MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by potato3732842 | 2025-08-07 15:24:56+00:00
Whenever you see something seemingly silly and inefficient/wasteful ask yourself what is preventing the more efficient solution. The answer is almost always that someone is paying more to deal with government in a slightly different way that reduces risk to them

1ac parking lot = easy and definite, just buy land, simple permits, etc.

.25ac parking garage = difficult permits with many more places for various parties to whimsically drag their dick all over it at great expense to you, etc.

Investing in a commercial structure carries massive financial risk because there are all sorts of steps along the way where the government has reserved the right to balloon your cost so 1mil of land, 2.5mil of structure and $100k of bullshit could potentially be 1mil,5mil,500k once everyone is done screwing you.

The parking lot on $4mil of land and $100k of construction and $100k of bullshit can only balloon to $4mil, 200k, 200k in the worst case.

Now, I pulled those numbers out of my ass but it's the basic workflow that underpins most of the "stupid" things we see being built.
by dtagames | 2025-08-07 15:24:56+00:00
The abandonment issue is real and at the heart of this[0].

To keep a trademark in the US, you must demonstrate that you still make and sell a product labeled with that mark.

Not only has Oracle never made or sold anything called JavaScript, they actually submitted a screenshot of Node.js as proof for their last filing. The inventor of Node.js is the person seeking abandonment in this suit.

[0] Source: I've been involved in three trademark disputes and lost one, won one, and neogtiated a free license for a third.
by jlarocco | 2025-08-07 15:25:24+00:00
> it's probably even less likely we would've had just as much investment.

I doubt it. Investors aren't going to just sit on money and let it lose value to inflation.

On the other hand, you could claim non-AI companies wouldn't start a new bubble, so there'd be fewer returns to reinvest, and that might be true, but it's kind of circular.
by ralferoo | 2025-08-07 15:25:39+00:00
It strikes me that this is a massive red flag pointing to AI being in a bubble. This is an insane amount of money to give away to employees who were presumably already happy with their compensation package.

Given how high data centre costs are, and anticipated growth on spending, and how until just recently the company was actively seeking investment, to have this much spare money sloshing around shows how horrifically overvalued the company is. If I directly owned significant quantities of shares in any company that's recently invested, I'd be worried about an imminent crash in their stock prices.
by viksit | 2025-08-07 15:26:01+00:00
In my fourth post in the series, I tackle how to make multi-step agent workflows learn behavior from data. Most agents today rely on vibes: prompt tuning, hand-written templates, and hope(!). This post is about replacing that with metrics and optimization.

Each branch in the workflow learns how to behave, not just where to route. I show how to set up a reward, plug in an optimizer, and treat agent behavior as something you can tune like a model.
by buoooou | 2025-08-07 15:26:15+00:00
Creators first, share your knowledge, get found on Google, grow your audience, and make money — all in one place. From creation to monetization, Postion provides a complete content creation ecosystem. Postion offers a unique chance to grow with an emerging platform, avoiding the traffic plateaus of mature networks. We provide creators a true partnership opportunity.

1.Fast Cold Start Advantage Extremely low migration cost for existing creators. Exclusive benefits and a zero-commission period for early adopters. Cold start acceleration with a bonus traffic tilt. Break through the information bubble for greater exposure.

2.Growth Incentives and Honors Compete in our 'Rising Star' program for monthly cash rewards. Earn the prestigious 'Genesis User' badge and status. Receive special honors and recognition for outstanding contributions. Unlock exclusive achievements as you grow with the platform.

3.Ultra-Low Rates & Profit Advantage Keep more of what you earn with our industry-leading low commission rates. Access a dedicated creator fund for high-quality content projects. Early-bird benefits include profit-sharing and bonus programs. Transparent and straightforward automated payout system.

4.Long-Term Growth & Protection Priority income guarantees for our foundational creators. Share in the platform's long-term success with growth dividends. Receive a permanent SEO bonus for all your historical content. Utilize automated tools to support audience growth and management.
by fantasizr | 2025-08-07 15:26:39+00:00
It's been going on for years

https://x.com/tomgara/status/1587640766696140800?lang=en

"It’s pretty simple: Google Meet (original) was previously Meet, which was the rebranded Hangouts Meet. Meet has been merged with Google Duo, which replaced Google Hangouts. Google Duo has been renamed Meet, and Meet has been temporarily named Google Meet (original), for clarity"
by jacobr1 | 2025-08-07 15:26:47+00:00
You _can_ build things that way. But then you need some business logic to decide which tools to expose to the system. The easy/dumb way is just to give it all the tools. With RAG, you have retrieval step where you have hardcoded some kind of search (likely semantic) and some kind of pruning or relevance logic (maybe give the top 5 results that have at least X% relevancy matching).

With tools there is no equivalent. Maybe you could try some semantic similarity to the tool description, but I don't know of any system that does that.

What seems to be happening is building distinct "agents" that have a set of tools designed into them. An Agent is a system prompt+tools, where some of tools might be the ability to call/handoff to other agents. Each call to an agent is a new context, albeit with some limited context handed in from the caller agent. That way you are manually decomposing the project into a distinct set of sub-agents that can be concretely reasoned about and can perform a small set of related tasks. Then you need some kind of overall orchestration agent that can handle dispatch to other agents.
by freeopinion | 2025-08-07 15:27:14+00:00
You have described to me that you are extremely dependent on a vendor that can exercise despotic control. On the one hand you express a total mistrust in the likelihood of them doing right by you. On the other hand you keep investing more and more of your assets into their control.

This indicates to me that the assets you put into their control are disposable for you or that you have no reasonable alternative. The former is easy for me to believe. That latter is difficult for me to believe. Together, it makes me disinclined to feel that the government needs to take any action on your behalf.
by chollida1 | 2025-08-07 15:27:30+00:00
> It also says it's a grant that vests over 2 years, so not what any normal person considers a "bonus". A bonus is cash in hand.

Every bonus I've gotten has vested. So its not that unusual. Generally vesting applies to larger bonuses and to bonuses tied to performance.

I'm guessing 1.5M is a larger bonus than the average tech employee gets each year but is pretty inline for a typical hedge fund.
by cb321 | 2025-08-07 15:27:46+00:00
For simple commands, it is pretty easy if your CLI toolkit sticks to a _gnu_generic kind of format, but for subcommands it gets hard.

Since in cligen (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44820383) the "proc signature is already The Spec", it actually provides a multi-command/subcommand completion script generator in util/complgen.nim .

Bash/Fish logic would be nice if anyone wants to contribute after reading this article about it. :-)
Show HN: We built a document AI, you only pay for good data
by jojogh | 2025-08-07 15:28:00+00:00
Hi HN, I’m one of the creators of Undatas.io. We've been working with document AI for a while and got tired of the standard model: upload sensitive files to a third-party server, send them to a black-box API, and pay for every page, even if the output is garbage. We decided to build a platform that fixes this from first principles. Today we're launching V3, which is a major overhaul focused on data control, verifiable results, and a fair pricing model. Here’s a breakdown of the technical approach: 1. Securely Process from Your Cloud Storage (S3, Box, Dropbox, GCS, Azure): Instead of uploading files to us, you connect your own cloud storage. The architecture works via native integrations. For major providers like AWS, GCP, and Azure, you grant our system secure, temporary access using scoped-down credentials (e.g., an IAM role you control). For services like Box and Dropbox, you connect your account via a standard OAuth 2.0 flow, granting read-only permissions. In all cases, the principle is the same: our workers fetch the object for in-memory processing and it's immediately discarded. Your documents never land on our persistent storage. 2. "Glass Box" Visual Validation: To solve the black-box problem, we built an interactive workspace. The backend returns JSON with detailed bounding box coordinates for every extracted token, line, and table cell. Our frontend uses these coordinates to map the structured data back to the source document image, allowing you to click on any JSON element and see it instantly highlighted. You can see a live, no-signup demo of the UI here: https://undatas.io/ 3. State-of-the-Art Table Extraction: This was our biggest R&D effort. Most tools fail at complex tables (merged cells, nested headers, no borders). Our model moves beyond simple heuristics. It uses a hybrid approach, combining a vision transformer (ViT) to understand the visual layout with graph neural networks (GNNs) to reconstruct the logical cell-to-cell relationships. This allows it to correctly parse table structures that would otherwise be ambiguous. 4. "Pay for Quality" API: This is built into our API workflow. When you process a document, the results for each page enter a "pending" state. You use the visual validator (or an approval webhook) to review them. Only when you explicitly "accept" a page's results is the transaction committed and your credits are used. A "discard" call costs nothing. We're trying to be as open as possible. While the core engine is proprietary, we are open-sourcing our client SDKs and other tools. Link to try the full platform: https://undatas.io/ A signup is needed for the full platform to manage API keys and credits. To make it easy for the HN community to test everything, we’re giving everyone 5,000 free credits (good for ~1,000 pages) and a 7-day trial of all features, including the private cloud connections. As a thank you to early adopters from this community, the first 50 people who subscribe to a paid plan will get a 25% lifetime discount. We’re here all day to answer your questions. Thanks for checking it out.
by FrustratedMonky | 2025-08-07 15:28:03+00:00
That you keep disagreeing, made me doubt, maybe I am using the word wrong. So I looked it up.

You are technically correct. If Trump was sleeping with 14 year old, and the cutoff for Pedophilia is 13. Then, guess he is in the clear. And Gaetz, paid for sex with 17 year old. So guess again, you could argue 17 is "old enough to play ball".

Guess I was wrong. 14-18 is ok for Republicans.

I'd say the Church steers younger, but I'm sure you can look that up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia

"Although girls typically begin the process of puberty at age 10 or 11, and boys at age 11 or 12,[3] psychiatric diagnostic criteria for pedophilia extend the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13"
by randomcarbloke | 2025-08-07 15:28:13+00:00
I didn't realise you weren't the guy from earlier, so fine.

I am not shrieking, I'm cool a cucumber. In general I try to avoid this subject because of how divisive it is and because the loudest voice in the room is the one decrying the subject despite all evidence to the contrary.

It is absolutely reddit-tier to say "grass isn't actually green because these two people say so" only in this case the grass is behind an abstraction that requires a bit of minor gathering and analysis, yes my own analysis counts for nothing I am aware, but I encourage everyone to do it themselves, the data are free and ubiquitous.

Do I see myself as HN? no, but evidently the original guy sees himself pushing back against the tide of uninformed HNites without realising what that actually implies.

Not nonsense, not debunked, not shrieking. Muddying the waters? maybe but I'm fed up of this fucking stupid shit popping up every other week on here and having sandal-clad neo hippies and anti-science right-wing fruitcakes sperging out.
by OsmanDKitay | 2025-08-07 15:28:27+00:00
The comparison to OpenAPI is the main thing to address and you re right to ask why it isn t enough.

OpenAPI is fantastic for describing a static API for a developer to read. But the web is more than that its a dynamic stateful environment built for human interaction. The current trend of forcing AI agents to navigate this human-centric web with screen scraping and DOM manipulation is brittle and I believe, unsustainable. Its like sending a robot into a grocery store to read the label on every single can instead of just asking the manager for the inventory list.

This is where Aura tries to be different in two key ways

Control & Permission:not just Documentation: Aura is designed from the website owner's perspective. It's a way for a site to say "This is my property and here are the explicit rules for how an automated agent can interact with it." The aura.json file is a handshake a declaration of consent. It gives control back to the site owner.

Statefulness(This is the big one): An OpenAPI spec is stateless. It cant tell an agent what it can do right now based on its current context. This is what the AURA-State header solves. So for example before you log in the AURA-State might only show you list_posts and login capabilities. After you successfully call login the very next response from the server includes a new AURA-State header that now unlocks capabilities like create_post and update_profile. The agent discovers its new powers dynamically. This state management is core to the protocol and doesn't really have a parallel in OpenAPI.

You re right to be skeptical and as I said in my post maybe Aura isnt the final answer. But I strongly believe the web needs a native capability-aware layer for the coming wave of AI agents. The current path of brute force interaction feels like it will break the open, human-centric web we ve all built.
by vonneumannstan | 2025-08-07 15:29:16+00:00
>Very weird reasoning. Without AlphaGo, AlphaZero, there's probably no GPT ? Each were a stepping stone weren't they?

Right but wrong. Alphago and AlphaZero are built using very different techniques than GPT type LLMs. Google created Transformers which leads much more directly to GPTs, RLHF is the other piece which was basically created inside OpenAI by Paul Cristiano.
by avodonosov | 2025-08-07 15:29:19+00:00
There are common properties of phycology shared by people. UI design and ergonomics rely on such properties. In psrticular, how people read text.

But I am speaking of myself only. From experience receiving well designed message comparing to the experience with badly designed messages.

I am a data point of evidence supporing my view. The opinion that "people don't read" is a complete speculation, without convincing evidence.

The real problem that many services simply not include the warning in the message.
by mlhpdx | 2025-08-07 15:29:28+00:00
One of the fun facts about airplanes is that they are made almost entirely aluminum. And, if you go, look it up or talk to a mechanical engineer, you will understand that aluminum has no “fatigue limit“. That sounds like a good thing, but it’s not. Aluminum will always fail eventually no matter how small the load. It’s just intrinsic in the material.
by sroussey | 2025-08-07 15:30:19+00:00
People don’t hold land to just wait it out. The holding costs are high and there is really only one time when this works well (when a city is expanding and you get some land in that path).

When you own land, you have taxes, insurance, mortgage perhaps, upkeep etc. Easier to invest in stocks.

Anyhow, you have land with the idea that when the conditions warrant you can develop. Hopefully soon. But conditions may not develop quickly and you have to bear high holding costs.
by jillesvangurp | 2025-08-07 15:30:36+00:00
You put the finger on the sore spot. When people talk about ethics, you have to question which moral agenda they are pushing. The two topics are hard to separate. And kind of subjective. And only partially codified in law. Ethics seems to be about going above and beyond the letter of the law, usually for moralistic reasons.

And when we talk about laws, we have to look internationally as well because they are not the same everywhere. And typically inspired by different value systems. Is it ethical for a Chinese police officer to use Chinese LLM to police Chinese citizens? I don't know. I'm a bit fuzzy on Confucius here which I assume would drive their thinking. And it might be an interesting perspective for Californian wannabe ethicists to consider that not all the values and morals that they are pushing are necessarily that widely shared and agreed upon.

Also, there's a practical angle here because the Chinese seem to be very eager adopters of AI and don't appear to be particularly concerned about what anyone outside China thinks about that. That cat is out of the bag.

I've always looked at ethicists with some skepticism. The reality with moralism (which drives ethics) is that it's about groups of people telling other people what to do, not do, how to behave, etc. This can quickly get preachy, political, and sometimes violent.

A lot of this stuff can also be pragmatic. Most religions share a lot of moral principles. I'm not religious but I can see how going around killing and stealing is not a nice thing to have and that seems to be uncontroversial in many places. Never mind that some moralists extremists seem to be endlessly creative about coming up with ways to justify doing those two things.

The pragmatic thing here is that the cat is already out of the bag and we might want to think about how we can adapt to that notion rather than to argue with the cat to please go back in the bag.
by jasperry | 2025-08-07 15:30:39+00:00
Yes, this. I'm a long time XFCE user but when I got a beefier machine I switched to KDE, and unlike XFCE it manages the hardware thoroughly enough (sleep/brightness/network/audio) that I don't have to manually hack anything. I tolerate the bloat for that reason. I disabled all the kwallet and pim stuff though, that was a mess.
by andsoitis | 2025-08-07 15:30:52+00:00
> Berkshire holds ~$60B+ of Apple and is also exposed to AI through its power-utility arm, Berkshire Hathaway Energy.

Apple is 22% of BRK’s holdings. The next biggest of their investments are Amex, BoA, Coke, Chevron.

They are not a tech company.
by titusjohnson | 2025-08-07 15:31:01+00:00
Everyone I know charges all their devices over night. Nightstands everywhere have charging docks for all the batteries you cary about your person. The hotels I have stayed at have USB ports about 2 feet from your pillow. Bluetooth speakers are semi-permanently plugged in until they need to be portable. The iPhone has built in smart charging specifically for charging over night.

Unlike my RC Car's high capacity batteries, which come with warnings all over them about proper charging care, not leaving them unattended, no common consumer product I have purchased in the last decade+ has come with any kind of visible warning regarding charging habits.

Common Sense over the last decade or two has shifted towards charging at night so your devices function all day.
by candiddevmike | 2025-08-07 15:31:35+00:00
How do OpenAI employees come out unscathed if AGI/ASI ruins all future jobs? Why would OpenAI keep these employees around? Would there even be humans as part of "OpenAI Inc" at that point?

I guess I don't understand how anyone could keep an AGI/ASI that can perform any job in bondage/slavery. Seems like human exceptionalism/hubris at its finest.
by vikingerik | 2025-08-07 15:32:30+00:00
Note that the "Earth-sized" condition in there is doing some heavy lifting. Earth is a factor of 40x more massive than the largest moon in our solar system. A body needs to be fairly close to Earth's mass to have enough gravity to retain liquid water on its surface. Not that it couldn't happen, but we currently don't have any known precedent for a moon that large.
by jayd16 | 2025-08-07 15:32:46+00:00
I'm curious to see the bubble burst. I personally don't think it will be anything like the dotcom era.

The benefits have just not been that wide ranging to the average person. Maybe I'm wrong but, I don't AI hype as a cornerstone of US jobs, so there's no jobs to suddenly dry up. The big companies are still flush with cash on hand, aren't they?

If/when the fad dies I'd think it would die with a wimper.
by wonderwonder | 2025-08-07 15:33:07+00:00
They have these in the rural parts of Kansas and Missouri. My mom has a country vet that she gets medication for her animals from and the vet just has a box in front of his farm where he puts the medication for his various patients after doing a phone consult. Patients take the medication and leave cash. I was stunned when I saw it the first time and realized that there really is another way to live.
by toomuchtodo | 2025-08-07 15:33:08+00:00
Re-allocating away from US economic exposure is somewhat straightforward. VXUS vs VTI/ITOT, international bond funds (BNDX) vs US bond funds (BND), etc. In my opinion, the harder part is the actual infra you need for value and securities ownership: your brokerage and your bank. As a US citizen, it is a challenge to find a financial services firm outside the US who is going to be willing to custodian and manage securities and other investment assets for you without you being a bona fide resident of their jurisdiction (if you're wealthy enough, this is of course not an issue). Am I at the point where I would consider moving my assets to an entity outside of US control and perhaps acquire hard assets outside the US (real estate, physical gold, etc)? Not yet, but we are getting there slowly, and it is better to have a plan and not need it than to need a plan and not have it.