MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by sdotson | 2025-08-21 21:15:13+00:00
We migrated Calm’s large Rush.js monorepo away from tsc emit and onto Node’s new type stripping feature. Key lessons:

ESM migration was a prerequisite (imports, JSON, CJS compat).

Biggest blocker: thousands of Sinon stubs (solution: “stub classes, not modules”).

Some CJS → ESM package refactors needed (lodash → lodash-es).

Results: local dev tasks ~30–40% faster, CI jobs ~3–6 minutes faster.

Full write-up: https://www.calm.com/blog/engineering/how-we-migrated-our-ru...

Curious if others have tried type stripping in Node 22/23 yet.
by Aachen | 2025-08-21 21:15:36+00:00
The software is easy. Apt install debian apache2 php certbot and you're pretty much set to deploy content to /var/www. I'm sure any BSD variant is also fine, or lots of other software distributions that don't require a graphical environment

On an old laptop running Windows XP (yes, with GUI, breaking my own rule there) I've also run a lot of services, iirc on 256MB RAM. XP needed about 70 I think, or 52 if I killed stuff like Explorer and unnecessary services, and the remainder was sufficient to run a uTorrent server, XAMPP (Apache, MySQL, Perl and PHP) stack, Filezilla FTP server, OpenArena game server, LogMeIn for management, some network traffic monitoring tool, and probably more things I'm forgetting. This ran probably until like 2014 and I'm pretty sure the site has been on the HN homepage with a blog post about IPv6. The only thing that I wanted to run but couldn't was a Minecraft server that a friend had requested. You can do a heck of a lot with a hundred megabytes of free RAM but not run most Javaware :)
by bawolff | 2025-08-21 21:15:51+00:00
> To do the same thing without it, you’d need some other engine to parse the XML, convert it to HTML, and then ensure the proper styles get applied

No, you can use <?xml-stylesheet ?> directives with CSS to attach a css stylesheet directly to an xml file.

CSS is not as flexible as xslt, but this seems to be very simple formatting which is well within what css is capable of.
by tracker1 | 2025-08-21 21:16:23+00:00
I'm somewhere in the middle on this, with regards to the ROI... this isn't the kind of thing where you see immediate reflection on quarterly returns... it's the kind of thing where if you don't hedge some bets, you're likely to completely die out from a generational shift.

Facebook's product is eyeballs... they're being usurped on all sides between TikTok, X and BlueSky in terms of daily/regular users... They're competing with Google, X, MS, OpenAI and others in terms of AI interactions. While there's a lot of value in being the option for communication between friends and family, and the groups on FB don't have a great alternative, the entire market can shift greatly depending on AI research.

I look at some of the (I think it was OpenAI) in generated terrain/interaction and can't help but think that's a natural coupling to FB/Meta's investments in their VR headsets. They could potentially completely lose on a platform they largely pioneered. They could wind up like Blackberry if they aren't ready to adapt.

By contrast, Apple's lack of appropriate AI spending should be very concerning to any investors... Google's assistant is already quite a bit better than Siri and the gap is only getting wider. Apple is woefully under-invested, and the accountants running the ship don't even seem to realize it.
by CuriouslyC | 2025-08-21 21:16:27+00:00
MCP up Playwright, have a detailed spec, and tell claude to generate a detailed test plan for every story in the spec, then keep iterating on a test -> fix -> ... loop until every single component has been fully tested. If you get claude to write all the components (usually by subfolder) out to todos, there's a good chance it'll go >1 hour before it tries to stop, and if you have an anti-stopping hook it can go quite a bit longer.
by Nadya | 2025-08-21 21:16:45+00:00
> In the story the engineers weren't designing a tool well-suited for the customers, but for whatever abstract scenarios they had in their head.

A joke exists about how developers will never be displaced by AI because that would require clients and/or project managers to accurately describe what they want the AI to build. On one hand that is extremely egotistical of developers. On the other it is also factual.

To my understanding of the story the developers had designed what was being communicated to them by someone who described what customers asked for and not what the customers actually wanted or needed. Nothing to do with what the engineers thought customers wanted and everything to do with what project managers had expressed to the engineers about what customers wanted. Speaking with the customers directly gave them a better idea of what was actually being asked for. So they built that instead.

My takeaway from the story is to fire the project manager. Not to make devs call clients.
by ameliaquining | 2025-08-21 21:17:00+00:00
This doesn't strike me as much simpler than Rust; it has most of the features listed above. I know a lot of people don't like RAII (which Rust has and Austral doesn't) because they want every function call to be visible at the call site, but replacing that with linear types, whatever their other virtues, does not make the language easier to learn; implicit destructor calls aren't hard to understand as a concept, once you've got your head around the notion of a value with a specifically bounded lifetime, whereas fighting the linearity checker seems likely to be an even greater speed bump for new users than fighting the borrow checker (which Austral still has).
by johnnyanmac | 2025-08-21 21:17:55+00:00
> It's like we live in different worlds.

We probably do, yes. the Web domain compared to a cybersecurity firm compared to embedded will have very different experiences. Because clearly there's a lot more code to train on for one domain than the other (for obvious reasons). You can have colleagues at the same company or even same team have drastically different experiences because they might be in the weeds on a different part of tech.

> I then carefully review and test.

If most people did this, I would have 90% less issues with AI. But as we expect, people see shortcuts and use them to cut corners, not give more times to polish the edges.
by AngryData | 2025-08-21 21:18:36+00:00
I have yet to see any actual evidence of such a problem, just a bunch of outrage from social media commentators who also claim things like Portland was burnt to the ground by BLM and other hyper-exaggerated crap.

And even if it is true, I still don't see why premeditated charge stacking should be allowed. If someone comes into the store that they know will steal, they should be banned from the store and arrested for trespassing then and there. Shitty criminal justice policies does not justify creative abuses of the law by corporations or prosecutors. Having 25% of the world prison population, along with all the costs that go along with it does not benefit us, it only hurts us. And it has repeatedly been shown that stiffer criminal charges do not prevent crime, if it did the US would be one of the safest 1st world countries, not the most dangerous 1st world country by a large margin that makes countries without actual functioning government seem peaceful.
by rane | 2025-08-21 21:18:36+00:00
> I doubt a PR is going to be buried if it's useful, well designed, good code, etc, just because of this disclosure

If that were the case, why would this rule be necessary, if it indeed is the substance that matters? AI generated anything has a heavy slop stigma right now, even if the content is solid.

This would make for an interesting experiment to submit a PR that was absolute gold but with the disclaimer it was generated with help of ChatGPT. I would almost guarantee it would be received with skepticism and dismissals.
by simpaticoder | 2025-08-21 21:18:49+00:00
I would have kept it down-weighted. This is a drama that can have no satisfying resolution, and offers little unique insight into the world. The topic itself, mathematical physics, is so rarified that only a few hundred people in the world can understand the facts of the case. What's left is a strange superposition of emotionally resonant stories - one where you empathize with the expert being railroaded by a psuedoscientist and his allies (the TFA), and the other where a brilliant outsider's ideas are ignored and punished by prejudiced insiders (Weinstein's narrative). The peanut gallery weighs in with vim and vigor, rather than just saying "I don't know", and all it does is tell you which story they like in that moment.

As an aside, scientists are highly motivated to take credible outsider ideas seriously because the cost/benefit makes a lot of sense (e.g. Max Planck taking Einstein seriously). The motive to suppress Weinstein doesn't make sense, regardless of the underlying claims. But really, I don't know.
by metalman | 2025-08-21 21:19:09+00:00
In just two weeks (with an August 15 peak of almost 70 million requests), fogos.pt handled over 550 million requests (more than 25 million per day) 9 TB of data transfer, nearly 100 million page views, 15 million visits, and 240 million API calls.

just shy of 60k(fire fighters,government,public) users, during actual fires,in a massive heat wave

It’s an operation run entirely by volunteers, with no funding, no formal team — just passion, and the help of partners.

https://fogos.pt/

it loads fast, looks, and works great

thinkin they get a pass
by tptacek | 2025-08-21 21:19:33+00:00
I don't know what you're having it write; I mostly have it write Go. When I ask it to write shell scripts, its shell scripts are better than what I would have written (my daily drivers are whatever Sketch.dev is using under the hood --- Claude, I assume --- and Gemini).

I've been writing Go since ~2012 and coding since ~1995. I read everything I merge to `main`. The code it produces is solid. I don't know that it one-shots stuff; I work iteratively and don't care enough to try to make it do that, I just care about the endpoint. The outcomes are very good.

I know I'm not alone in having this experience.
by thanhhaimai | 2025-08-21 21:20:40+00:00
I'd rather `ruff` being merged with `ty` instead. `uv` for me is about package / project manager. It's not about code style. The only time `uv` should edit a code file is to update its dependencies (PEP 723).

On the other hand, both `ruff` and `ty` are about code style. They both edit the code, either to format or fix typing / lint issues. They are good candidates to be merged.
by EarlKing | 2025-08-21 21:20:48+00:00
It's not just about how you got there. At least in the United States according to the Copyright Office... materials produced by artificial intelligence are not eligible for copyright. So, yeah, some people want to know for licensing purposes. I don't think that's the case here, but it is yet another reason to require that kind of disclosure... since if you fail to mention that something was made by AI as part of a compound work you could end up losing copyright over the whole thing. For more details, see [2] (which is part of the larger report on Copyright and AI at [1]).

--

[1] https://www.copyright.gov/ai/

[2] https://www.copyright.gov/ai/Copyright-and-Artificial-Intell...
by rickydroll | 2025-08-21 21:20:49+00:00
Urban, suburban, and rural spaces all have different pluses and minuses. People have different needs for living spaces throughout their lives, and I feel it's important to recognize and acknowledge that and support them in finding the right place to live.

To me, the fundamental reason behind suburban failure is the lack of affordable housing in the city, forcing city mice to move out to suburbia, bringing their city mice habits and expectations with them. Build more housing in cities, and suburban problems will work themselves out.
by sicvita | 2025-08-21 21:20:52+00:00
I totally agree with the 4 rules listed here (especially #1), but in line with other comments I don't see how LLMs make flashcards for language learning obsolete. If anything, after ~15 months of semi-casual Japanese learning, with flashcards as a core part of my routine, I'm even more convinced of the power of brute force memorization / spaced repetition. I often have moments where I'm presented with a word I can't quite remember, and 90% of the time my "gut instinct" on the pronunciation is correct (I'm usually wrong when I second guess myself). It's a spooky feeling being able to summon the correct pronunciation for a word from deep within my brain when I've consciously told myself "I don't really remember this one".

Also agree that learning a bunch of vocab / flashcards is only a small part of language learning, and it should only be a small % of your studies. After ~80k review items in ~15 months, I'm at the point where I simply spend 20-30 mins. before bed knocking out 100-140 review items (both recognition and recall). Now it's just part of my daily routine and I genuinely still enjoy it. I invested a lot of initial time with flashcards while working through Genki I+II just to lay some solid foundations, more like 200-300 review items a day (knowing some Chinese was my main headstart with this).

+1 for Skritter. I was an early user way back in 2011 for Chinese, and after setting language learning aside for many years it was a joy to boot it back up. I much prefer the Kana/Kanji interface for writing practice than Anki. Admittedly it is a bit pricey, though. I'd also highly recommend Satori reader as a reading/listening practice app. Aside from that, plenty of manga, conversational Japanese 'podcasts' on YouTube, anime, and video games helps. Next step is to find a tutor at some point....

One thing that I've always found weird among the Japanese language learning community is the emphasis on drilling/learning individual Kanji. I don't really recall this being a "thing" in Chinese (presumably b/c you're on the hook for 4-5+k Hanzi rather than 2-3k Kanji :D). Truly bizarre to me to drill individual Kanji out-of-context rather than just learn a couple of common words that use them.
by CuriouslyC | 2025-08-21 21:21:41+00:00
One of my favorite patterns is to use repomix to take a project repo and turn it into a single file, drop it in gemini and chat with it for a while about how to improve the codebase, then ask it to create a hyper-detailed set of instructions for claude to implement the changes we discussed. The planning tends to be much better than Opus because you've got your whole codebase in context and you've been chatting and steering the model for a bit, plus it can save you ~200-300k tokens.
by tracker1 | 2025-08-21 21:21:52+00:00
On the flip side, they didn't actually learn that lesson... that it was a matter of immature tech with relatively limited reach... by the time the mid-90's came through, "the internet is just a fad" was pretty much the sentiment from Sears' leadership...

They literally killed their catalog sales right when they should have been ramping up and putting it online. They could easily have beat out Amazon for everything other than books.
by xyst | 2025-08-21 21:22:20+00:00
With the rise in climate change and _collective inaction_. We are in a trajectory for mass extinction [1].

With the second AI gold rush coming to a near abrupt stop, political climates worsening, billionaires continuing to loot the collective populace through their pawns in the kakistocracy (USA) and kleptocracy (Russia). We are absolutely cooked.

What’s the point anymore? What are we even solving? Being a _good_ person is no longer worth any value. Just exploit and climb over each other like crabs in barrel.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/09/1...
by doorhammer | 2025-08-21 21:22:21+00:00
Hey, thanks for saying that. I have huge gaps in time commenting on HN stuff because tbh, it's just social anxiety I don't need to sign up for :| so I really value someone taking the time to express appreciation if they got something out of my novels.

I don't ever want to come across like I think I know what's up better than someone else. I just want to share my perspective given my experience and if I'm wrong, hope someone will be kind when they point it out.

Tbh it's been awhile since I've worked directly in a call center (I've done some consulting type stuff here and there since then, but not much) so I'm mostly just extrapolating based on new tech and people I still know in that industry.

Fwiw, the way I try to approach interpreting something like the GPs post is to try to predict the possible realities and decide which ones I think are most plausible. After that I usually contribute the less represented perspective--but only if I think it's plausible.

I think the reality you were describing is totally plausible. My gut feeling is that it's probably not what's happening, but I wouldn't bet any money on that.

If someone said "Pick a side. I'll give you $20k if your right and take $20k if you're wrong" I'm just flat out not participating, lol. If I _had_ to participate I'd reluctantly take benefit-of-the-doubt side, but I wouldn't love having to commit to something I'm not at all confident about

As it stands it's just a fun vehicle to talk about call center dynamics. Weirdly, I think they're super interesting
by jynelson | 2025-08-21 21:22:35+00:00
you were reading very closely, well done. yes, that is my claim, Rust was smaller and cleaner before async and const. I was so indirect about it because many of my best friends work on those features and I wasn’t sure how to word it. fortunately Matklad has worded it very well on the other site: 2015 rust was a more complete language that cohered better, but the vision of Rust is not to cohere perfectly, it’s to be an industrial language that is useful even if it’s not beautiful.

https://lobste.rs/c/b8kevh
by jsight | 2025-08-21 21:22:52+00:00
I've been playing around with go quite a bit lately, and now think that being bundled is actually a really serious advantage.

Being able to just to "go fmt", without needing any additional tools, is a really great thing about the language.

The only danger that I can see (and it is a big one) is that Python doesn't have the same kind of consistency that go does. It might end up failing just because so many people use Python in such different ways.
by andrew_lettuce | 2025-08-21 21:23:00+00:00
Thank you for bringing this up. Sears really didn't have a choice, they were a victim of the most pernicious LBO, Gordon Gecko-style strip mining nonsense on the PE spectrum. All private equity is not the same but after seeing two PE deals from the inside (one a leveraged buy out) and another VC one with the "grow at insane place" playbook I think I prefer the naked and aligned greed of the VC model; PE destroyed both of the other companies while the VC one was already doomed.
by rstuart4133 | 2025-08-21 21:24:17+00:00
> Aside from a narrow set of tasks like translation, grammar, and tone-shifting, LLMs are a dead end.

I consider myself an LLM skeptic, but gee saying they are a "dead end" seems harsh.

Before LLM's came along computers understanding human language was graveyard academics when to end their careers in. Now computers are better at it and far faster than most humans.

LLM's also have an extortionary ability to distill and compress knowledge, so much so that you can download a model whose since is measured in GB, and it seems to have a pretty good general knowledge of everything of the internet. Again, far better than any human could do. Yes, the compression is lossy, and yes they consequently spout authoritative sounding bullshit on occasion. But I use them regardless as a sounding board, and I can ask them questions in plain English rather than go on a magical keyword hunt.

Merely being able to understand language or having a good memory is not sufficient to code or do a lot else, on it's own. But they are necessary ingredients for many tasks, and consequently it's hard to imagine a AI that can competently code that doesn't have an LLM as a component.
by alecco | 2025-08-21 21:24:31+00:00
They will grow.

At one point in my life I was very busy with uni and full-time job. I listened to audiobooks, lessons, or just read my notes during commutes. And I was lucky to be allowed to study in my work breaks (away from the "watercooler gang"). I made time. I was very picky with who I spent time with and made sure the human interaction was high quality. Those were some of my most productive years for my side/fun projects. And I was never bored.

Life is not short. We waste most of it in meaningless time sinks. (BTW, thank you for making me remember this)
by tamimio | 2025-08-21 21:24:31+00:00
I think I have said it before here (and in real life too) that AI is just another bubble, let alone AGI which is a complete joke, and all I got is angry faces and responses. Tech always had bubbles and early adopters get the biggest slice, and try as much as possible to keep it alive later to maximize that cut. By the time the average person is aware of it and is talking about it, it's over already. Previous tech bubbles: internet, search engines, content makers, smartphones, cybersecurity, blockchain and crypto, and now generative AI. By the way, AI was never new and anyone in the field knows this. ML was already part of some tech before generative AI kicked in.

Glad I personally never jumped on the hype and still focused on what I think is the big thing, but until I get enough funds to be the first in the market, I will keep it low.
by butlike | 2025-08-21 21:24:45+00:00
> Rather you should be _doing_ something, something interesting to you. Create, not Consume.

Yes, I agree. And I'm going to add something so as to not be taken as a nitpick with the above, since I believe that to be right:

You can also consume activities that let you blossom. Softball, SkeeBall, pool, whatever... in addition to creating your own things.
by didibus | 2025-08-21 21:25:03+00:00
I guess there are two markets to consider.

The market of the AI foundation models itself, will they have customers long term willing to pay a lot of money for access to the models?

I think yes, there will be demand for foundational AI models, and a lot of it.

The second market is the market of CAD, EDA, Office, graphic 2d/3d design, etc. This market will not grow because they integrate AI into their products, or that is the question, will it? Otherwise, you could almost hypothesize these market will shrink as AI is going to be for them an additional cost of business that customers will expect to be included. Or maybe they manage to sell to their customers a premium for the AI features where they take a cut above that of what they pay the foundational models under the hood, that's a possibility.
by kiitos | 2025-08-21 21:25:16+00:00
simple isn't measured in terms of SLoC, it's measured in terms of cognitive complexity

the article itself says, clearly, that the (short) rust program requires knowledge of a significant number of non-trivial language features, as well as the behavioral outcomes of all of their combinatorial interactions -- approximately none of which are relevant to the problem that is being solved by that program!

what I expect is that a language adds as little cognitive complexity (overhead) as absolutely possible, when it is used to express a solution to a given problem