MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by FrustratedMonky | 2025-08-07 20:03:05+00:00
If you really want to disect where things got off track. I think it was here.

My original comment >>>

"I was just referring to the predominant number of cases where Church officials, and Republicans are caught in under-age scandals. It seems like it is coming out of the shadows now, and Republicans are just openly going with it, they like em young and illegal. Epstein is just the case where the 'right' bothered keeping up tabs on it, so now they are clutching their pearls."

I think is in line with my most recent comment. I think the direction is clear.

When you replied with this >>>

"But even that is characterized by the "choir boy", not the "baby being baptized". Where is this pedophilia idea coming from?"

I was lost on what was being asked. I didn't understand the choir boy reference, or why pedophilia was a question, since it seemed my point was pretty pointed.
by dismalaf | 2025-08-07 20:03:05+00:00
You mean it's extremely common in Muslim countries. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage_in_the_Middl...

I love this site down voting facts if it doesn't conform to preconceived "progressive" notions.

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Cousin_Marriage_in_Islamic_Law
by teiferer | 2025-08-07 20:03:09+00:00
> We do not have hundreds of millions starving every day.

Then maybe it's time you stop being ignorant. It's not even hard to google. Start with the WHO, over 700 million people faced hunger and malnutrition in 2023. [1] And I'm not particularly interested in how you will try to nitpick your way out of that. It's so easy in the west and in upper classes of the developing world to close your eyes to this.

[1] https://www.who.int/news/item/24-07-2024-hunger-numbers-stub...

> And if we did, we don't have a large portion of industrialized/militarized missions starving every day anway. We'd send the best of the best, hand picked, with the best tech we can build.

Initially, sure. But that's not what I was talking about. Eventually you want to build a civilization there, right? Eventually you have millions there. And it's hard to see how you will be able to organize a society in large scale in a way that does not have the problems humankind currently has if you can't even fix that here which compared to all other planets is a nature paradise. Even after a thermonuclear war, earth is easier to live on than any other planet in this solar system. Time to leave your scifi bubble if you believe otherwise.

> It's fine if you believe we should not go (but I disagree), but the state of the world is not evidence of failure of the mission.

The state of the world is evidence of failure of a mission that is much easier than building a civilization on another planet.
by andix | 2025-08-07 20:03:19+00:00
GPT-5 just dropped for my ChatGPT Plus.

Two concerning things: - thinking/non-thinking is still not really unified, you can chose and the non-thinking version still doesn't start thinking on tasks that could obviously get better results with thinking

- all the older models are gone! No 4o, 4.1, 4.5, o3 available anymore
by jjk166 | 2025-08-07 20:03:51+00:00
I don't think anyone was ever arguing "not only are we going to develop self driving technology but we're going to build out the factories to mass produce self driving cars, and convince all the regulatory bodies to permit these cars, and phase out all the non-self driving vehicles already on the road, and do this all at a price point equal or less than current vehicles" in 5 to 10 years. "We will have self driving cars in 10 years" was always said in the same way "We will go to the moon in 10 years" was said in the early 60s.
Show HN: The Drive AI, an agentic workspace
by sftechdude | 2025-08-07 20:03:53+00:00
Meet The Drive AI, the world's first agentic workspace.

Humans spend hours dealing with files: creating, sharing, writing, analyzing, and organizing them. The Drive AI can handle all of these operations in just a few seconds — even while you're off-screen getting your coffee, on a morning jog, or during your evening workout. Just give The Drive AI agents a task, and step away from the screen!

Link: https://thedrive.ai
by reissbaker | 2025-08-07 20:04:24+00:00
Lol! We're open-source, so there's no point hiding. Our actual non-devDependencies in our package.json is small, but there are a lot of transitive dependencies — downside of the Node ecosystem.

I doubt we're particularly different in that regard from Claude Code, since we use the same frameworks (e.g. Ink for terminal rendering).
by eqvinox | 2025-08-07 20:04:49+00:00
> - First off, your assumption is wrong that only the increase in value gets taxed. No, the entire value of your holding gets taxed, see § 6 Abs. 1 Satz 1 Außensteuergesetz (AStG) [1].

You're misreading that law. It says moving away is equivalent to selling shares and that §17 EStG is applicable. Which in turn says:

(2) Veräußerungsgewinn im Sinne des Absatzes 1 ist der Betrag, um den der Veräußerungspreis nach Abzug der Veräußerungskosten die Anschaffungskosten übersteigt.

> - The factor 13.75 originates from the calculation method called "vereinfachtes Ertragswertverfahren" (~ simplified earnings-based method), which itself is defined in Bewertungsgesetz (BewG), § 11 Wertpapiere und Anteile [2]

§199 BewG says "…kann das vereinfachte Ertragswertverfahren (§ 200) angewendet werden, wenn dieses nicht zu offensichtlich unzutreffenden Ergebnissen führt."

Key phrase there being "kann". It doesn't have to. You can probably sue against it getting applied, if they're really insisting on it. And note §11 BewG says:

"…so ist er unter Berücksichtigung der Ertragsaussichten der Kapitalgesellschaft oder einer anderen anerkannten, auch im gewöhnlichen Geschäftsverkehr für nichtsteuerliche Zwecke üblichen Methode zu ermitteln; dabei ist die Methode anzuwenden, die ein Erwerber der Bemessung des Kaufpreises zu Grunde legen würde…"

So, finding a reasonable method that a buyer would use to determine the values of the shares is explicitly pointed out.
by ralferoo | 2025-08-07 20:05:09+00:00
Even in your example, and assuming that the only feature that the enterprise plan offers is SSO, that's not even close to a 12400% increase, that's a 1147% increase.

My point was that saying the minimum order is 125 seats for enterprise, and so claiming that the price for a single seat is increase by 12400% is being deceptive.

If you buy a six-pack of beer, you don't say "This is terrible! I only wanted one beer and this six-pack is a 500% increase in price!". If you only want one beer, you just buy the single beer and leave the six-pack on the shelf.
by neilv | 2025-08-07 20:05:45+00:00
I've seen some insanely obnoxious email saturation bombing from some SaaS marketing teams. One was emailing me every 5-15 minutes.

Sometimes it could just be a rogue sales/marketing person. But other times it looks like it's probably blessed from the top, if not the startup-CEO personally setting the email marketing tool slider controls to maximum trashy level.
by olieidel | 2025-08-07 20:06:06+00:00
Also:

- A printer (the most important equipment of any German startup founder)

- Envelopes for letters

- A stamp with your company name (some companies and agencies you deal with require you to stamp things, because a stamp obviously proves, beyond any doubt, that you are acting on behalf of your company, because obviously no one would be able to create a similar stamp with your company's name on it, right)

- A virtual office address at a coworking space (because you're receiving physical mail, and also there are weird tax reasons not to register your company at your home address)

- A mail-scanning service (because you don't want to walk to the coworking space every few days to pick up your physical mail)

- A mail-forwarding service (so that the mail gets forwarded from your virtual office address, which now has exactly no purpose at all, to your mail-scanning service)
by nineplay | 2025-08-07 20:06:09+00:00
I think we're going to find that a large number of people who were shamed as "town sluts" were actually abuse victims. Every so often I see nasty comments that 'she got pregnant at 15' or 'she had two kids before finishing high school' with follow-ups blaming poor sex ed. I think people are side stepping the implications, especially if the father is otherwise unknown. Even in my day the girl who got pregnant by the volleyball coach shouldered the bulk of the blame.
by wongarsu | 2025-08-07 20:06:10+00:00
If cost is no concern (as in infrequent one-off tasks) then you can always go with the biggest model with the most reasoning. Maybe compare it with the biggest model with no/less reasoning, since sometimes reasoning can hurt (just as with humans overthinking something).

If you have a task you do frequently you need some kind of benchmark. Which might just be comparing how good the output of the smaller models holds up to the output of the bigger model, if you don't know the ground truth
by j_timberlake | 2025-08-07 20:06:31+00:00
My 2 cents: ChatGPT -> Gemini 1 was their 15-month lead. The moment ChatGPT threatened Google's future Search revenue (which never actually took a hit afaik), Google reacted by merging Deepmind and Google Brain and kicked off the Gemini program (that's why they named it Gemini).

Basically, OpenAI poked a sleeping bear, then lost all their lead, and are now at risk of being mauled by the bear. My money would be on the bear, except I think the Pentagon is an even bigger sleeping bear, so that's where I would bet money (literally) if I could.
by armchairhacker | 2025-08-07 20:06:44+00:00
That only works for some queries, particularly simple ones. Even elaborating the given query into “type of wrench for tight spaces” puts “basin wrench” in 6th place below incorrect wrenches like “oil filter” and “hydraulic torque” (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=type+of+wrench...).
by kypro | 2025-08-07 20:06:44+00:00
I'm considering placing a sign on the wall saying to knock for eggs next time we want to get rid of some. I think that's a fair compromise.

We get a lot of crime around here... The issue with an eggs honesty box is that it's likely to be a nuisance to the neighbourhood. If people are willing to smash windows, I doubt they'd think twice about throw some eggs around. In fact we got egged ourselves a couple of halloween's ago...
by OneDeuxTriSeiGo | 2025-08-07 20:07:08+00:00
I'm specifically targeting the libertarian side of the original comment as I don't keep up with authoritarian conservatives and I generally don't want to engage with them (nor do I the authoritarian left).

LPLouisiana is definitely left leaning libertarian but the first 4 are all very much your old school small government libertarians.

Both Josh Eakle and Kevin Gaughen used to be senior members of the Libertarian Party prior to the Mises Caucus burning it to the ground and they are absolutely center right libertarians through and through.
by mytailorisrich | 2025-08-07 20:07:08+00:00
To put things in perspective, let's remember that Japan, like many countries, experienced a population boom during the 20th century.

Japan's population was about 44 million in 1900, it is 123-124 million now.

A decreasing population poses major challenges but they are far from "annihilation" or becoming "extinct"...
by scottLobster | 2025-08-07 20:07:20+00:00
Please describe these "great lengths". They allowing customer audits now?

The first law of Silicon Valley is "Fake it till you make it", with the vast majority never making it past the "Fake it" stage. Whatever the truth may be, it's a safe bet that what they've said verbally is a lie that will likely have little consequence even if exposed.
by Topfi | 2025-08-07 20:08:20+00:00
> especially considering Horizon Beta does very poorly on tool call and MCP evals in my scenarios

GPT-5 does very well on tool calls, my MCP tests and is far better than 2.5 Pro in some early agentic coding testing. Seems I was very wrong, though not in the way I would have suspected, as whatever Horizon Alpha and Beta were was not GPT-5 in its entirety, but rather a "submodel" (for lack of a proper term at the moment as it does appear to be distinct from MoE) and limited additionally by having a small context window. Basically, Horizon was an early, very limited preview of what we now get with GPT-5, but the difference between the two is very notable.
by LaghZen | 2025-08-07 20:08:32+00:00
Thanks for the follow-up!

Equivalence of P and Algphys: Section 2.3 and Appendix D show any polynomial-time algorithm can be modeled in Algphys with preserved complexity.

Polynomial Mapping: Section 2.2 and Appendix C detail symplectomorphic reductions, ensuring mappings like those for 3-SAT are polynomial-time computable.

No Exponential Distortion: Appendix F (Elimination of Objections) addresses concerns like exponential precision, confirming mappings don’t inflate complexity for polynomial algorithms.

The exponential bounds come from the inherent structure of NP-complete problems, not the mapping itself.
by FrustratedMonky | 2025-08-07 20:08:38+00:00
I can't argue with any of that, since technically everyone could have been playing everyone else. Maybe Republicans are easily fooled, or maybe Trump is playing 5-d chess and playing both sides.

I just think 'playing like a fiddle' typically means a lopsided power dynamic where one person has much more knowledge, or skill. So I'd assume it was implying Democrats were in a superior position. Not, that Democrats just got lucky once. This going back and forth pointing fingers about who was playing , seems like too many layers deep.

it feels like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMz7JBRbmNo
by AgentMatrixAI | 2025-08-07 20:09:20+00:00
I'm not really convinced, the benchmark blunder was really strange but the demos were quite underwhelming, and it appears this was reflected by a huge market correction in the betting markets as to who will have the best AI by end of the year.

What excites me now is that Gemini 3.0 or some answer from Google is coming soon and that will be the one I will actually end up using. It seems like the last mover in the LLM race is more advantageous.
by wrcwill | 2025-08-07 20:09:21+00:00
ugh still fails my test prompt: https://chatgpt.com/share/689507c7-5394-8009-b836-c6281a246e...

"Assume the earth was just an ocean and you could travel by boat to any location. Your goal is to always stay in the sunlight, perpetually. Find the best strategy to keep your max speed as low as possible"

o3 pro gets it right though..
by const_cast | 2025-08-07 20:09:41+00:00
> Under a free market, medical care will be cheap.

This isn't an argument - this is an ideology, a pure faith.

There's no mechanism for this. Some things are just expensive.

Performing a surgery is expensive no matter what. It requires advanced machines and multiple humans with ideally decades of specialized training.

There may be "cheap" surgeries if there's no regulation, in the same way we have cheap shit on Temu - it's junk and doesn't work.

The cell phone reference you made kind of says it all - yes we have cheap cell phones. Most of them are shit.

We don't want shit medicine, shit surgeries, or shit chemotherapy. We want stuff that works.

Also, elephant in the room: products and services are necessarily different.

A phone is a PRODUCT. Medical care is a SERVICE. The difference being cheap products are good, sometimes, cheap services are bad.

We don't want a surgery to cost 100 dollars because that means the doctors are making, like, 2 bucks an hour. Which means we're living in a third world shit hole.

You don't want to live in a third world shit hole, do you? Great, then we're on the same page.

And, elephant number 2: healthcare can never, under any circumstances, be a free market. No matter how hard you try.

When you get sick and need to go to the hospital you might naively think the market of hospitals is thousands. This is wrong. Its actually a monopoly - there is only one hospital you can go to.

This is because of what healthcare is fundamentally - a service to keep you alive. You will go to whatever hospital is closest, because the human will to live transcends markets and even money as a concept.

This means, in a free market, it's not free at all - it's filled with only monopolies who can effectively charge whatever they want - which is exactly what we see.

The only places this doesn't happen is in places in which healthcare is nationalized. Because said countries know a free market is impossible, they don't even try, and they avoid the monopolization that's inevitable.

Some other people will naively point to systems in which there are both public and private options - and note that the private options are cheap and effective.

But that's only the case because of the public options. When private care has to compete with low cost public care, it will be cheap. If you remove that competition by privatizing all healthcare, then they can, once again, effectively charge whatever they want.
by mhitza | 2025-08-07 20:09:54+00:00
I've ran a comparison benchmark for the smaller models https://gist.github.com/mhitza/f5a8eeb298feb239de10f9f60f841...

Comparing it against the RTX 4000 SFF Ada (20GB) which is around $1.2k (if you believe the original price on the nvidia website https://marketplace.nvidia.com/en-us/enterprise/laptops-work...). Which I have access to on a Hetzner GEX44.

I'm going to ballpark it between 2.5-3x faster than the desktop. Except for the tg128 test, where the difference is "minimal" (but I didn't do the math).
by olieidel | 2025-08-07 20:10:41+00:00
Good points!

1. Yeah, valid - I was assuming the default case of "you founded your company in Germany and are moving away at some stage". In that case, you could deduct the initial share capital (often €25k) from the valuation, as that was your "purchase price". In most cases, that doesn't lead to a significantly different outcome.

But yeah, if you actually bought shares of an existing company at a certain (higher) price, than of course the "taxable delta" might change your calculation.

In that respect, I was wrong as I assumed everything would get taxed. This is only roughly the case when you founded the company yourself in Germany, as mentioned above. Thanks for the correction!

2. True! As mentioned in my post, you can also pay someone to assess the value of your shares, which would most likely result in a valuation lower than 13.75x. You will have the additional costs of getting that assessment though, and you'll have to convince the authorities that your assessment is closer to the truth than the default valuation which is based on 13.75x.
by tatjam | 2025-08-07 20:11:10+00:00
But using pressure differentials is also sort of tautological. Lift IS the integral of the pressure on the surface, so saying that the pressure differentials cause lift is... true but unsatisfying. It's what makes the pressure difference appear that's truly interesting.

Funnily enough, as an undergraduate the first explanation for lift that you will receive uses Feynman's "dry water" (the Kutta condition for inviscid fluids). In my opinion, this explanation is also unsatisfying, as it's usually presented as a mere mathematical "convenience" imposed upon the flow to make it behave like real physics.

Some recent papers [1] are shedding light on generalizing the Kutta condition on non-sharp airfoils. In my opinion, the linked papers gives a way more mathematically and intuitively satisfying answer, but of course it requires some previous knowledge, and would be totally inappropriate as an answer by the AI.

Either way I feel that if the AI is a "pocket PhD" (or "pocket industry expert") it should at least give some pointers to the user on what to read next, using both classical and modern findings.

[1]: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376503311_A_minimiz...
by calebjosue | 2025-08-07 20:11:14+00:00
Location: Mexico. Remote: 100% Willing to relocate: Yes, maybe in the future. Technologies: Java, Scala, JavaScript, SQL. Résumé/CV: https://www.calebjosue.com/documents/CalebRuiz__CV__Mid2025__Edited.pdf Email: calebjosue-dev@outlook.com
by fc417fc802 | 2025-08-07 20:11:35+00:00
> it’s much more mundane than other aspects

Is it though? It brings to mind the humorous essay that attempted to extrapolate in a hard sci-fi manner the consequences of the existence of phasers and teleporters in star trek. It seems likely to be a mundane usage which is merely the tip of the iceberg for an absurdly powerful technology.

> the hard speculative physics kind

Apologies if I'm off the mark but just to be clear you don't need speculative real world physics for a "hard" take. All you need is an author dedicated enough to invent his own set of rules and then faithfully "simulate" it. It's just that most authors are lazy and go with speculative real world physics as the base.

At some point I started seeing people conflate hard sci-fi with real world physics and I'm not sure where that came from.
by tptacek | 2025-08-07 20:11:40+00:00
No, this story is about TETRA radios, which are used in Europe; I'm in Chicago, on Motorola's STARCOM (P25), which is ostensibly AES (it wouldn't be shocking to find vulnerabilities; in fact shocking not to, but it won't be as crazy as TETRA, which freelanced its entire encryption stack).
by throwanem | 2025-08-07 20:12:19+00:00
What? How does any of this follow from anything I've said? What's utilitarian about demanding a scapegoat for something that isn't even indictable?

I'm not criticizing parents' decisions, but yours. This specifically includes your using the sorrow of others, in this case parents faced with a harrowing dilemma, as an excuse for your own behavior, rather than demonstrate anything resembling the courage of your supposed convictions.
by Tadpole9181 | 2025-08-07 20:12:35+00:00
But this just sounds like a simplified layman explanation, the same way most of the ways we talk about electricity are completely wrong in terms of how electricity actually works.

If you look at airflow over an asymmetric airfoil [1], the air does move faster over the top. Sure, it doesn't arrive "at the same time" (it goes much faster than that) or fully describe why these effects are happening, but that's why it's a simplification for lay people. Wikipedia says [2]:

> Although the two simple Bernoulli-based explanations above are incorrect, there is nothing incorrect about Bernoulli's principle or the fact that the air goes faster on the top of the wing, and Bernoulli's principle can be used correctly as part of a more complicated explanation of lift.

But from what I can tell, the root of the answer is right. The shape of a wing causes pressure zones to form above and below the wing, generating extra lift (on top of deflection). From NASA's page [3]:

> {The upper flow is faster and from Bernoulli's equation the pressure is lower. The difference in pressure across the airfoil produces the lift.} As we have seen in Experiment #1, this part of the theory is correct. In fact, this theory is very appealing because many parts of the theory are correct.

That isn't to defend the AI response, it should know better given how many resources there are on this answer being misleading.

And so I don't leave without a satisfying conclusion, the better layman explanation should be (paraphrasing from the Smithsonian page [4]):

> The shape of the wing pushes air up, creating a leading edge with narrow flow. This small high pressure region is followed by the decline to the wider-flow trailing edge, which creates a low pressure region that sucks the air on the leading edge backward. In the process, the air above the wing rapidly accelerates and the air flowing above the top of the wing as a whole forms of a lower pressure region than the air below. Thus, lift advantage even when horizontal.

Someone please correct that if I've said something wrong.

Shame the person supposedly with a PHD on this didn't explain it at all.

[1]: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Karman_t...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lift_%28force%29

[3]: https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/VirtualAero/BottleRocket/a...

[4]: https://howthingsfly.si.edu/aerodynamics/air-motion