MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by em-bee | 2025-08-05 22:13:44+00:00
Stallman’s open source movement

do you want to give RMS a heart attack?

RMS founded the Free Software movement to protect the users of software.

to redistribute power back into the hands of creators who were getting walled out of anything but proprietary work for an employer. If they were fired, they had nothing to show for years of work except a reference, since their deep expertise was essentially meaningless

ignoring the fact the big philosophical different between Free Software and Open Source, neither had the above as a goal. for the first decade or so of the movement, all Free Software and Open Source development was done by people in their free time. practically none of it was done at work. the exceptions are MIT and BSD projects which both predate the Free Software and Open Source movements.

on other words, developers always had the ability to do stuff in their free time regardless of the license. those that live in countries that allow employers to own everything had to fight their employers to be allowed to do so, and they still have to do that. the cases where employees are getting paid to work on Free Software or Open Source are rare, although they are less rare today than in the past because more companies release their sources. but again, this was not the goal at the founding. at least not that this should help the developers. the goal was always to support and protect the users, to allow them to share and modify the software they use.
by TimTheTinker | 2025-08-05 22:14:37+00:00
> Tuition is the only lever left to most institutions.

No, cutting costs (especially slashing the administration and facility budget) is another lever that few institutions use. The other really important levers are professor hiring and pay, and admissions standards.

Build a reputation for hiring a great faculty, paying them well, keeping a minimal administration, and cultivating a student body that is hungry to learn, and the right people will come. Everything else is mostly fluff with regard to a quality education.
by EasyMark | 2025-08-05 22:14:52+00:00
If you want to get inside the mind of "Why do this?" for the current administration all you really need to do is ask yourself 2 questions.

"Does the right consider this woke?"

and

"If I was a libertarian billionaire looking out for no one but myself, whatever the price to the public good, what would I decide?"

and you will be able to predict with 80% accuracy what they are going to do and their stance on any given situation.
by nudgeOrnurture | 2025-08-05 22:14:52+00:00
complete coding noob here.

if I want to throw a shuriken abiding to some artificial, magic Magnus force like in the movie wanted, both chatGpt and Claude let me down, using pygame. what if I wanted c-level performance or if I wanted to use zig? burp.

It works like the average Microsoft employee, like some doped version of an orange wig wearer who gets votes because his daddys kept the population as dumb as it gets after the dotcom x Facebook era. in essence, the ones to be disappointed by are the Chan-Zuckerbergs of our time. there was a chance, but there also was what they were primed for
by throw4747935 | 2025-08-05 22:15:15+00:00
The lede is buried, tl;dr: During WWII, a platypus named Winston Churchill was shipped from Australia to the UK (on behalf of its namesake). On the last leg of the journey, after the panama canal, the platypus nursery got too hot (above 27 degrees Celsius) and the platypus died.
by ryandrake | 2025-08-05 22:15:17+00:00
The CEOs and execs also seem to be feeding and sustaining the hype themselves:

CEO1: "This technology is the biggest technical leap in my lifetime!"

CEO2: "Oh yea? Well, this technology is more useful than electricity!"

CEO3: "Oh yea?? This technology is more impactful than the invention of fire!"

VP1: "This technology is going to really help improve productivity!"

VP2: "Come on! This technology is going to let one person do the work of 100!"

VP3: "Surely you jest! Without using this technology, you might as well not even try to earn a living!"
by danudey | 2025-08-05 22:15:41+00:00
Presumably the intent was to keep the behavior of `cp` consistent with the behavior in previous releases of macOS and other POSIX operating systems (none of which, IIRC, use reflinks by default if available).

There are circumstances where having a reflink that doesn't take up space could be problematic or result in unexpected behaviour. An example: you have a huge file, e.g. databases or a huge "big data" dataset, maybe it's a terabyte or something, but it's on a disk that only has 500 GB free.

Now you want to do a nightly backup. With reflinks you `cp` the file and it succeeds despite not having enough space on the disk. Then your system starts up during the day, loads up the data set, and starts making changes; you zero-out the dataset and then start re-importing the data. Now because you're writing new blocks, your re-import fails halfway through because the disk is full.

Without reflinks, your nightly copy fails and you get an alert about it, and then you go clean it up.

This is kind of an idiotic, contrived example, but it's an example of the kind of thing that could happen with reflinks that wouldn't happen otherwise.
by bluecoconut | 2025-08-05 22:15:46+00:00
Not getting around it, just benefiting from parallel compute / huge flops of GPUs. Fundamentally, it's just that prefill compute is itself highly parallel and HBM is just that much faster than LPDDR. Effectively H100s and B100s can chew through the prefill in under a second at ~50k token lengths, so the TTFT (Time to First Token) can feel amazingly fast.
by reactordev | 2025-08-05 22:15:47+00:00
It depends on the genre. Simulation “games” tend to love realism of simulation while providing an accelerated time. Others like you said, are more fun with plausible physics or physics that bend the rules a little bit. Sometimes, a game just about funky physics becomes a hit - Goat Simulator.

Walking/Running/Steps have already been solved pretty well with NN’s, but simulation of vehicle engines and vehicle physics have not. Not to my knowledge. I suspect iRacing would be extremely interested in such a model.

edit

I take it back, PINN’s are a thing and now I have a new rabbit hole…
by MisterMower | 2025-08-05 22:15:51+00:00
The data this satellite collects is used to promote climate regulation and legislation. The authors of the article can’t even come up with other ostensible uses for it. Farmers care about carbon dioxide levels? Good one.

The equivalent would be a democrat administration using government force to shut down data collection they don’t like because it will be used to promote policies they don’t want. Kind of like how the Biden admin’s FAA restricted drone use at the southern border during the migrant crisis.

I think the word you’re looking for is “like” instead of “equivalent”.
by kev009 | 2025-08-05 22:15:57+00:00
Once upon a time random corporate videos would have full custom orchestral scores https://youtu.be/q7hFJZf9fWk?t=162

The thing I notice time and again in all this is they want you to believe technology is displacing labor at one end but there's usually a lot of retraining consumers/society to accept something qualitatively different to cover up or re-conceive what was. That's not a moral judgement, just an observation. But the end result is usually the same, some group of current or wannabe oligarchs playing musical chairs at the top without regard for the rest of the system.
by slg | 2025-08-05 22:16:09+00:00
>To show their destructive power. That one plane could do as much damage as dozens / hundreds.

>What would blowing up water show? What would blowing up an empty field show? What would blowing up an already-flatten city (like Tokyo) show? There is no shock value to dropping an atomic bomb on a non-target.

Is knocking down buildings the only way people can perceive the power of a bomb? Would a huge mushroom cloud over Tokyo Bay not be shocking? Could that "psychological effect of a new type of weapon" you mentioned in the previous post have been intensified if the Japanese War Cabinet saw that mushroom cloud with their own eyes?

>Arthur Compton, the scientist who led the plutonium side of the Manhattan Project recalled that...

That is an argument against "an advertised demonstration". It is not an argument for killing a hundred thousand civilians. Why wouldn't "the shock of surprise" apply to a demonstration that happened without notice? Why are you presenting this as a binary choice between "an advertised demonstration" and dropping the bomb on a city?

>Even with dropping the first bomb the Japanese War Cabinet wasn't willing to consider surrendering. It took two bombings for the message to sink in (and even then it was a 3-3 tie, and the Emperor had to be called in to break the stalemate): that is the fact any counterfactual has to contend with, that the two bombings barely got the ball over the line.

You keep on repeating this as if the decision being close means that any deviation from the history would have caused them to reach a different conclusion. You have no way of knowing that. I don't know why you seem to believe that the only path to surrender was the exact events that transpired.
by jdlshore | 2025-08-05 22:16:35+00:00
I know you’re just expressing your frustration, but the “the person who did this should be fired” meme you’re propagating is pretty toxic. Decisions like this are never the work of one person, and even when they are, any problems you’re perceiving were traded off against other problems you’re not perceiving. And even if it was an unadulterated mistake, it’s just that… a mistake. Should you get fired for the mistakes you make?

I guess what I’m really saying is that the internet would be a better place if you and others like you dialed down the rhetoric, dialed down the outrage, and dialed up the empathy.

Thanks for listening.
by duxup | 2025-08-05 22:16:41+00:00
>Microsoft's top finance executive Amy Hood last week told employees in an internal memo that the upcoming year will require "intensity," building on an earlier memo from CEO Satya Nadella asking employees for "dedication, drive, and hard work."

Been a while since I stopped working at big companies. Not missing having some random finance executives making multiples of what I make pretend they know about what I do or tell me to work harder ...
by GavinAnderegg | 2025-08-05 22:16:44+00:00
I'm guilty of having fallen off the RSS bandwagon as Twitter grew and Google Reader was killed off. But over the past few years, I've gotten back into the groove of curating a list of small blogs in an RSS feed. Catching up on my feed is such a nice way to start the morning. It's always great to see a new piece show up from a writer you like, but who posts infrequently. The fracturing of social media made me want to post more on my own site, and I'm seeing more posts from others who feel the same. I'm hoping this trend continues.
by trod1234 | 2025-08-05 22:16:57+00:00
Apples to oranges.

Luddites weren't at a point where every industry sees individual capital formation/demand for labor trend towards zero over time.

Prices are ratios in the currency between factors and producers.

What do you suppose happens when the factors can't buy anything because there is nothing they can trade. Slavery has quite a lot of historic parallels with the trend towards this. Producers stop producing when they can make no profit.

You have a deflationary (chaotic) spiral towards socio-economic collapse, under the burden of debt/money-printing (as production risk). There are limits to systems, and when such limits are exceeded; great destruction occurs.

Malthus/Catton pose a very real existential threat when such disorder occurs, and its almost inevitable that it does without action to prevent it. One cannot assume action will happen until it actually does.
by riazrizvi | 2025-08-05 22:17:47+00:00
Well yes exactly. LLMs have increased the value of open source to users. So by reducing the extent of the open source, value is maintained, but rebalanced slightly back in favor of the creator, with their larger closed source piece.

BTW most business-astute maintainers always managed a closed piece of expertise which is what they charged for. I’m saying that proportion needs to grow now.
by immibis | 2025-08-05 22:18:20+00:00
Policing drug use is a waste of taxpayer money as well as a waste of labour (of both the drug users when they're not doing drugs, and the cops). The results of drug use should be policed, not the use itself; safe environments for occasional drug use should also be created (the free market would do this if it wasn't illegal, and in some places if you know where to look, has already quietly done this).

I have to disclaim I don't know what meth is like, what meth users are like, or what it's like to be on meth, but if 20 people are doing meth and not bothering anyone, and the police officer is keeping watch to ensure they don't bother anyone, that is fine by me. We should treat them like drunk alcoholics, not like murderers (unless they murdered someone).

Separately, we could encourage people to try less harmful drugs than meth. That isn't really possible as long as we give out the same penalties for weed as for meth.
by soraminazuki | 2025-08-05 22:18:34+00:00
From the CEO's article referenced in that post [1]:

> the rise of AI in software development signals the need for computer science education to be reinvented as well.

> Teaching in a way that evaluates rote syntax or memorization of APIs is becoming obsolete

He thinks computer science is about memorizing syntax and APIs. No wonder he's telling developers to embrace AI or quit their careers if he believes the entire field is that shallow. Not the best person to take advice from.

It's also hilarious how he downplays fundamental flaws of LLMs as something AI zealots, the truly smart people, can overcome by producing so much AI slop that they turn from skeptics into ...drumroll... AI strategists. lol

[1]: https://ashtom.github.io/developers-reinvented
by stavros | 2025-08-05 22:18:42+00:00
I helped my dad lose 50 lbs by finally, after 10 years, getting him to give up bread, sugar, potatoes. It took buying him 2 months of Ozempic. Once he saw what stopping the cravings for certain foods can do, he believed me finally. At 65 years old, healthier than I remember since he was 40 and I was a teen. It doesn't require some weird bionic arm implant.
by msteffen | 2025-08-05 22:18:45+00:00
> randomly talk about my issues with a random phd in the lab (great scientist with tens of thousands of citations) which quickly scans the data and notes that the voltage obtained by the system in the publication is literally impossible

I'm interested in the apparent contradiction between the "tens of thousands of citations" credential for your evidently competent labmate who caught the fraud, and the "only high impact numbers get citations, only citations get you a chance to progress in the academia pyramid" indictment of the evidently mediocre fraudster.

How much of the science that happens do you think is due to people like your labmate, who seems to have earned her citations organically with talent, and how much is due to the fraud? Are most citations still going to talented people?

My parents were both academics who built their careers in the 70s and 80s. I don't know that they had a perspective on fraud per se, but they did say that science used to be totally different—lots of money going into a smaller research community. But because each PI trains many PhDs, the research community has grown unsustainably and now funding is highly competitive. For the system to be sustainable, the vast majority of PhDs need to leave science, and there need to better exits for those people (or else there need to be many fewer PhD candidates and researchers need to stop relying on PhD candidates for labor). I wonder if the fraud is a consequence of this problem.
by cco | 2025-08-05 22:18:48+00:00
Sure.

This is a thinking model, so I ran it against o4-mini, here are the results:

* gpt-oss:20b

* Time-to-first-token: 2.49 seconds

* Time-to-completion: 51.47 seconds

* Tokens-per-second: 2.19

* o4-mini on ChatGPT

* Time-to-first-token: 2.50 seconds

* Time-to-completion: 5.84 seconds

* Tokens-per-second: 19.34

Time to first token was similar, but the thinking piece was _much_ faster on o4-mini. Thinking took the majority of the 51 seconds for gpt-oss:20b.
by givemeethekeys | 2025-08-05 22:19:09+00:00
I realize I might have been overzealous in my need to stress that drivers should be held liable for "auto-pilot", when it's possible that there are situations when a vehicle system truly malfunctions / does not disengage even after driver input.

In those situations, the manufacturer should be held 100% liable, and the NTSB / other authorities would need a way to determine that - probably the same way they determine it when other car's systems fail - like, when some cars' accelerator peddle got jammed.
by rpdillon | 2025-08-05 22:19:17+00:00
Made this point elsewhere, but the music industry has been on a downward slide towards making music as cheaply as possible for some time now.

If you look at Taylor Swift's first 12 number one hits, each of them was written by a different writer. Compare that to bands from 30 years ago, many of whom wrote and recorded all the songs themselves.

Labels don't sign rock bands anymore because actually recording a rock band well in a studio is 10x the cost of just using a sampler and a single artist singing. I know folks want to blame AI, but it's really just enabling the latest iteration of this trend.

I'm not defending the whole thing. It's a shame, and I love going back and listening to my old Rush albums. But AI is not the problem here. It's the incentives.
by UmGuys | 2025-08-05 22:19:23+00:00
If you keep a journal of what you work on and learn each day it reinforces the concepts so you remember better. And you can use it for reference in the future. This is extra important for juniors starting out when everything is new. Taking good notes will accelerate your growth. It helps develop an understanding of the context you're working in faster.

Here's an example: the first time you learn a design pattern you can create a journal entry about that pattern with some psuedocode. Then next time you want to build something using that pattern, you can look at your journal. Even 10 years down the line and 3 companies later.

Does that help?
by snek_case | 2025-08-05 22:20:06+00:00
Genetics do factor. It's not just a question of genetics affecting metabolism. People literally don't feel hunger with the same intensity as one another. It's like sex drive. There are both very horny people and asexuals out there. There are also people who routinely forget to eat. For many people though, the notion of "forgetting to eat" seems completely alien, because those signals are much stronger for them.
by lazyeye | 2025-08-05 22:20:34+00:00
I'm not sure what to make of your argument. Because the govt does manage some aspects of business, this therefore means they are entitled to manage all aspects of business? The govt could also then dictate what the workers eat, what the workers wear, what the workers talk about, how often they have meetings etc etc. This is all justified apparently because Hammurabi whatever....
by ivape | 2025-08-05 22:20:41+00:00
Often the math works out that you get a lot more for $20 a month if you settle for smaller sized but capable models (8b-30b). I don’t see how it’s better other than Ollama can “promise” they don’t store your data where as OpenRouter is dependent on which host you choose (and there’s no indicator on OpenRouter exposing which ones do or don’t).

In a universe where everything you say can be taken out of context, things like OpenAi will be a data leak nightmare.

Need this soon:

https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.02486
by bigyabai | 2025-08-05 22:21:26+00:00
The issue isn't getting LLM weights. Llama taught us that it's basically impossible to prevent people from distributing them if they choose to. You don't have to worry about "future access changes" too much, OpenAI knows there is no "undo" button once they publish weights.

The real issue is having SOTA, collapse-proof hardware for inference. Apple and Nvidia hardware are both reliant on drivers that can brick your server with an over-the-air update. AMD hardware has generally more resilient Mesa drivers that can theoretically survive a hostile OEM, but with fewer options for finetuning and training. Intel GPUs are a high-VRAM option but it's unclear how long they'll be supported in-software for. Everything is a system of tradeoffs.
by exceptione | 2025-08-05 22:21:55+00:00
I am talking about argument-based-on-reasoning. Yes, I understood you did not believe the crap you were writing.

Rational arguments have nothing to do with marketing labels like left, and any other binary belief traps. The things you mentioned are nothing more than echos of nonsensical political marketing that is deliberately NOT targeting the ratio. Instead, they aim the underbelly, the non-rational core we all have. It speaks to the peoples need to belong to a group, it speaks to deeply held beliefs, it speaks to identity.

I understand it is incredible hard while drowning in a sea of identity politics, but do not conflate reason with political memes.
by wizee | 2025-08-05 22:22:12+00:00
Privacy, both personal and for corporate data protection is a major reason. Unlimited usage, allowing offline use, supporting open source, not worrying about a good model being taken down/discontinued or changed, and the freedom to use uncensored models or model fine tunes are other benefits (though this OpenAI model is super-censored - “safe”).

I don’t have much experience with local vision models, but for text questions the latest local models are quite good. I’ve been using Qwen 3 Coder 30B-A3B a lot to analyze code locally and it has been great. While not as good as the latest big cloud models, it’s roughly on par with SOTA cloud models from late last year in my usage. I also run Qwen 3 235B-A22B 2507 Instruct on my home server, and it’s great, roughly on par with Claude 4 Sonnet in my usage (but slow of course running on my DDR4-equipped server with no GPU).
by maxloh | 2025-08-05 22:22:58+00:00
Not for all licenses.

For example, GPL has a "no-added-restrictions" clause, which allows the recipient of the software to ignore any additional restrictions added alongside the license.

> All other non-permissive additional terms are considered “further restrictions” within the meaning of section 10. If the Program as you received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is governed by this License along with a term that is a further restriction, you may remove that term. If a license document contains a further restriction but permits relicensing or conveying under this License, you may add to a covered work material governed by the terms of that license document, provided that the further restriction does not survive such relicensing or conveying.
by VoidWhisperer | 2025-08-05 22:23:03+00:00
I would hope that these logs don't include the full details of the credit card (such as number/cvv).. if it does, the company that is logging this info could end up having some issues with Visa/MC

Edit: Now that I looked at it a little deeper, i'm assuming they are talking about these[0] sort of files?

[0]: https://docs.helix.q2.com/docs/card-transaction-file
by alchemist1e9 | 2025-08-05 22:23:08+00:00
I don’t get it, you have privacy at home or outside work, why when someone is paying you to work for them there is an expectation of privacy? You don’t see how that is extremely counterproductive for capitalism and economic activity?

Just don’t come to work right? You can have all the privacy you want? Or don’t visit the business if you are the customer.

Please help me understand what the logic and justification is to regulate and control security camera use within private enterprises (with the obvious exception of toilets and changing rooms etc)?