantum computers https://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.1695

A Perspective on Quantum Computing Applications in Quantum Chemistry using 25--100 Logical Qubits https://arxiv.org/pdf/2506.19337
by akoboldfrying | 2025-08-31 21:43:51+00:00
Based on that code snippet, and making some (possibly unjustified) assumptions about the rest of the code, your actual request rate could be as low as 50% of your claimed request rate:

Suppose it takes 0.99s to send REQUESTS_PER_SECOND requests. Then you sleep for 1s. Result: You send REQUESTS_PER_SECOND requests every 1.99s. (If sending the batch of requests could take longer than a second, then the situation gets even worse.)

The issue GP has with app and DB on the same box is a red herring -- that was explicitly the condition under test.
by jeroenhd | 2025-08-31 21:43:54+00:00
My Bitwarden extension stores my webauthn keys and those keys work on any device I have Bitwarden unlocked on.

I could definitely share any webauthn account with anyone of my choice if I wanted to. Just store the generated key in a shared webauthn vault.

You can go spec-incompliant and tell the browser to only accept certain types of hardware to store your credential, but unless the entire ecosystem maintains lists of compromised hardware and blocks half the desktop user base for defeated TPM mechanisms, you're going to have to deal with spoofed clients. The only reason spoofed TPM/hardware backed credential stores aren't a problem for webauthn right now is that there is no need to spoof them at the moment.
by metalman | 2025-08-31 21:44:32+00:00
they are leveraging the givens, lots of solar energy and pulverised rock heated to 1300°c in a vacume will sinter into bricks. I think that a more advanced version would also yield oxygen in significant amounts and other volitiles that could be captured. The moons surface composition is well understood, and in any case,1300°C will sinter almost any random rock debrit into a brick, the harder part will be mortar, or perhaps making something with mechanical joints, like stone henge, or lego. Pyramids on dark side of the moon Of course any moon base will be located next to one of the permanently shaded craters where water ice , hopefully other ice, can be found for making fuel and other uses.
by Borealid | 2025-08-31 21:44:47+00:00
Let's say I come up with the idea of using a fan to blow a balloon into the air. I get a patent with the claim "a device made buoyant in air and propelled by forced wind".

Someone else comes up with the idea of blowing a dust bunny into the air with their breath.

Their idea, which has nothing at all to do with my idea and is certainly not a copy, infringes my claim because what they are doing matches what I've claimed as the core idea in my patent. They didn't "copy" me, for two reasons:

1. Their idea was had independently of mine, with its own creativity 2. Their idea is fundamentally not the same as mine, but because my enumerated claim is sufficiently broad to cover their concept too, it's still infringement

With a copyright, their additional creativity would have made their work not infringe. With a copyright, you can't claim anything broader than the work you actually produced.
by awongh | 2025-08-31 21:45:39+00:00
TICs are a scam though. They are just condos with less legal protections for the relationships between the tenants. They don't solve any of the cost of ownership issues or deal with the idea of appreciation of the value of the real estate. afaik it's actually much worse because you're combining the appreciation of the asset, but you can't sell as easily as with a condo.
by themafia | 2025-08-31 21:46:05+00:00
On AWS if you want raw computational capacity you use Lambda and not EC2. EC2 is for legacy type workloads and doesn't have nearly the same scaling power and speed that Lambda does.

I have several workloads that just invoke Lambda in parallel. Now I effectively have a 1000 core machine and can blast through large workloads without even thinking about it. I have no VM to maintain or OS image to consider or worry about.

Which highlights the other difference that you failed to mention. Hertzner charges a "one time setup" fee to create that VM. That puts a lot of back pressure on infrastructure decisions and removes any scalability you could otherwise enjoy in the cloud.

If you want to just rent a server then Hertzner is great. If you actually want to run "in the cloud" then Hertzner is a non-starter.
by mgh95 | 2025-08-31 21:46:32+00:00
I think the parent commentors point was that it is nearly trivial to generate variations on unit tests in most (if not all) unit test frameworks. For example:

Java: https://docs.parasoft.com/display/JTEST20232/Creating+a+Para...

C# (nunit, but xunit has this too): https://docs.nunit.org/articles/nunit/technical-notes/usage/...

Python: https://docs.pytest.org/en/stable/example/parametrize.html

cpp: https://google.github.io/googletest/advanced.html

A belief that the ability of LLMs to generate parameterizations is intrinsically helpful to a degree which cannot be trivially achieved in most mainstream programming languages/test frameworks may be an indicator that an individual has not achieved a substantial depth of experience.
by dedup-com | 2025-08-31 21:47:27+00:00
I just realized that you might not know what a "bootcamper" is. Facebook's hiring process generally goes like this:

- you're interviewed with a random team and evaluated if you'd be a good fit for the company.

- you are hired and go through a multi-week "bootcamp" to learn FB's vocabulary, processes, and tech stack, fixing some real bugs and implementing some real (but minor) features in the process.

- upon completing the bootcamp you seek a team that is of interest to you and if interest is mutual, you join the team. If you can't find a team after X weeks, you part ways with the company.
by alnewkirkcom | 2025-08-31 21:47:29+00:00
You're asking the right question: what enforces it?

Think about how societies enforce contracts in general. Governments could, in theory, just stop enforcing citizen/property rights or contracts. But they don't, because if they did, trust collapses, citizens revolt, and the system breaks down. Enforcement isn't about perfection; it's about enough stability that the system holds together.

CBC operates similarly. It doesn't create a new enforcement mechanism out of thin air, but it gives existing ones (boards, investors, regulators, peers, employees) something concrete to hold leaders to. Without CBC, there's no "thing" to point to when accountability is challenged. With it, there is.

And just like with governments, the possibility of negative consequences (talent attrition, investor pressure, loss of credibility) is what incentivizes leaders to treat the agreement seriously. CBC isn't pie in the sky; it's infrastructure for accountability. Enforcement comes from the same place it always has: the need for trust and legitimacy to keep the system functioning.
by bukotron | 2025-08-31 21:48:07+00:00
Rust does not solve any problem existing in expecienced C++ developer career. You dont write modern C++ code in such a way memory leak or dangling pointer is possible at all)

This is exactly WHY we dont see a rush movement of C++ developers to Rust throwing away everything for Rust. Rust is trying to solve problems that already not exist 99.9999% of time in modern C++ code style and standards.

Also, some day C++ compilers or tooling will get its own Borrow Checker to completely forget about Rust - this will be done just for fun just to stop arguing with rust-fans :)
by WalterBright | 2025-08-31 21:48:37+00:00
Back in the 90s, I implemented precompiled headers for my C++ compiler (Symantec C++). They were very much like modules. There were two modes of operation:

1. all the .h files were compiled, and emitted as a binary that could be rolled in all at once

2. each .h file created its own precompiled header. Sounds like modules, right?

Anyhow, I learned a lot, mostly that without semantic improvements to C++, while it made compilation much faster, it was too sensitive to breakage.

This experience was rolled into the design of D modules, which work like a champ. They were everything I wanted modules to be. In particular,

The semantic meaning of the module is completely independent of wherever it is imported from.

Anyhow, C++ is welcome to adopt the D design of modules. C++ would get modules that have 25 years of use, and are very satisfying.

Yes, I do understand that the C preprocessor macros are a problem. My recommendation is, find language solutions to replace the preprocessor. C++ is most of the way there, just finish the job and relegate the preprocessor to the dustbin.
by perihelions | 2025-08-31 21:49:01+00:00
This isn't an anonymous protocol. It's asks for trust that the bank and the media platforms who age-restrict political protests aren't colluding to store all verification requests indefinitely, to build shadow profiles for evil reasons. (Of course they can doxx people if they collude: they have shared timing and device fingerprints).

Translate this to a state collapsing into a dictatorship, like Serbia or Turkey, and you'd expect the supposed "trusted" verifiers, banks, to be run by people who collude with the people black-bagging people.

The assumption "banks are ultimately trusted" is not a sound assumption.

The implicit assumption "age attestation cryptography is only for unimportant things like gambling.com, so we can YOLO this" is not sound. Age-attestation is a general-purpose backdoor for doxxing people in many contexts—not just unimportant ones that are embarrassing at worst.
by CognitiveLens | 2025-08-31 21:49:10+00:00
I start all my UI projects with this principle, but it's extremely difficult to maintain as screens evolve. I want typography-driven interfaces with structure communicated through headings and spatial grouping, but I usually end up with far more borders and nested padding than I think is "right" as I run into the limits of whitespace as an organizing structure, particularly when the audience has a limited attention span or time to engage.

From experience, borders/cards help communicate conceptual boundaries, while whitespace helps communicate information hierarchy - Gestalt principles don't really address that distinction. For product or data-driven UI where a lot of loosely-related information/topics are shown in discrete parts of the page, cards are effective at high-level grouping. For content-driven UI, whitespace can be sufficient, and I think the article makes this clear.

Other than 'The Ultimate Developer Toolkit' (where type size is more of an issue than the card layout), I actually think the card-based version of each example layout is more compelling - easier to scan, and easier to 'chunk' - despite wanting the typography-and-whitespace alternative to be sufficient.
by araes | 2025-08-31 21:49:27+00:00
Has the same annoying issues as REBOL. Special characters are allowed in words.

a+b

is a word. Unlike

a + b

which is a sequence of three words separated by spaces.

Dealbreaker. a+b*c + a+b * c / a+b/d + a+b / d % a + b So easy to miss or add a space while typing. Reading afterward, its difficult to tell if there's even spaces in some areas.
by c0balt | 2025-08-31 21:49:29+00:00
I'm pretty sure a lot of fields would disagree with you. Last I checked game programming, OS development, embedded development and more were deeply invested in either C or more often C++, especially when RT tasks were involved or vendor-provided compilers are required.

Rust just doesn't have close to the same type of adoption/support yet, especially when considering various embedded platforms.
by queenkjuul | 2025-08-31 21:50:47+00:00
99% of my communications are SMS/MMS and while i do avoid phone calls my friend called me yesterday, and i called a business to ask about their holiday hours this weekend.

And it's all LTE, your pocket computer needs a network whether you use SMS or some IP messenger. Therefore carriers get involved, and they make horrifying demands of users and manufacturers.

But yeah, i don't want a phone, i want a pocket computer with VoLTE
by throawaywpg | 2025-08-31 21:50:58+00:00
Those are the titles bestowed upon him by the UK. But here is the full titles given to him by all entities (including Canada)

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

In Masai he's known as "The Helper of the Cows" (literally: he whom the cows love so much they call for him when they are in times of distress)
by kiitos | 2025-08-31 21:51:14+00:00
i mean the details are far beyond what can be effectively communicated in a HN comment but if your loadgen tool is doing anything like sleep(1000ms) it is definitely not making any kind of sound request-per-second load against its target

and, furthermore, if the application and DB are co-located on the same machine, you're co-mingling service loads, and definitely not measuring or capturing any kind of useful load numbers, in the end

tl;dr is that these benchmarks/results are ultimately unsound, it's not about optimization, it's about validity

if you want to benchmark the application, then either you (a) mock the DB at as close to 0 cost as you can, or (b) point all application endpoints to the same shared (separate-machine) DB instance, and make sure each benchmark run executes exactly the same set of queries against against a DB instance that is 100% equivalent to the other runs, resetting in-between each run
by awongh | 2025-08-31 21:51:24+00:00
That kind of cash too is just another form of cost- and I think that goes to part of my point which is that especially because of speculation the sticker price of a home is really inflated.

If the buyers don't have a profit motive (neither the builder or the lender) how much lower will the true cost be? It could be low enough for a non-profit co-op to own the building instead of a bunch of investors.