MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by geoffeg | 2025-08-08 20:17:46+00:00
> I'm leaning towards it being some extremely cheeky DCS/flightsim nerd because of the shortness and randomness of the flights. It screams "do it because I can and report back to the boys" to me.

It's not so easy to land a plane in real life, even if you have a lot of flightsim experience. It is definitely possible and there are people who have done it, but I don't think it's the norm. A lot of flying, especially landing, involves sensory inputs. Additionally, replacing the battery in that Cessna probably requires taking the cowling off. Not properly securing the battery or cowling may result in a bad time if something comes loose. Once again, doable, but you can do as quickly as you can with a car.

> I know literally nothing about flying. How does this work? Wouldn't the air traffic controllers see it on radar and try to radio it then call in the military (I've probably watched too many movies.)? Always blows my mind when I hear this kind of stuff in this day and age.

If you takeoff from an uncontrolled airport and stay clear of controlled and restricted airspace you don't have to say a single thing on any radio and no one will care about you. The controllers would see the blip on their radars but there's no requirements to check in with them (although it's generally a good idea) so they'll mostly keep other aircraft who they are talking to away from you.

Now, if you do fly into controlled airspace near an airport with a tower without talking to anyone, things will change. A slight excursion into the controlled airspace for a short time may go unnoticed, but the more blatant and prolonged the deviation, the larger the response will be. Fly into LAX's airspace and get in the way of their flights and you'll eventually get a visit from some friendly fighter jets. (There are some exceptions. For instance, there's a few narrow corridors through LAX's airspace that don't require talking to ATC. One of those corridors even goes directly over LAX's runways at a few thousand feet.)
by ActorNightly | 2025-08-08 20:18:08+00:00
To piggyback on this, at enterprise level in modern age, the question is really not about "how are we going to serve all these users", it comes down to the fact that investors believe that eventually they will see a return on investment, and then pay whatever is needed to get the infra.

Even if you didn't have optimizations involved in terms of job scheduling, they would just build as many warehouses as necessary filled with as many racks as necessary to serve the required user base.
by TimTheTinker | 2025-08-08 20:18:26+00:00
> I've seen many therapists and [...] their capabilities were much worse

I don't doubt it. The steps to mental and personal wholeness can be surprisingly concrete and formulaic for most life issues - stop believing these lies & doing these types of things, start believing these truths & doing these other types of things, etc. But were you tempted to stick to an LLM instead of finding a better therapist or engaging with a friend? In my opinion, assuming the therapist or friend is competent, the relationship itself is the most valuable aspect of therapy. That relational context helps you honestly face where you really are now--never trust an LLM to do that--and learn and grow much more, especially if you're lacking meaningful, honest relationships elsewhere in your life. (And many people who already have healthy relationships can skip the therapy, read books/engage an LLM, and talk openly with their friends about how they're doing.)

Healthy relationships with other people are irreplaceable with regard to mental and personal wholeness.

> I think you just don't like that LLM can replace therapist and offer better advice

What I don't like is the potential loss of real relationship and the temptation to trust LLMs more than you should. Maybe that's not happening for you -- in that case, great. But don't forget LLMs have zero skin in the game, no emotions, and nothing to lose if they're wrong.

> Hate to break it to you, but "God" are just voices in your head.

Never heard that one before :) /s
by merth | 2025-08-08 20:18:50+00:00
i'm not the person you replied but if wages lag furhter, how rents going up? it should go down since there is noone to be able to pay higher rents. they have no choice but either convince homeowner or downgrade. and Group A(rich + upper-middle) won't rent since they have enough wealth to buy a house, they may upgrade and cause inflation in luxury houses/goods.
by bluecalm | 2025-08-08 20:18:53+00:00
Why does it matter if I believe if my company is going to be profitable or not? I have no idea what happens. It may be more profitable, it might be less profitable, it might go bankrupt. It's impossible to predict. This is especially true for small companies because outcome depends on what the founder does in the future. Taxing future efforts which are going to be outside of the country is just ridiculous.
by p12tic | 2025-08-08 20:18:55+00:00
That's just an artifact of Intel disabling ECC on consumer processors.

There's no reason for ECC to have significantly higher power consumption. It's just an additional memory chip per stick and a tiny bit of additional logic on CPU side to calculate ECC.

If power consumption is the target, ECC is not a problem. I know firsthand that even old Xeon D servers can hit 25W full system idle. On AMD side 4850G has 8 cores and can hit sub 25W full system idle as well.
by nestorD | 2025-08-08 20:19:08+00:00
The first step is to acquire hardware fast enough to run one query quickly (and yes, for some model size you are looking at sharding the model and distributed runs). The next one is to batch request, improving GPU use significantly.

Take a look at vLLM for an open source solution that is pretty close to the state of the art as far as handling many user queries:https://docs.vllm.ai/en/stable/
by jamesponddotco | 2025-08-08 20:19:14+00:00
I do one question at a time so I don't feel overwhelmed and can answer questions with more details.

I start with an idea between <idea> tags, write as much as I possibly can between these tags, and then go one question at a time answering the questions with as much details as I possibly can.

Sometimes I'll feed the idea to yet another prompt, Computer Science PhD[1], and use the response as the basis for my conversation with the socratic coder, as the new basis might fill in gaps that I forgot to include initially.

[1]: https://github.com/jamesponddotco/llm-prompts/blob/trunk/dat...

[2]: Something like "Based on my idea, can you provide your thoughts on how the service should be build, please? Technologies to use, database schema, user roles, permissions, architectural ideas, and so on."
by instig007 | 2025-08-08 20:19:19+00:00
> it always seemed a bit backward to me for the importer to ask for lazy import, especially if you make it an import keyword rather than a Python flag

Exactly this. There must be zero side effects at module import time, not just for load times, but because the order of such effects is 1) undefined, 2) heavily dependent on a import protocol implementation, and 3) poses safety and security nightmares that Python devs don't seem to care much about until bad things happen at the most inconvenient time possible.

> Of course that doesn't solve the overhead of finding the modules, but that could be optimized without lazy import, for example by having a way to pre-compute the module locations at install time.

1) opt for https://docs.python.org/3/reference/import.html#replacing-th...

2) pre-compute everything in CI by using a solution from (1) and doing universal toplevel import of the entire Python monorepo (safe, given no side effects).

3) This step can be used to scan all toplevel definitions too, to gather extra code meta useful for various dynamic dispatch at runtime without complex lookups. See for example: https://docs.pylonsproject.org/projects/venusian/en/latest/i...

3) put the result of (2) and (3) as a machine-readable dump, read by (1) as the alternative optimised loading branch.

4) deploy (3) together with your program.
by sjsdaiuasgdia | 2025-08-08 20:19:21+00:00
Yes, what actually happened is important.

In that Constitution story, a government website that has the Constitution's text was updated in a peculiar way. It could be interpreted as having been related to habeas corpus rights, as that was in the middle of the removal. It could also be interpreted as unintentional, as the deletion started in the middle of Article I Section 8. You'd think a targeted deletion wouldn't include so much unrelated text. Then again, you could say that it's just an incompetently done targeted deletion. It's debatable! Maybe it was intentional and maybe the order came from the top. Or maybe it was just a run of the mill tech SNAFU.

In this situation, Trump, on Trump's social media platform, posted that he wants this CEO to resign. That's not debatable, it's verifiable fact. It happened. We know the man at the top is saying this.

So yeah, stop with the false equivalencies and pay attention to what's actually happening.
by abdullahkhalids | 2025-08-08 20:19:48+00:00
You are correct. I was going off my memory. They say [1]

> To prevent fingerprinting based on screen dimensions, Tor Browser starts with a content window rounded to a multiple of 200px x 100px. The strategy here is to put all users in a couple of buckets to make it harder to single them out.

Moreover, even if you resize your window, the browser tries to protect you

> by adding margins to a browser window so that the window is as close as possible to the desired size while users are still in a couple of screen size buckets that prevent singling them out with the help of screen dimensions.

[1] https://tb-manual.torproject.org/anti-fingerprinting/#letter...
by tenacious_tuna | 2025-08-08 20:20:29+00:00
> For Japanese casualties, the predictions were essentially limitless, since the plans included bombing every city in the invasion’s path with the tactics used on Tokyo. Viewed through this pitiless lens, Hiroshima and Nagasaki not only saved 100,000 American lives but also forced Emperor Hirohito to surrender, saving millions of Japanese lives and turning the country into a bastion of democracy and one of America’s most valued allies.

This keeps being repeated. The US's own survey corps concluded that the nuclear bombing was unnecessary for ensuring a Japanese surrender, and in all likelihood was instead to ensure Japan surrendered to the US and not to Russia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Strategic_Bombin...
by VincentEvans | 2025-08-08 20:20:37+00:00
While until recently I had to, in the name of flight safety, carefully pack my bags while consulting the sizes of shampoo containers allowed in the carry-on baggage, surrender my unapproved nail clippers, and with my shoes in hand and pants belt-less - stand in line to be x-rayed and patted down on my way to board a plane…

… someone can without anyone ringing any alarm bells and not phasing the local law enforcement one bit - take off multiple times unnoticed and unidentified on a private plane, and, if they choose to, fly it straight into a freshly refueled jet that I am sitting in waiting to take off.

Shhh, hope “terrorists” don’t read this comment. Or the article in LA Times.
by semi-extrinsic | 2025-08-08 20:20:46+00:00
What do you mean 10 years?

You can pick up a DGX-1 on Ebay right now for less than $10k. 256 GB vRAM (HBM2 nonetheless), NVLink capability, 512 GB RAM, 40 CPU cores, 8 TB SSD, 100 Gbit HBAs. Equivalent non-Nvidia branded machines are around $6k.

They are heavy, noisy like you would not believe, and a single one just about maxes out a 16A 240V circuit. Which also means it produces 13 000 BTU/hr of waste heat.
by actuallyalys | 2025-08-08 20:20:48+00:00
In this case, it appears to be just that the author didn't properly qualify the sentence (see their reply to my comment).

But certainly it does seem like a potential risk of LLMs that they will synthesize people's notes and early marketing materials into "experience reports" that describe benefits and uses that never actually happened. Potentially these could then become part of training data or future contexts via search for other people writing, further exacerbating the effect. We already see similar phenomenon with human errors getting magnified via word-of-mouth.
by tcdent | 2025-08-08 20:21:11+00:00
When considering used hardware you have to take quantization into account; gpt-oss-120b for example is running a very new MXFP4 which will use far more than 80GB to fit into the available fp types on older hardware or Apple silicon.

Open models are trained on modern hardware and will continue to take advantage of cutting edge numeric types, and older hardware will continue to suffer worse performance and larger memory requirements.
by errozero | 2025-08-08 20:21:38+00:00
Hey, the scales are just an array of numbers like this

['Darkness', [0, 1, 3]], ['Darkness2', [0, 1]], ['Single', [3]], ['Locrian', [0, 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10]], ['Aeolian', [0, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10]], ['Mixolydian', [0, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10]], ...

A scale is randomly selected at the start and then notes are randomly selected from that scale in the pattern generation, plus the root note number is added to each one.

So if you had the 'Darkness' scale selected and had the root dropdown set to 0, the notes in this scale would be C, C#, D# which is 0, 1, 3 if you count the keys on a keyboard. If you changed the root to 2, then it would become D, D#, F (2, 3, 5).

Hope that makes sense.
by com2kid | 2025-08-08 20:21:49+00:00
> Even with help from the "world's best" LLMs, things didn't go quite as smoothly as we had expected. They hallucinated steps, missed platform-specific quirks, and often left us worse off.

This shows how little native app training data is even available.

People rarely write blog posts about designing native apps, long winded medium tutorials don't exist, heck even the number of open source projects for native desktop apps is a small percentage compared to mobile and web apps.

Historically Microsoft paid some of the best technical writers in the world to write amazing books on how to code for Windows (see: Charles Petzold), but now days that entire industry is almost dead.

These types of holes in training data are going to be a larger and larger problem.

Although this is just representative of software engineering in general - few people want to write native desktop apps because it is a career dead end. Back in the 90s knowing how to write Windows desktop apps was great, it was pretty much a promised middle class lifestyle with a pretty large barrier to entry (C/C++ programming was hard, the Windows APIs were not easy to learn, even though MS dumped tons of money into training programs), but things have changed a lot. Outside of the OS vendors themselves (Microsoft, Apple) and a few legacy app teams (Adobe, Autodesk, etc), very few jobs exist for writing desktop apps.
by qcnguy | 2025-08-08 20:21:53+00:00
No we never moved past that because the weather isn't getting more extreme. What happened is the left repeat this claim over and over, so people came to believe it. But where's the evidence?

Are storms getting worse? No. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ace-north-atlantic-hurric...

Is drought getting worse? No. https://www.drought.gov/historical-information?dataset=1&sel...

For people who don't Fucking Love Science!™ and think climatologists are corrupted by profit, what's the killer argument that weather is getting more extreme.
by ActorNightly | 2025-08-08 20:22:08+00:00
Man from all these responses, so many people are unaware of the finance world, lol. Or just bots posting for HRT

In case you are unaware - very single trading firm makes money on fees, not by outperforming the market. This goes for firms like Vanguard too.

Just think about it for a little bit - if you could reliably outperform the market by any % with an algorithm why even start a company? Just take out loans, invest, make money, repeat and become rich. No expenses to manage a company.
by nine_k | 2025-08-08 20:22:15+00:00
Believe it or not, there are people who think that a world without nuclear warheads and the MAD equilibrium [1] would be safer. This is despite the documented history of several millennia of such world existing, and being plagued with constant wars fought with conventional weapons.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction
Ask HN: Have we reached the acceptance phase of generative AI?
by wsgeorge | 2025-08-08 20:22:32+00:00
In the immediate aftermath of GPT 3.5 and the LlaMA leak, Github Copilot, there was a lot of denial (negative sentiment, barely concealed rejection etc) about the world we were being ushered into.

Then there was a lot of movement by governments and pressure groups to legislate.

Post GPT-5, Grok4 et al, have we ridden the crest and gotten to the other side now?
by KeysToHeaven | 2025-08-08 20:22:32+00:00
Threads are where information goes to die. I genuinely don't understand how after more than a decade the Slack team hasn't figured this out.

Yesterday I got fed up, so I used cline + gpt5 to vibe code this chrome extension that enables discord-style replies in Slack. If you hate slack threads as much as I do, I think you'll appreciate this.

It's nice that AI coding enables us to do things on a whim like this. Took me like 30 minutes and cost under a dollar. Was listed on the chrome web store that same night.

I also open sourced the repo and already had a PR merged from an opensource contributor who also used AI.
by ilaksh | 2025-08-08 20:22:43+00:00
There is huge pressure to prove and scale radical alternative paradigms like memory-centric compute such as memristors, or SNNs, etc. That's why I am surprised we don't hear a lot about very large speculative investments in these directions to dramatically multiply AI compute efficiency.

But one has to imagine that seeing so many huge datacenters go up and not being able to do training runs etc. is motivating a lot of researchers to try things that are really different. At least I hope so.

It seems pretty short sighted that the funding numbers for memristor startups (for example) are so low so far.

Anyway, assuming that within the next several years more radically different AI hardware and AI architecture paradigms pay off in efficiency gains, the current situation will change. Fully human level AI will be commoditized, and training will be well within the reach of small companies.

I think we should anticipate this given the strong level of need to increase efficiency dramatically, the number of existing research programs, the amount of investment in AI overall, and the history of computation that shows numerous dramatic paradigm shifts.

So anyway "the rest of us" I think should be banding together and making much larger bets on proving and scaling radical new AI hardware paradigms.
by alnwlsn | 2025-08-08 20:23:05+00:00
There's not much to it, you just take the small 12V sealed lead-acid cell out from the bottom of the UPS, extend the two leads, and connect a larger capacity lead-acid battery of the same voltage.

If you don't recognize the terms "sealed", "lead-acid", "battery", "capacity", or "voltage" then you shouldn't do this.

About the only advantage of it is that it's cheap (free if you find a UPS in the trash with an already dead battery), but those cheap UPSs make really crap quality power, and for some of them the only reason they don't overheat is because their stock battery is so small. It's a bit like how you can cook a whole turkey in the microwave, but you probably don't want to.
by zzo38computer | 2025-08-08 20:23:18+00:00
I think it is good to write good documentation, whether or not you use LLMs. I do not use LLMs but I still try to write good documentation because it is helpful to have good documentation even if you do not use LLMs.

However, it is not my intention to write documentation specifically for use with LLM, or for LLMs to scrape my servers for this purpose. If someone wants to use them with LLMs they will have to do that by themself, which you are free to do.
by tracker1 | 2025-08-08 20:23:47+00:00
If I were to guess, it's likely that sales projections are down right now, and they're hoping by keeping the existing line a bit longer, new buyer numbers will be larger in the spring. Most people don't upgrade every generation and a lot of people are still running M1/M2 devices.

I would also speculate that there may be some growing pains for the n2 production from TSMC, and/or a desire to get there in the AZ fab production before launch to avoid tariffs hitting their bottom line. They'd rather pay 12-20% more for just the CPU than eat large tariffs on the full cost. I don't think they'd be able to significantly raise prices further based on tariffs, like some other companies with smaller margins are forced to do, on order to be competitive.
by jedberg | 2025-08-08 20:24:13+00:00
> Anything that guarantees exactly once is selling snake oil.

That's a pretty spicy take. I'll agree that exactly-once is hard, but it's not impossible. Obviously there are caveats, but the beauty of DBOS using Postgres as the method of coordination instead of the an external server (like Temporal or Inngest) is that the exactly-once guarantees of Postgres can carry over to the application. Especially so if you're using that same Postgres to store your application data.
by ezst | 2025-08-08 20:24:24+00:00
> I know, you wanted to vent about the USA and abandon the thread topic, and I countered your argument without even leaving the topic.

Accusations about being off-topic is really pushing it: you want to bet on governments' incompetence in dealing with AI, and I don't (on the basis that there are unarguably still many functional democracies out there), on the other hand, the thread you started about the state of Europe's AI industry had nothing to do with that.

> Like how I can say that the future of USA's AI is probably going to obliterate your local job market regardless of which country you're in

Nobody knows what the future of AI is going to look like. At present, LLMs/"GenAI" it is still very much a costly solution in need of a problem to solve/a market to serve¹. And saying that the USA is somehow uniquely positioned there sounds uninformed at best: there is no moat, all of this development is happening in the open, with AI labs and universities around the world reproducing this research, sometimes for a fraction of the cost.

> And if any single country out there is actually preparing for this, I haven't heard about it.

What is "this", effectively? The new flavour Gemini of the month (and its marginal gains on cooked-up benchmarks)? Or the imminent collapse of our society brought by a mysterious deus ex machina-esque AGI we keep hearing about but not seeing? Since we are entitled to our opinions, still, mine is that LLMs are a mere local maxima towards any useful form of AI, barely more noteworthy (and practical) than Markov chains before it. Anything besides LLMs is moot (and probably a good topic to speculate about over the impending AI winter).

¹: https://www.anthropic.com/news/the-anthropic-economic-index
by Volundr | 2025-08-08 20:24:42+00:00
The question I answered was:

> Doesn't the lack of liquidity in an economy cause deflationary behavior?

Which seems to accept the given premise.

But ok, let's look at yours:

> the issue is that the GP's premise ("When super-rich people receive money, it goes mostly to tax havens, removing it from circulation.") is invalid.

Is it? I thought it was well understood at this point that the best place to stimulate the economy was from the bottom, because every dollar put in goes directly back into circulation, creating demand, while the wealthy and middle class will save some portion of it. Certainly I don't think the money in my savings account is doing much to create the kind of demand that would stimulate job growth, and while one might argue that the stocks in my 401k are doing something the idea that it's driving more growth than buying a car is... Dubious.

But if you have data please share.