MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by nukifw | 2025-08-20 15:24:21+00:00
For the first point, you are right. We start by a common (but very useful) feature. Since OCaml allows an infinite level of nesting (and different kind of structure item) it was still a bit of a challenge, mostly for finding the right UX.

For the second point we delay the aeration convention to the formatter (ocamlformat). It can be configure in a different way :)

Thanks for your feedback!
by WorldMaker | 2025-08-20 15:24:43+00:00
Newspapers and TV channels were held to Truth in Advertising Laws, and obvious scams would trigger law suits, from consumer groups, from the FCC itself sometimes, from rival newspapers and TV channels.

Google has enough of a near-monopoly in ads that there aren't rivals scaled enough to defend the public good out of the greed of their pocket books if not the good of everyone else. Google's competitors are too busy selling ad space to the same and similar lowest common denominator polluters and scammers than to police Google enough to hope to put it out of business.

The FCC gave up on policing anything on the internet ages ago. Between Congressional protections and multiple administrations trying to keep the FCC weak, it doesn't seem to have enough power to do anything towards Google.

I suppose that leaves consumer advocacy groups. I don't know how we build and scale a Consumers Against Predatory Google Ads to the point that it can force Google to reconsider their approach to advertising for the consumer good instead of evil. But then I also don't understand how Google isn't already doing tremendous enough damage to their brand that there isn't already enough of a sentiment that Google is actively engaged in evil and needs to stop, five or six years ago at least (or maybe at least as far back as when Google bought/merged Doubleclick). Their brand, too, seems too big to fail at this point, and it is weird to me.
by mooreds | 2025-08-20 15:25:09+00:00
> Submission time is not such a good indicator of who interacts with a post because a post could be active for 12-24 hours

Posts that make it to the front page are good for 12-4 hours, I agree.

But if a post gets less than 4 upvotes in the first 15ish minutes, my experience is that 99% of the time it won't get to the front page.
by rimunroe | 2025-08-20 15:25:18+00:00
hi!!! If you're on Steam still feel free to add me: https://steamcommunity.com/id/stealthpengu1n/

The rope mod was always one of my favorites. I think I asked rACEmic to add it. I have distinct memories of putting up votes in the server to see if people wanted me to enable it, especially in de_rats or de_jeepathon2k
by sjs382 | 2025-08-20 15:25:29+00:00
I keep a few ways to contact me in my HN profile.

I often flag submissions or comments when they go against the rules (sometimes written, sometimes unwritten) of the site.

I'm generally not willing to:

* engage with someone who's demanding an audience for a post/comment (upset that their post/comment was flagged). * justify these flags to a stranger. * open myself to harassment based on what I flag.

So, if these flags become public, I'll just stop flagging. I'm sure I'm not alone. I consider this a negative outcome of making flags public.
by Syzygies | 2025-08-20 15:25:51+00:00
Tarides has an OCaml focus. Elsewhere on their site, with an interesting omission:

"Examples of functional programming languages include OCaml, Erlang, Clojure, Haskell, Scala, and Common Lisp."

F# and OCaml are close cousins, and for me F# is even cleaner syntax and twice as fast (M4 Mac Studio).

It was a struggle for me to overcome my partisan preference for OCaml.
by pxc | 2025-08-20 15:25:59+00:00
You still inevitably need a bunch of CI platform-specific bullshit for determining "is this a pull request? which branch am I running on?", etc. Depending on what you're trying to do and what tools you're working with, you may need such logic both in an accursed YAML DSL and in your build script.

And if you want your CI jobs to do things like report cute little statuses, integrate with your source forge's static analysis results viewer, or block PRs, you have to integrate with the forge at a deeper level.

There aren't good tools today for translating between the environment variables or other things that various CI platforms expose, managing secrets (if you use CI to deploy things) that are exposed in platform-specific ways, etc.

If all you're doing with CI is spitting out some binaries, sure, I guess. But if you actually ask developers what they want out of CI, it's typically more than that.
by latexr | 2025-08-20 15:26:03+00:00
> The point of refactoring is to make an investment in the code

> (…)

> Refactoring isn’t self-indulgent play. It’s serious business.

> (…)

> And the point of refactoring is not to indulge one’s interest in fun new coding techniques. Refactoring is a business investment.

The whole post felt repetitive, despite being fairly short. I’m confident you could make it more concise and your point stronger by cutting two thirds or more. Refactoring your words, if you will.

> Refactoring is when you change the design of existing code without changing its behavior.

This is the crux of your point. You know that, because it’s even in bold. What do you want to say after that? Who is this post for? Is it for people who misuse the term? Are you trying to change their behaviour? I’m guessing so, from the title. Then talk to them directly, avoid meandering.

> If we never experiment, we seriously limit our learning. One good way to experiment is with a spike: a small project which is intended from the beginning to be thrown away. I’m also not trying to say that refactorings should never ever contain experiments.

This bit and the surrounding paragraph is a great example. You could cut all of that out and improve your message. None of it is wrong, but it’s also not relevant to the message and looks like you’re backtracking on your previous words.
by Guid_NewGuid | 2025-08-20 15:26:11+00:00
But the exact reason for flagging per-person is kind of orthogonal to this request right? It's a request for transparency. You are able to override other people's interest in discussing topics for no real personal cost. Is there any drawback to you having those flags be on the public record? Or any reason not to make those flags public? Why exactly should flagging be private.

I think a lot of people agree with your reasons for flagging and wish politics didn't cross over into tech, but that doesn't really impinge either way on making flags public. (In the example article that prompted this a debate about the relative benefits of different vaccine research approaches seems patently tech/science based, but again it is not really relevant to a proposal to make the flags public record).
by corysama | 2025-08-20 15:26:25+00:00
Nvidia’s marketing team uses confusing terminology to make their product sound cooler than it is.

An Intel “core” can perform AVX512 SIMD instructions that involve 16 lanes of 32-bit data. Intel cores are packaged in groups of up to 16. And, they use hyperthreading, speculative execution and shadow registers to cover latency.

An Nvidia “Streaming Multiprocessor” can perform SIMD instructions on 32 lanes of 32-bits each. Nvidia calls these lanes “cores” to make it feel like one GPU can compete with thousands of Intel CPUs.

Simpler terminology would be: an Nvidia H100 has 114 SM Cores, each with four 32-wide SIMD execution units (where basic instructions have a latency of 4 cycles) and each with four Tensor cores. That’s a lot more capability than a high-end Intel CPUs, but not 14,592 times more.

The CUDA API presents a “CUDA Core” (single SIMD lane) as if it was a thread. But, for most purposes it is actually a single SIMD lane in the 32-wide “Warp”. Lots of caveats apply in the details though.
by SideburnsOfDoom | 2025-08-20 15:27:11+00:00
> a CI isn't supposed to be a build system?

No. "Continuous Integration" is the practice of frequently merging changes to main. In this sense, "integration" means to take my changes and combine them with other recent changes.

A build and test system like those described in this article is a way to make CI safe and fast. It's not CI itself, it's just the enabling automation: the pre-merge checks and the post-merge artefact creation.
by dranudin | 2025-08-20 15:27:16+00:00
For me, in Germany, it was always cursive from the beginning to the end of school. We learned to write in the first class of elementary school. I still only write cursive and cannot write any other style, by hand. And only with a fountain pen. The style I was taught is called "Lateinische Ausgangsschrift". At a catholic elementary school in NRW. If you are interested here is an overview of the different cursive styles: https://www.schulschriften.de/html/schreibschrift.html
by johnisgood | 2025-08-20 15:27:20+00:00
I keep getting down-voted, but I have never been against being specific, in fact, I was advocating to be specific[1], i.e. North American, Latin American, South America, etc.

[1] "If someone says "America" to refer to a place, they really ought to specify if they want you to understand them.".

Additionally, natural languages are inherently ambiguous.

So ugh, I do not think we disagree.
by DonHopkins | 2025-08-20 15:27:46+00:00
The important difference between "jerk" and "asshole" is that "asshole" goes through glass. If you're driving around, then somebody cuts you off, and you mouth "jerk" at them through the windshield, they will smile at you and and wave. While "asshole" will be totally and universally unambiguously understood.
by raxxorraxor | 2025-08-20 15:27:52+00:00
I don't think SOC2 specifically demands SSO and just encourages it. Probably good, since such security mandates often age badly, even such a broad concept like SSO could fall victim. And there is always that one tool that isn't integrated, ironically inhouse software often neglects it.

But otherwise I believe you are very on point. Although from a developer perspective perhaps it should be segmented the other way around. If I can outsource to identity providers, I have delegated a lot of risk and work. And while the initial implementation might be a bit more cumbersome, in the long run it certainly is less development intensive than providing a complete user management interface. And maintenance for a few keys is easier than user management, even if you still have to do some of that.

Perhaps not using SSO should be marketed as some privacy focused benefit, which is more expensive.
by tchantchov | 2025-08-20 15:27:58+00:00
Hello!

I Builded a comprehensive stock analysis platform after getting frustrated with raw financial data across different sites. This example for NVDA includes 11 specialized modules: price predictions through 2030, technical analysis, earnings forecasts, risk assessment, and detailed financials all in one place. The technical analysis module incorporates various indicators beyond basic charting and each section provides actionable insights rather than just raw data display.

Would appreciate feedback from the community on additional analysis features that would be valuable for you.

Thank you!
by the_af | 2025-08-20 15:28:00+00:00
It's actually even worse.

I thought the author was talking about Chiang's famous statement about LLMs being "lossy compression", and was ready to admit LLMs progress so fast this may not be the full picture.

However, this is not the author's actual criticism! TFA's states:

> I won't belabor obvious points like his nonfictional views on current-generation LLMs being surprisingly shallow [footnote]

The footnote then links to an alleged "rebuttal" to Chiang by Scott Alexander, link here: https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/01/15/maybe-the-real-superin...

This alleged "rebuttal" is actually referencing this Buzzfeed article by Ted Chiang: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/tedchiang/the-real-dang....

Regardless of whether you agree or not with Ted Chiang, his article isn't about "current-generation LLMs"... it's about unchecked capitalism and the fears of Silicon Valley entrepreneurs (at the risk of misrepresenting Chiang, he's saying it's ironic that Silicon Valley's worst fears resemble a sort of unchecked, rampant capitalism).

You don't need to agree with Chiang to realize he's article is sort of neutral on AI/LLM, and is actually a criticism of Silicon Valley entrepreneurs! TFA's author cannot critique his views on capitalism as "shallow" just because he disagrees with them, or misrepresent them as being about state-of-the-art AI/tech when they are actually about capitalism.

How could the article's author (and Scott Alexander) completely miss this?
by aisearchapi | 2025-08-20 15:28:14+00:00
We built AISearchAPI.io because existing web search APIs with summaries were too costly for our startup.

This one is simple: send a query and get back a concise AI summary in about 5 seconds. Pricing is $0.001 per request, or about $1 for 1,000 queries.

We use it for our own projects and decided to open it up. Would you give it a try and share feedback?
by 2b3a51 | 2025-08-20 15:28:24+00:00
> "hand writing comes with close to zero dependencies: no software, no os, no booting time, no charging - just hand, surface, and optionally an instrument. It is offline first, offers great privacy, and fun."

I'd add that you can shift sideways into drawing diagrams, or mathematical notation, or devise your own symbols on the fly in the blink of an eye without any friction, apart from the overall manual experience. So a way of capturing thoughts quickly before they evapourate. Then these notations can be rendered into electronic texts at leisure.
by amalcon | 2025-08-20 15:28:43+00:00
The problem is that it's really hard to come up with a definition that includes all of the things we agree are obviously life (e.g. mold), does not include fire, and does not just appeal to the particular structure that most or all life on earth seems to have (the cell).

The result is a landscape of fuzzy definitions mostly centered around that last one.
by tptacek | 2025-08-20 15:29:14+00:00
It doesn't specifically demand it, but (1) SSO is the simplest way to knock out a huge swath of control objectives, and (2) once you attest to a control like SSO, it's extremely annoying to pull that back. If you hire security/compliance/engineering management to take you through SOC2 and they don't set up and attest to SSO, they're bad at their job.
by yencabulator | 2025-08-20 15:30:10+00:00
I scribble about programming because nothing digital has so far allowed me to use spatial arrangement, arrows and such to organize my thoughts as conveniently.

I very rarely write on paper anything more than a short sentence at a time.

For me, paper is less about writing and more about laying out my thoughts.

(So far writing on digital tablets has been a less than great experience and I really like the real world arrangeability and simultaneous viewing of multiple pieces of paper.)
by Philpax | 2025-08-20 15:30:58+00:00
The cookie will be invalidated if shared between IPs, and it's my understanding that most Anubis deployments are paired with per-IP rate limits, which should reduce the amount of overall volume by limiting how many independent requests can be made at any given time.

That being said, I agree with you that there are ways around this for a dedicated adversary, and that it's unlikely to be a long-term solution as-is. My hope is that the act of having to circumvent Anubis at scale will prompt some introspection (do you really need to be rescraping every website constantly?), but that's hopeful thinking.
by IAmBroom | 2025-08-20 15:31:07+00:00
I'd argue that this is FAR more true of the soft sciences - of which biology is perhaps the "hardest".

The definition of steel is pretty hard-edged. A polymer of C, H, and O isn't steel.

The definition of a quasar is similar. There are "maybe quasars", but that's from lack of data, not lack of definition clarity.

A circle is pretty exactingly defined. Mathematicians aren't fuzzy on that.
by stavros | 2025-08-20 15:31:09+00:00
That's what I understood from the top-level question, and it's my experience as well. If you don't review the LLM's code, it breaks very quickly. That's why the question for me isn't "how many agents can I run in parallel?", but "how many changes can I review in parallel?".

For me, that's "just one", and that's why LLM coding doesn't scale very far for me with these tools.
by canyon289 | 2025-08-20 15:31:15+00:00
Hey all, I created this model with a top notch team. I answered many questions last week when this hit the front page, and happy to answer more here as well.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44902148

Personally I'm excited that you all have access to this model now and hope you all get value out of using them.
by Festro | 2025-08-20 15:32:05+00:00
Not a huge amount of features right now but this tool looks cool.

Write, tab for next sentence suggestion, ctrl+k for modifying highlighted text, shift for synonyms on hovered word. Great, lightweight UI, simple assistive functions, and an AI chat pane for research, with sources listed.

I feel like this is already a really nice environment for blog writing.

If I had my way, a link to LMStudio, or a way to search and load local models from HuggingFace, and a more robust dictionary spellchecker and it'd be a lot more useful.
by err4nt | 2025-08-20 15:32:29+00:00
“A webpage that counts down to a movie release.” Not an app. Not a startup. Just a janky react/tailwind page.

Maybe part of the problem is trying to bite off more than you can chew, spinning up React and Tailwind for what could be a single HTML element, a CSS style rule or two, and a few lines of plain JavaScript code is a symptom here. This is like taking a cruise ship on a canoe trip and then complaining that it's too time consuming and difficult. Start simple, start small!
by nukifw | 2025-08-20 15:32:40+00:00
We try to invest equal time between the OCaml platform (on VSCode) and OCaml-eglot (for Emacs). In fact, I find the VSCode extension to be rich (and generally iso-features with Emacs mode).

However, I (as maintainer of OCaml-eglot) find Emacs easier to extend (the VSCode extension is surprisingly complex when you stray from the beaten path), which seemed perfect for incubating an experimental feature. Furthermore, as mentioned at the end of the article, the feature can also be invoked from a code action, which makes it de facto callable from VSCode once the various PRs have been merged :)
by dingnuts | 2025-08-20 15:32:42+00:00
if you have to understand the code, it's not vibe coding. Karpathy's whole tweet was about ignoring the code.

if you have to understand the code to progress, it's regular fucking programming.

I don't go gushy about code generation when I use yasnippet or a vim macro, why should super autocomplete be different?

this is an important distinction because if Karpathy's version becomes real we're all out of a job, and I'm sick of hearing developers role play publicly towards leaders that their skills aren't valuable anymore
by taeric | 2025-08-20 15:32:57+00:00
As the sibling says, shorthand is a very different thing. Cursive seems much more a way to write with fewer finger movements. That is about it.

I'm tempted to say it is also about fewer pickups of the pen, but I think that is largely the same thing. Many of the finger movements you do when writing otherwise will be to pick the pen off the page.
by mr-wendel | 2025-08-20 15:33:09+00:00
My little Databricks story: we setup hosted model inference for an in-house model. Worked great for several months!

But then they did maintenance and broke the entire feature. Reconfiguring everything from scratch didn't work. A key part where a Docker image is selected was replaced with a hard-coded value including a long system path (and employee name -- verified via LinkedIn).

Because of constant turn-over in account reps we couldn't get any help there. General support was of no use. We finally got acknowledgement of the issue when we got yet another new account rep, but all they did was push us towards paid support.

We exhaustively investigated the issue and it was clearly the case that nothing could be done on our end to resolve it. The entire underlying compute layer was busted.

Eventually they released a newer version of the feature which did work again, but at this point it has become impossible to justify the cost of the platform and we're 100% off.

Good luck to them, but from my experience the business fundamentals are misaligned and it's not a company I hope to ever work with again.
by DrScientist | 2025-08-20 15:33:22+00:00
The debate about leaving the EU was multi-faceted [1] - but a significant part was a kind of nostalgia for when Britain was indeed Great, and the idea that a UK free from the shackles of the EU could be great again. Take back control was the slogan - a complete misunderstanding of the difference between lost sovereignty and pooled sovereignty.

I see the same forces driving the US now as it undermines international organisations.

[1] and sure xenophobia played a depressingly large part.
by PorterBHall | 2025-08-20 15:33:46+00:00
Wedge issues, deployed by both political parties, do exactly this.

Wealthy donors express their political desires by funding politicians who become dependent on their continued financial support.

The voter gets just enough small wins on these wedge issues to keep them somewhat happy. The wealthy preserves the status quo since that’s how they became wealthy in the first place. Our democracy ossifies in the face of new challenges.

If voters across the spectrum viewed campaign finance reform as a key issue, we might have some hope in changing things.
by crdrost | 2025-08-20 15:34:03+00:00
I think this particular function was selected because it happened to be convenient to program and the visual effect was pleasant enough.

The actual "correct" thing to do would probably be to have the point maintain constant speed in 3D space like a real boat sailing on a globe, right? But that's a rather bigger lift:

const degrees = Math.PI / 180; const bearing = 5 * degrees; // or it might be 85 degrees? Not sure off the top of my head const k = Math.tan(bearing); const v = 0.001 // some velocity, adjust as needed const phi = (t) => v*t/Math.sqrt(1 + k*k) // the sqrt is not strictly needed const theta = (t) => k*Math.ln(Math.tan(phi(t)/2)) // this is the annoying one haha

with outputs,

const x = (t) => Math.sin(phi(t)) * Math.cos(theta(t)) const y = (t) => Math.sin(phi(t)) * Math.sin(theta(t)) const z = (t) => Math.cos(phi(t))

I doubt that they did the ln(tan(phi/2)) thing though, but it's what you get when you integrate the k d{phi} = sin{phi} d{theta} equation that you have here.
by snapetom | 2025-08-20 15:34:12+00:00
I don’t know if you’re US-based or not but in the US, government work has the stigma of attracting the bottom of the barrel. It is nearly impossible to get fired for performance reasons. Combine low pay and high job security, and you’re not going to attract the most innovative, motivated, or competent people.

Early in my career, I was warned that if I took a job with the state of California, I’d be stuck there for my whole career. I’d be unhirable in the private sector.