MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by yubblegum | 2025-08-06 15:51:03+00:00
The fact that the management of this forum, who are VCs, permitted such a mechanism is part of the "own it, HN" assertion. HN has baked in something like 'peter principle' into the forum. Karma Grifters who post articles that get them over the 500 points are then ala Peter Principle granted the right to 'grey out' actual thoughtful comments.

Are you telling the management of this outfit never looked into this phenomena?

How about ageism? Mr. Paul Graham and personality cult asserting that anyone over 20 something is no longer viable for leading edge tech work?

We used to call these VCs "vulture capitalists" in the 90s. We geeks were so right about so many things in the 90s: We were right about GPL. We were right about VCs. We were right about surveillance tech. We were right about outsourcing ...

But alas, "corpo-techbros" empowered by thoughtless forum software courtesy of Paul Graham and company got into this mess.
by takigon | 2025-08-06 15:51:29+00:00
"Too much thought into whether they could, and not enough thought on whether they should" This is so true. I can't even begin to fathom the implications of this.

A large aspect of the creation of this app was motivated by my curiosity about what the reading experience offered by an e-reader with AI functionality natively integrated into it. Another major reason was that I thought I would have to make it and use it to see if it was really necessary.
by jaredwiener | 2025-08-06 15:51:34+00:00
It should hopefully go without saying that as shocking as this is, this is not the legally binding version of the Constitution. Nor is it the only version hosted on a US Government website.

NARA's, for example, still seems complete: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcri...

So is the Senate's: https://www.senate.gov/about/origins-foundations/senate-and-...
by ActorNightly | 2025-08-06 15:51:37+00:00
>how inefficient the boundary crossing is

For 99.99% of the programs that people write, the modern M.2 NVME hard drives are plenty fast, and thats the laziest way to load data into a C extension or process.

Then there is unix pipes which are sufficiently fast.

Then there is shared memory, which basically involves no loading.

As with Python, all depends on the setup.
by foobiekr | 2025-08-06 15:51:43+00:00
Some of this has massively fallen away over the last thirty years. I spent a lot of time on Japanese linguistics, and the really formal tense usage was already falling away even in business context by the mid-1990s. I still find it fun to construct sentences that are practically gramnatical self-abasement but it's not common in actual spoken or written Japanese.
by brokencode | 2025-08-06 15:52:04+00:00
I don’t think these companies have a lot of power to increase prices due to the very strong competition. I think it’s more likely that they will become profitable by significantly cutting costs and capital expenditures in the long run.

Models are becoming more efficient. Lots of capacity is coming online, and will eventually meet the global needs. Hardware is getting better and with more competition, probably will become cheaper.
by simianparrot | 2025-08-06 15:52:11+00:00
They will then learn the bitter lesson that convincing the GenAI to create something that brings your vision to life is impossible. It's a real talent to even be able to define for yourself what your vision is, and then to have artists achieve it visually in any medium is a process of back and forth between people with their own interpretations evolving the idea into something even better and cohesive.

GenAI will never get there because it can't, by design. It can riff on what was, and it can please the prompter, but it cannot challenge anyone creatively. No current LLM's can, either. I'll eat my hat if this is wrong in ten years, but it won't be.

It will generate refined slop ad nauseam, and that will train people's brains into spotting said slop faster using less energy. And then it'll be shunned.
by benreesman | 2025-08-06 15:52:15+00:00
Sure. I'm experimenting like everyone else, but I mostly use gptel as the primary interaction surface and Claude Code for a range of refactorings and other "more than mechanical, less than creative" edits. Both of these are very (!!!) well complimented by magit, which is so good at AI supervision it seems designed for it, by a genius.

For Claude Code I'm rapidly switching anything I want "vibe coded" into Hadkell for code, Dhall for config, and check-heavy Nix for deploy. Between that and some property tests that I seed and then have Opus elaborate on, you can put Claude Code so restrictive that it just hits the compiler in a loop until useful code comes out. Its trapped: I hoist CLAUDE.md in from the Nix store so it physically can't edit out the brutal prompts around mocks and lies, and -Wall -Werror in GHC gives it nowhere to hide, all it can do is burn tokens and desperately Web Search tool until it gets it perfect ish or I cut off its money because this requires a real LLM minimum and likely a real programmer. If there's a property test welded into the type system it can't even fail to use a parameter: that's an error Claude.

I have a bunch of elisp in // hypermodern // emacs for things like OpenRouter integration and tool use, but frankly, stock gptel is so strong I always wonder if I'm getting my money's worth trying to tune it into the asymptote.

Happy to answer any more questions.
by simoncion | 2025-08-06 15:52:36+00:00
Because of this, I tend to structure my business communications as "Sentence or five that best conveys what I want from (or want to tell) the reader, followed by the required background and/or supporting information required to understand the problem being described, or justify the request being made.".

However, you can't do much of anything to deal with people who stop reading at the first sentence or question. Those folks are hopeless.
by KerrAvon | 2025-08-06 15:52:39+00:00
What do you mean we aren’t at McCarthyism yet? We have blown well past McCarthyism. The US is a bona fide fascist dictatorship RIGHT NOW. Anonymous state agents are kidnapping US citizens off the street for deportation to third world countries. This is wildly and transparently illegal, but there is nothing in place to enforce the law because they’ve corrupted the DOJ, which is supposed to enforce the law.

They haven’t destroyed every vestige of liberal democracy — the states can fight and there are still courtroom battles — but the fascists own the enforcement mechanisms for justice, and don’t feel bound by the outcomes. The guardrails are gone.

Do not harbor illusions that we’re going to return to normality in our lifetimes. It’s possible something new and better will take over once the Trump regime is somehow ended, but I doubt it; they’re trashing the place pretty thoroughly.
by kernc | 2025-08-06 15:53:06+00:00
Too personal to share, but maybe too personal and important to share even with the members of the cloudy cartel, i.e. the Providers. Is exactly why I wrote myba that does full contents and paths encryption before syncing with the lapsable remotes ...

https://kernc.github.io/myba/

Some things are better public. Some are not ...
by cosmic_cheese | 2025-08-06 15:53:25+00:00
Monopolies are bad regardless. It’s similar to dictators — even if you have a “good” one that works in the interest of the people, that can all come crashing down and turn to despotism in an instant.

In the case of the web, it’s also bad for any single company to have as much influence as Google has on web standards development. There’s simply too much conflict of interest at play. As a web engine developer they should have some amount of sway but if any party is to have disproportionate power it’d be better if it were an org like Mozilla that’s more likely to give issues like privacy and potential for abuse greater consideration.
by 9rx | 2025-08-06 15:53:47+00:00
> You think the Democratic White House, manipulated Republicans into Voting for Trump.

Yes, that is what he thinks. Did you not read the comment? It is, like, uh, right there...

He also explained his reasoning: If Trump didn't win the party race, a more compelling option (the so-called "50-year-old youngster") would have instead, which he claims would have guaranteed a Republican win. In other words, what he is saying that the White House was banking on Trump losing the presidency.
by ralferoo | 2025-08-06 15:53:52+00:00
A couple of missing steps:

2.5. OpenAI gains a lot more training data, most of which was supposed to be confidential

4.5. Previously confidential training data leaks on a simple query, OpenAI says there's nothing they can do.

4.6. Government can't not use OpenAI now so a new normal becomes established.
by TuringNYC | 2025-08-06 15:54:01+00:00
>> $200k is totally doable with $2M investment capital and a bit of disciplined options trading.

10% probably. Though with the higher-than-market rate, there would also be dispersion in the consistency of the return. I could see some lean years where no money is made. I could also see a decade where you are buying at ever-higher valuations rather than dollar-cost averaging -- thus you could see a lean decade following.

It all depends on how much consistency you want.
by nyrikki | 2025-08-06 15:54:18+00:00
The 200-100 times slower is a bit cherry picked, but use case does matter.

Typically from a user perspective, the initial starting time is either manageable or imperceptible in the cases of long running services, although there are other costs.

If you look at examples that make the above claim, they are almost always tiny toy programs where the cost of producing byte/machine code isn't easily amortized.

This quote from the post is an oversimplification too:

> But the program will then run into Amdahl's law, which says that the improvement for optimizing one part of the code is limited by the time spent in the now-optimized code

I am a huge fan of Amdahl's law, but also realize it is pessimistic and most realistic with parallelization.

It runs into serious issues when you are multiprocessing vs parallel processing due to preemption, etc .

Yes you still have the costs of abstractions etc...but in today's world, zero pages on AMD, 16k pages and a large number of mapped registers on arm, barrel shifters etc... make that much more complicated especially with C being forced into trampolines etc...

If you actually trace the CPU operations, the actual operations for 'math' are very similar.

That said modern compilers are a true wonder.

Interpreted language are often all that is necessary and sufficient. Especially when you have Internet, database and other aspects of the system that also restrict the benefits of the speedups due to...Amdahl's law.
by 827a | 2025-08-06 15:54:22+00:00
Of course, the big difference between The Feed and Bread & Circuses is: The feed is weaponized to be the perfect entertainment mechanism, which is well-indicated by how many hours a day the typical person spends scrolling it versus the maybe an hour a month a typical late-18th century french citizen would have spent at the circus.

No one is trying to prove anything, because these things can't be proven. All we can do is study history and study the present. These things remain true to my eyes:

1. Wealth inequality is an intrinsic fact of human society. There's vanishingly few societies anyone reading this would choose to live in which had significantly lower levels of wealth inequality. Part of that is because: There are vanishingly few societies which had exceedingly low levels of wealth inequality, period. Its human nature, and society always seems to converge at a scale expression of human nature, even if there are pockets of attempts to circumvent it which near-always internally fall to corruption or get out-competed (e.g. the USSR).

(I only say near-always because e.g. modern uncontacted amazonian/north sentinel island tribes likely have a pretty egalitarian society, and they haven't fallen yet. you could go live with them if you want to experience what that's like)

2. You're talking about managing wealth inequality on a social media site operated by a venture capital company. This behavior pattern generalizes to modern society: Desktop Linux exists, but people broadly prefer operating systems which enrich hyperwealthy oligarchs. Local markets exist, but Walmart and Costco reign supreme. Taylor Swift and Drake attract ten times the listeners of ten thousand indie artists combined. Human behavior patterns, even in extremely competitive and choice-heavy markets, tend to concentrate wealth.

3. None of that is to state that we live in a perfect or even good system. There may just exist the Least Bad. None of that is to state that we shouldn't make efforts to improve our system. Wealth inequality being an intrinsic fact of human society is not a blank check to aim for or even allow infinite wealth inequality.

4. Maybe technology could have evolved in a more egalitarian society; in other words, a society which does not exclusively and significantly compensate inventors for their inventions. There are some historical examples; technology development during the early USSR was quite impressive and significant. Of course, it barely lasted one human lifespan, and if you ever talk with anyone who lived in the USSR during the 70s and 80s its worth asking them if they feel they'd prefer to live under that system, or our current one.
by jjangkke | 2025-08-06 15:54:36+00:00
Surprised how little comment this post has, this is an insane improvement.

I've been using Electric SQL but Automerge 3.0 seems to be the holy grail combining local first approach to CRDT?

Wondering if I should ditch Electric SQL and switch to this instead. I'm just not sure what kind of hardware I need to run a sync server for Automerge and how many users reads/writes it can support.

ElectricSQL is pretty good too but its still not quite there and implementing local first means some features related to rollback are harder to apply.

I'm still very new to this overall but that 10x memory boost is welcome as I find with very large documents the lag used to be very noticeable.
by slowmovintarget | 2025-08-06 15:54:40+00:00
I thought this was just a goof too, then I went to look at the commentary. There are "explainers" for each part of each Article. In the Explainer contents for Article I, where there should be 10 sections, the truncation of the Explanatory articles begins at Article 1 Section 8 Clause 13 and continues through the end of Article I on the site. Clause 13 establishes the maintenance of the Navy.

This suggests that they were trying to do an overhaul of the contents and made a structural screw-up that caused this. Ironically, these pages are indexed in the search engines still. If you search for "USC Article 1 Section 8 Clause 13" you'll get link to the explainer page [1], and a 404 when you try to navigate to it.

Someone royally screwed up here.

[1] https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-1/section-8...

[2] https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/article-1/sec... for a working annotated site, though even it is mildly broken.
by bwfan123 | 2025-08-06 15:54:42+00:00
The issue here is that the deputy editor-in-chief of the journal is also an author of the paper. As such, the conflict of interest should have raised the bar to the acceptance of the paper.

Here is a business idea. Start a "Frontier Journal" published electronically as a pdf. Contact professors, grad students, etc for paper submissions. Publish their papers for a fee, say $100. The paper will buff their resumes and pad their egos. Send out proceedings as pdf to participants. Everybody profits including the environment. I have seen this scam play out.
by 16bytes | 2025-08-06 15:54:42+00:00
If you sell a physical thing, some percentage of them will have defects. That's just a fact of manufacturing.

It seems unfair to move to "not recommended" due to a single instance of a hardware failure, especially if the manufacturer made it right. And repair-ability is one of their core values!

At most this should've triggered a "this happened to me, keep an eye out if this seems to be a thing." note in the review instead of moving to not recommended.
by jmpman | 2025-08-06 15:55:09+00:00
>now on to the lowest cost per mile robotaxi Is this a serious comment?

Absolutely a serious comment and why Waymo will likely be unable to compete. Tesla is designing their fleet for the lowest cost per mile, and likely the real reason why they have pushed back on Lidar versus camera - humans can drive with binocular (some with just monocular) vision, why use Lidar as it’s more expensive.

If a Waymo car costs $100k and is good for 100k miles, then that’s $1/mile. Tesla’s robotaxi is likely designed for 500k miles at under $0.10/mile. Tesla’s robotaxi will be able to drive me for cheaper than I’ll be able to drive myself. Think of a cab company with scale enough to build their own cabs, optimizing for the lowest cost per mile, and with $0 labor costs. That’s going to be their huge win. And no, I’m not an Elon fan, but I do understand his business plan, and it’s brilliant. And no, I don’t think it’s going to displace personal cars. There’s too much burst demand during rush hour for a peak scaled fleet to be cost effective (I haven’t run the numbers, so even that slight may be incorrect). However I do expect to never have to drive myself once I hit retirement age, and I’ll probably not even own the vehicle. My hope is that there will be a fast follower, able to compete against Tesla, otherwise I’ll be paying Tesla $0.99/mile instead of $0.12/mile.
by cpursley | 2025-08-06 15:55:22+00:00
I'm more inclined to think it was follow the cloud's trajectory with pricing getting pushed down as these things become hot-swappable utilities (and they already are to some extent). Even more so with open models capable of running directly on our devices. If anything with OpenAI and Anthropic plus all the coder wrappers, I'm even wondering what their moats are with the open model and wrapper competition coming in hot.
by twp | 2025-08-06 15:55:29+00:00
It's not a question of share everything or share nothing - with https://chezmoi.io you can choose exactly what you want to share:

* You can keep your entire dotfile repo secret by using any private git hosting, including your own git hosting or a private GitHub repo.

* You can keep individual files secret by using age or gpg encryption. If you repo is public, this only reveals the existence of the file, not its contents.

* You can keep individual parts of your dotfiles secrets, e.g. API keys, by encrypting them or storing them in your password manager. All popular password managers are supported.

Disclaimer: I'm the author of chezmoi.
by ptaffs | 2025-08-06 15:55:48+00:00
And if the user deliberately or accidentally doesn't spend their money, or if the Cafe doesn't attribute spend to the right user, or even that owner begins to resent the further sliver of profit, there's incentive to game the system. Badge might ask users to upload receipt images for disputes, but that's an expensive business overhead. The problem is based on the problem that cafe staff can't or won't gently enforce the social contract that you pay if you take a table, and the proposed system is that cafe staff are doing exactly the same thing and the owner is paying Badge a commission. Might a user complain to the staff that they were "marked" unfairly? We live in a world where store owners add 3% to credit card transactions because of the loss to the Banks but would they want to return to the days of stores managing their own customer tab/lending?
by zamadatix | 2025-08-06 15:56:04+00:00
Backwards compatibility is given in HTML by the doctype. I think you might also really be talking to forwards compatibility in addition - "what I would write in an HTML 4 document will (almost) always work the same in an HTML 5 document".

I don't think what the author is talking about is necessarily against either. HTML5 can continue its evolutions while "HTML6" (or something completely separate) exists alongside the traditional DOM, like the <canvas> example they reference or like WASM exists alongside JS. From this perspective, the article is about why it's a worthwhile time to make the new thing rather than why the new thing won't also have baggage in 20 years or why we should just throw everything current out the window as part of supporting the new thing.
by eulers_secret | 2025-08-06 15:56:05+00:00
I wonder if this can work with OpenCode (Claude Code fork which allows for other model providers: https://github.com/sst/opencode)?

I really don't like being tied to a particular provider or model, switching models has been really helpful to get past blocks and save money (especially with Deepseek!).

And, of course, I need to use Github Copilot's Open AI-compatile API at work...
by Cipater | 2025-08-06 15:56:06+00:00
From the article:

>Silicon Valley’s militarization is in many ways a return to the region’s roots.

>Before the area was a tech epicenter, it was a bucolic land of fruit orchards. In the 1950s, the Defense Department began investing in tech companies in the region, aiming to compete with Russia’s technological advantages in the Cold War. That made the federal government the first major backer of Silicon Valley.

>The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, a division of the Department of Defense, later incubated technology — such as the internet — that became the basis for Silicon Valley’s largest companies. In 1998, the Stanford graduate students Sergey Brin and Larry Page received funding from Darpa and other government agencies to create Google.
by cosmic_cheese | 2025-08-06 15:56:34+00:00
The problem with forking Blink/Chromium is that in order to be able to counter Google, the organization maintaining the fork is going to need dev manpower on the order of Google’s to be able to keep up with upstream patches, which is prohibitively expensive for all but a handful of orgs (not to mention, skilled talent capable of working on web engines doesn’t grow on trees). Without that any fork that differs substantially from mainline is eventually doomed as the divergence grows and overwhelms the team.
by bgwalter | 2025-08-06 15:56:46+00:00
SV does not have the institutional knowledge, reporters on the ground or the kind of determination for thankless work that makes a newspaper great.

The NYT should do more investigative journalism, but it is better than nothing. SV pundits just recycle and comment on news stories that the mainstream press has reported.

SV outlets will never go after the "deep state" apart from performative complaining because they are in it and get the money from it.

I wish the NYT/WaPo were as good as in the 1980s in terms of investigative reporting, but that is what we have.
by jordanpg | 2025-08-06 15:56:57+00:00
https://bsky.app/profile/librarycongress.bsky.social/post/3l...

> It has been brought to our attention that some sections of Article 1 are missing from the Constitution Annotated (constitution.congress.gov) website. We’ve learned that this is due to a coding error. We have been working to correct this and expect it to be resolved soon.