MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jajuuka | 2025-08-11 20:08:27+00:00
Heard of Apple Game Porting Toolkit? That's built on the back of Wine.

Microsoft has been open sourcing a bunch of their programs for a while now too. Majority are inconsequential but they are still nice to see. People on Linux OS's are excited about Microsoft calculator being open source but these open source projects still show that some people there have interest in the push.
by kens | 2025-08-11 20:08:31+00:00
I asked Jon Bruner at Lumafield for details:

The scan was performed on our Neptune Microfocus scanner, configured with a 130 kV source. Current varies on this source depending on scan settings; in this case 123 µA. Each voxel in this scan is 12.8 microns; for smaller parts that we're able to move even closer to the X-ray source we can achieve 3-6 micron voxels.

Compared to medical CT scans, this is much higher resolution--medical CT scans have voxels on the order of 0.5 to 1 mm! This is possible because we're able to apply much higher X-ray doses in industrial scans. Medical CT scans are typically on the order of 120 kV, at higher current but for much less time--perhaps a few seconds compared with minutes to hours for an industrial CT scan.
by yencabulator | 2025-08-11 20:08:57+00:00
That can go wrong too. They (the guardians of language, prim and proper) tried to make "swap file" be "heittovaihtotiedosto", literally "thrown replacement record collection". Thrown as in the things being swapped are in the air while being exchanged, not placed somewhere temporarily. In the real world, lots of computer-related terminology ended up being just transliterated from English directly, along the lines of procedure -> proseduuri, server -> serveri, icon -> ikoni.
by powgpu | 2025-08-11 20:09:02+00:00
Me and many people don't.

Just laptop is good enough. Although currently switched back to apple silicon ATM for LLM, price and convince reasons, and as soonest linux on Apple Silicon reach some maturity, will switch over completely.

However not using a smartphone is probably good for one's mental and physical healthy now days. It is understandable if your work require you to have one, but if I'm not getting paid, why would I even get a smartphone?

Back in the 80's there are investment people managing billions dollars and deals over pen paper and a land line!
by quesera | 2025-08-11 20:09:11+00:00
This does not match my experience at all, and I think your "near zero" claim is silly.

> difficult to deploy from source

I won't argue with you here. There are a lot of moving pieces in a Rails deployment. This isn't different from most web app frameworks, but it is difficult.

That said, I've never worked on a Rails app where deployment was any more difficult than a variation on `bin/deploy v123 production`, because I wrote that script and it works 100% of the time.

> and written in Ruby so the chance of being able to actually modify it for some feature you want is near zero

But this is still silly. You just don't know Rails or Ruby well, and don't want to learn them. Fine, but if you hadn't already made that decision, you would find the solution simple enough. No judgement intended -- different framework/language paradigms fit different people differently.

Rails has great IDE support also. Static typing can be a useful language feature, but a lack of same has not ever, in my experience, made it more difficult to understand real-world code.

There is a lot to love about Go too, don't get me wrong. But I would guess that the number of random developers who could drop in and be immediately productive in a Ruby/Rails app, vs a Go webapp, is basically equivalent. The overlap of projects where both would be highly appropriate choices is a bit thin.

[I hire into Ruby/Rails jobs regularly. I often hire senior developers with no Ruby/Rails background, but I do not hire people into these positions who are not open to learning. It takes a senior dev (from the C/Algol family) one day to learn Ruby, and (from a web dev background) a week or less to learn Rails. I have never seen a failure.

I also hire into Go jobs almost as frequently. The hiring criteria is a bit different (less emphasis on web awareness), but I do find it easier to teach Go to a Ruby dev, than Ruby to a Go dev. Make of that what you will.]
by c0balt | 2025-08-11 20:09:36+00:00
The GUI looks useful but for the core problem:

> Managing multiple Linux servers usually means juggling terminal windows and copy-pasting snippets/scripts. [...]

There is already a plethora of tooling for many of these points. Not a lot of GUI stuff but ansible seems to cover a lot of ground (inventory, organized playbooks instead of shell scripts). Ansible also "just" uses SSH as a transplrt mechanism.

This feels like a solution that tries to support a flawed workflow instead a solution improving the workflow itself.
by don_neufeld | 2025-08-11 20:09:44+00:00
It's definitely detailed. Here are a few from today:

Call PG&E about medical baseline allowance

Check SM Court website re: Conservancy ruling

Expect next invoice from [redacted]

Order refill of [medication]

Book service for [vehicle]

Various financial transfers associated with agreements.

Tons of project related tasks for work I can't share

etc, etc.
by aqrit | 2025-08-11 20:09:57+00:00
`_mm_alignr_epi8` is a compile-time known shuffle that gets optimized well by LLVM [1].

If you need the exact behavior of `pshufb` you can use asm or the llvm intrinsic [2]. iirc, I once got the compiler to emit a `pshufb` for a runtime shuffle... that always guaranteed indices in the 0..15 range?

Ironically, I also wanted to try zig by doing a StreamVByte implementation, but got derailed by the lack of SSE/AVX intrinsics support.

[1] https://github.com/aqrit/sse2zig/blob/444ed8d129625ab5deec34... [2] https://github.com/aqrit/sse2zig/blob/444ed8d129625ab5deec34...
by rs186 | 2025-08-11 20:10:10+00:00
Thank you, this does not get discussed enough on HN. I used to look forward to monthly releases of VSCode and actually read the changelog carefully to see what new features/enhancements I could make use of. These days I just glance and ignore it completely -- almost everything is Copilot, MCP blahblah. Such a disappointment.

You would think with all the AI magic, they would deliver more "core editor" features/enhancement. No, just more Copilot.
by echelon | 2025-08-11 20:11:09+00:00
Because antitrust enforcement has been so lax, we only have two options.

The DOJ/FTC/EU/ASEAN/etc. need to force a breakup of first party app stores, first party payment, first party web browser, and first party messaging. They also really need to require web installs without hidden menus and scare walls.

We'll see a proliferation of offerings if that happens.
by guywithahat | 2025-08-11 20:11:18+00:00
I think the Slate 20-25k pricetag includes the 7500 tax credit, which will no longer exist when it comes out. They'll both be around 30k. Slate has announced they're no longer targeting sub-20k after the EV credit.

It also looks like their simpler EV process (ie cost saving) is basically to do what Tesla does, and use the same battery pack and platform for all their vehicles, as well as simplify the design down as much as possible. I think it'll be exciting and I hope they're successful with it
by toast0 | 2025-08-11 20:11:22+00:00
I'm not good at writing documentation, and you can't pay me enough to care about it, sorry. I've tried enough times, and nobody reads it, or it becomes out of date by the time anyone reads it, and I don't see the personal ROI. I'll write notes for future me, and put them somewhere others can read it, if you don't make that onerous. Otherwise, if you want documentation from me, you need to have someone else drag the information out of me and write it down. But, I've only rarely been in organizations that care enough about documentation to do that, so there you go.

There's always a lot of talk about how documentation is important, but there's never budget for a tech writer (well, you must have found some, as you've taken tech writer as a title, but it's not often available) or a documentation maintainer.
by bradac56 | 2025-08-11 20:11:23+00:00
"there will be another crisis someday" ... yes I guess that's always true in general.

I can agree it might be crypto but not because of "crypto" specifically it's more about the banking deregulation and the abomination called Fintech as a whole that will more than likely cause a community to regional banking crises due to all of the SanFran startups buying and then running banks into the ground. Crypto is just the cool boy thing they are using to buy said banks.
by jermaustin1 | 2025-08-11 20:11:30+00:00
That is a bit harsh. I'm actually quite pleased with the code it is outputting currently.

I'm not saying it is anywhere close to a paid foundation model, but the code it is outputting (albeit simple) has been generally well written and works. I do only get a handful of those high-thought responses before the 50k token window starts to delete stuff, though.
by ls65536 | 2025-08-11 20:11:49+00:00
The industry definitely seems to be going in this hybrid PQC-classical direction for the most part. At least until we know there's a real quantum computer somewhere that renders the likes of RSA, ECC, and DH no longer useful, it seems this conservative approach of using two different types of locks in parallel might be the safest bet for now.

However, what's notable is that the published CNSA 2.0 algorithms in this context are exclusively of the post-quantum variety, and even though there is no explicit disallowing of the use of hybrid constructions, NSA publicly deems them as unnecessary (from their FAQ [0]):

> NSA has confidence in CNSA 2.0 algorithms and will not require NSS developers to use hybrid certified products for security purposes.

[0] https://www.nsa.gov/Press-Room/News-Highlights/Article/Artic...
by chowells | 2025-08-11 20:11:59+00:00
Are you aware of HTML 5? Fun fact about it: there's zero leniency in it. Instead, it specifies a precise semantics (in terms of parse tree) for every byte sequence. Your parser either produces correct output or is wrong. This is the logical end point of being lenient in what you accept - eventually you just standardize everything so there is no room for an implementation to differ on.

The only difference between that and not being lenient in the first place is a whole lot more complex logic in the specification.
by shazbotter | 2025-08-11 20:12:51+00:00
Exciting is one word for it. The dot com crash was also "exciting", I suppose.

I see it as a chance for the capital class to sell everyone shovels and build railroads that will further cement their power and influence, all the while insisting software and art are more democratic than ever. All the while using the same tools to build surveillance infrastructure that will make any dissent impossible.

So yeah, exciting is one word you could choose.
by unethical_ban | 2025-08-11 20:12:58+00:00
A baby takes nine months to make and a moment to throw out a window. Shall we keep on with analogies?

I disagree it takes "a moment" for a large, multiperson organization to lose all credibility due to occasional editorial lapses.

Or maybe it's because I think trust in reputable organizations is the only thing binding society together from crumbling into an AI social media abyss, that I refuse to declare NYTs credibility dead.

Heck, I still support the WSJ news section even though they're owned by an enabler of the current administration.
by yencabulator | 2025-08-11 20:13:13+00:00
I've yet to hear a non-Finn get doubled consonants right, ever. Kukkakaali. Ikkuna.

Somewhat easier but still challenging is getting the wovels in the right place. They're just different, and the barrier is as hard going the other way but Finns have more practice in speaking English than the other way around. It's similar to the idea that it's very very hard to learn a tonal language if you grew with non-tonal languages.
by XenophileJKO | 2025-08-11 20:13:23+00:00
So my current pet project is a to-do system with an app that you can look at, edit, or complete tasks in. But I have both a fully agentic interface and simpler LLM powered inputs.

I'm really enjoying it. I think it is a good example of how to leverage LLMs to reduce drudgery.

Things I can do now: - take a picture of a notice like a license renewal and a task is created and automatically filled with due dates and information extracted from the image and likely from online searches.

- turn a design document into a reasonable task plan.

- create classified and researched tasks with a sentence.

I'm just getting started on it but it already is kind of feature complete. Programmed with Claude Code, about 20k lines.

The key I think is to have something as easy to input as a text file, because it applies intelligence to remove friction.
by Analemma_ | 2025-08-11 20:14:00+00:00
No, this is exactly the opposite of true: you need to do more reading about the baby boom. It happened across many countries, including ones which had little involvement in WWII, and in almost all cases it began in the 1930s, even with the Great Depression underway. It got supercharged by the end of the war because that's when the economic doldrums finally ended, but upward trend in fertility predated even the beginning of the war, never mind the end.
by ivanmontillam | 2025-08-11 20:14:03+00:00
These are the kind of claims that make some Linux users tiresome to talk to. (Full disclosure: I am also a Linux user).

I'm not defending Microsoft, they are not necessarily my cup of tea, but these claims are only true of anything pre-Nadella era (part of 2014 and earlier).

Feel free to express your opinions, but don't be hateful!
by freedomben | 2025-08-11 20:15:03+00:00
Maybe, but at the very least, this time we seem to be a lot more aware of it, and lots of schools are grappling with how to adapt in this age. We definitely have a lot to figure out still, and there will unfortunately be a lot of broken eggs in this omelette, but at least it's not something everybody is just sleeping on (this time around).

I also think it's a little too easy to throw the baby out with the bathwater. For students that are genuinely curious, AI can be a major facilitator to learning. I've seen several students make massive gains in subjects when they can converse with AI and test their knowledge. The key difference is motivation/incentive. If a student just wants to check the homework box and be done, AI is a major net negative. It doesn't have to be though (hallucination problems aside)
by ack_complete | 2025-08-11 20:15:08+00:00
Sure, but I have to support a range of target CPUs in the consumer desktop market, and the older CPUs are the ones that need optimizations the most. That means NEON on ARM64 and AVX2 or SSE2-4 on x64. Time spent on higher vector instruction sets benefits a smaller fraction of the user base that already has better performance, and that's especially problematic if the algorithm has to be reworked to take best advantage of the higher extensions.

AVX-512 is also in bad shape market-wise, despite its amazing feature set and how long it's been since initial release. The Steam Hardware Survey, which skews toward the higher end of the market, only shows 18% of the user base having AVX-512 support. And even that is despite Intel's best efforts to reverse progress by shipping all new consumer CPUs with AVX-512 support disabled.
by Oras | 2025-08-11 20:15:20+00:00
Two years ago, I was sitting close to Sam on his London tour, and he defined:

- Super Intelligence: an AI that is as smart as the smartest person on Earth.

- AGI: an AI that is smarter than the entire population.

Are these definitions still stand? Based on the article and the release of GPT-5, I don't think so.
by AtlasBarfed | 2025-08-11 20:15:54+00:00
We need 50 mile PHEVs more than anything. I think there's two decades of these while EV economies of scale and charging infrastructure builds out.

Basically, you design a skateboard EV, but way less batteries and you put a recharge engine instead of the frunk. So I don't even think it would be a major departure from the current generation of EV engineering.

I think this can challenge a new price point until sodium ion batteries hit their stride and really change the economics of EVs.
by habosa | 2025-08-11 20:16:51+00:00
Every business building on LLMs should also have a contingency plan for if they needed to go to an all open-weights model strategy. OpenAI / Anthropic / Google have nothing stopping them from 100x-ing the price or limiting access or dropping old models or outright competing with their customers. Building your whole business on top of them will prove to be as foolish as all of the media companies that built on top of Facebook and got crushed later.
by lowsong | 2025-08-11 20:17:28+00:00
> YouTube gaining an “ask a question about this video” button, this is a perfect example of how to sprinkle AI on an existing product.

> Extremely slow, but the obvious incremental addition of Gemini to Docs is another example.

These are great examples of insulting and invasive introductions of LLMs into already functional workflows. These are anti-features.
by QuantumGood | 2025-08-11 20:17:46+00:00
In my business (partly home studio support), it's hard to support MacOS for new-ish users.

If the OS is old, things like FFMPEG will not work with things like Audacity. And to use an old version of FFMPEG, you have to guess which one, then install a variety of dev tools to compile it, waay beyond the capability of the average "I just want to record my podcast user". Audacity itself has an extensive help article devoted to this issue for Mac.

If you have a new Mac, you'll find companies have given up going through the cost and time of certifying for each new Mac OS, like Evoluent (early vertical mouse maker), who gave up several versions ago and won't support using all the extra mouse buttons their product has on Mac.

If you want to use many audio plugins, you'll have to deal with special permissions if it didn't come from the app store. If you want to use zoom to let a remote tech control your screen, you have to find and set two security permisssions.

For all four of these issue on Windows, it just works.

UPDATE: As commenter below pointed out, experienced users have a different experience than new users, which doesn't invalidate the specific issues I've mentioned, and which I encounter every month, and sometimes weekly.
by asveikau | 2025-08-11 20:18:43+00:00
I was around at the time.

Mac OS 8 had no preemptive multitasking or meaningful address space protections. A single bad pointer dereference in user mode took down the entire system, and a single busy loop without a yield locked up the entire system.

Both of these were universally admitted to be bad and outdated by technically minded people.

By 1997 they had looked at replacing it with BeOS or NEXTSTEP, and purchased the latter with the goal of replacing Mac OS. The Rhapsody OS, an OS8 style UI with NeXT underneath, had already been started. Before that, they had also attempted and failed to write a next gen classic Mac OS (Copland).

Windows 9x had a lot of problems, but had preemptive multitasking and much better address space isolation. Windows NT 4 Workstation was also a thing at the time and much better. It did take them two more releases to make it into the consumer product.
by kieranmaine | 2025-08-11 20:18:45+00:00
This doesn't quite cover what you're looking for but I think a previous survey led with a question that mentioned uploading ID - https://yougov.co.uk/topics/society/survey-results/daily/202....

I can't find the survey it's entirety, but I think the above question was followed by (this is based on the number at the end of the URL, which I'm guessing is quesiton order) - https://yougov.co.uk/topics/society/survey-results/daily/202...
by spauldo | 2025-08-11 20:18:58+00:00
A lot of Lisp was funded by AI research. That research dried up in the 90s (see "AI Winter"). Regular computers of the time were underpowered for Lisp, which originated on mainframes and then moved onto purpose-built hardware. So the new generation of programmers learned Pascal, C, and C++ instead and were mostly disconnected from the AI research that had come before.

Modern AI focuses on numeric methods, whereas classic AI was heavily symbolic. That makes Lisp less well suited for it, since symbolic computation is where Lisp shines. Classic AI does have some useful bits to it, but insofar as AI development goes it's mostly considered a dead end.
by oblio | 2025-08-11 20:19:03+00:00
The thing is, the 100x can't be in all the verticals, speak all the languages, be a warm body required by legislation, etc, etc. Plus that 100x just became a 10x (x 10x) bus factor.

This will reduce demand for devs but it's super likely that after a delay, demand for software development will go even higher.

The only thing I don't know is how that demand for software development will look like. It could be included in DevOps work or IT Project Management work or whatever.

I guess we'll see in a few years.
by bombcar | 2025-08-11 20:19:05+00:00
But that's just it - the airlines have finally (lol) realized that a huge price "Delta" (lolx2) between normal cattle class and first class was a mistake.

People aren't usually paying 4x for first, but they will pay $10 more for Y, $30 for Z, etc.

The future of airlines is fully adjustable planes!
by andrewstuart | 2025-08-11 20:20:00+00:00
Don’t have a team with one AI service on it ….. have a team with three.

You’re crazy to only use one AI service if you’re doing serious development.

Use the 3 big ones all at the same time.

Ask them all to solve the same problem. Ask them all to evaluate each others solutions. Do this over and over in multiple iterations.

Each model is good at different things.

When you’re not getting a great result with this one, switch to another.

Using one AI is crazy when three together are more powerful.
by tsimionescu | 2025-08-11 20:20:08+00:00
That's a silly argument, because arithmetic is so simple people pick it up in spite of their use of calculators. Hell, people learn simple arithmetic even if they've never had any schooling (they can tell you that 5 apples and 3 apples makes 8 apples, things like this). And arithmetic with big numbers is so tedious regardless of how well you know it that it's better to just use a calculator, and people have always done this (before digital calculators you had an abacus, multiplication tables, and many other similar instruments).

Calculus or programming or advanced algebra etc are nowhere near the same difficulty, and the same rules don't apply.
Ask HN: Could we pool our machines to run more powerful AI models locally?
by floweronthehill | 2025-08-11 20:20:26+00:00
Today I remembered the SETI@Home project. A distributed computing project for people to contribute their computer's power to help search for signals of extraterrestrial life.

And then I wondered if it's feasible to run more powerful open source models across multiple machines. Has it been tried before?