MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by toast0 | 2025-08-07 20:36:14+00:00
I would assume that logic is applied.

Exit taxes are generally applied as if the taxpayer sold all capital assets on the day of leaving.

At least in the US taxation regime (I'm unfamiliar with others), family cars don't qualify for a capital loss, and rarely appreciate. Clothing would be similar.

But it doesn't seem unreasonable that a country should want to be paid tax on unrealized gains as you're leaving. It would probably be more fair to wait until the gains were realized and then apportion the gains among the countries of residence, but if you're leaving, it's going to be hard to compel your participation later, so it makes more sense to do it as you're leaving.
by jononor | 2025-08-07 20:36:31+00:00
No the preferred way of making modifications is the weights _together_ with training (or fine tuning) scripts, and the entire evaluation pipeline to measure performance. And the data required to support all of this.

When someone joins your data science team your would give them all this code and data. Not just the weights and say - the weights are the source, modify that to improve the model, I look forward to see your MR next week.

EDIT: Heck, sometimes the way to make improvements (modifications) is just to improve the data, and not touch the training code at all. It is often one of the most powerful ways. You still need training code though, and evaluation to measure the impact.
by kvdveer | 2025-08-07 20:36:57+00:00
So far, the average US workforce seems to be ok with working conditions that most Europeans would consider reasons to riot. So far I've not observed substantial riots in the news.

Apparently the threshold for low pay and poor treatment among non-knowledge-workers is quite low. I'm assuming the same is going to be true for knowledge workers once they can be replaced an mass.
by dafty4 | 2025-08-07 20:37:55+00:00
*

1 point by dafty4 0 minutes ago | next | edit | delete [–]

@dang, why was this related post flagged (neither posted nor flagged by me, but of interest since RSS feeds are delayed in posting "live" news updates (e.g., BBC RSS is a delayed version of BBC-Live)):

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44824487

?
by ndriscoll | 2025-08-07 20:38:03+00:00
Why would e.g. saving after each keypress be janky from the UI perspective? These days disks can complete a write in 20 us. If you're typing at 0.1 seconds/character, you're going 5,000 times slower than the computer is capable of. If you have a 60 Hz monitor, it can block saving your work every frame and still be 99.9% idle. Even if you're making network requests each time, if the request finishes in 20 ms, you're still done 80 ms before the user presses the next button.
by Orbital_Armada | 2025-08-07 20:38:10+00:00
Although the idea of a "Dark Age" is mostly debunked these days, the slow unraveling of the Western Roman Empire led to a real and sustained change in material conditions. Notably, population density and urbanization both decreased, along with the labor specialization that accompanies them. I'd expect most 'inventions' to happen when and where people have the most hands on time to make them! (I can't really speak to Indian and Chinese civilizations, but they have also had integration and disintegration periods)
by grafmax | 2025-08-07 20:38:19+00:00
My point with these examples is not that they represent the current investor market, but to provide straightforward examples of how factors other than supply can benefit an investors (since it seemed that this point was hard for us to get on the same page about). Instead my actual argument is that investors don’t need monopolies, just pricing power, which is what an inelastic market gives them.

The 19% stat & the mom-and-pop claim you are referring to is actually misleading for our discussion.

> This study included properties for short-term or long-term rentals, second homes, and vacation retreats but did not follow condos or build-to-rent single-family-home projects.

So it only refers to a subset of the housing market. For a better idea of the pricing power investors have we need to include other kinds of rentals. Also from the article:

> Census Bureau stats show 45% of households live in a place they don’t own, the third-highest share of tenants nationally.

The vast majority of that 45% is multifamily housing, which is typically owned by institutions.

This shows a broader picture of the housing market in California. There is huge institutional ownership of housing. It’s far from implausible that these investors lack pricing power.
by OtherShrezzing | 2025-08-07 20:38:19+00:00
I rewrote a 4 page document from first to third person a couple of weeks back. I gave Claude Sonnet 4 the document after editing, so it was entirely written in the third person. I asked it to review & highlight places where it was still in the first person.

>Looking through the document, I can identify several instances where it's written in the first person:

And it went on to show a series of "they/them" statements. I asked it to clarify if "they" is "first person" and it responded

>No, "they" is not first person - it's third person. I made an error in my analysis. First person would be: I, we, me, us, our, my. Second person would be: you, your. Third person would be: he, she, it, they, them, their. Looking back at the document more carefully, it appears to be written entirely in third person.

Even the good models are still failing at real-world use cases which should be right in their wheelhouse.
by romanmokie | 2025-08-07 20:39:14+00:00
Hey everyone, just wanted to share my experience not trying to promote anything.

I’m a developer running a few automated YouTube channels with AI-generated content. Last year, they brought in over $50k. I started out using ElevenLabs for voice generation, but the cost quickly became unsustainable.

So, I decided to build my own TTS with voice quality as close as possible to ElevenLabs. My version costs me about $0.01 per minute of audio, compared to roughly $0.11 with ElevenLabs.

Two weeks ago, I made the platform public. It offers 3 plans:

Free — 216,000 characters every 24 hours

$5 — comes with $5 in credits + $5 bonus

$499 one-time — unlimited usage, no future payments

Results after 2 weeks:

10,000+ users

700+ users paid the $5 plan

0 users bought the $499 plan

What do you think? Any feedback or ideas?
by StrangeDoctor | 2025-08-07 20:40:04+00:00
I bought a threadripper pro system out of desperation, trying to get secondhand PCIe 80G A100s to run locally. The huge rebar allocations confused/crashed every Intel/AMD system I had access to.

I think the Xeon systems should have worked and that it was actually a motherboard bios issue, but I had seen a photo of it running in a threadripper and prayed I wasn’t digging an even deeper hole.
by ssalka | 2025-08-07 20:40:24+00:00
Something interesting... the first 10 seconds or so of the "Death Growl" example[1] is basically copied verbatim from "Ov Fire And The Void" by Behemoth.

More specifically, I think the part that seems copied is at 2:13 of the original[2], as it leads into a solo-ish bit which in the AI version sounds similar still, but goes on to do its own thing:

[1] https://map-yue.github.io/music/moon.death_metal.mp3

[2] https://youtu.be/vAmnsKKrt9w?t=133
by danabramov | 2025-08-07 20:40:34+00:00
Note Bluesky is architected to be downstream of PDS (personal data servers) which any user can switch to another provider, and the Bluesky app server acts as an aggregator (but anyone else can build their own aggregators — and people already have). So as Natalie notes in the post, you don’t even “have to” use the Bluesky app API to access the posts. You can get them from a third-party app server (“app view”) or even have your own. They’re all aggregating from the same data source.
by kbolino | 2025-08-07 20:40:50+00:00
Right, but peppering was not part of my comment. You can't always pepper, and there are different ways to do it. It's (mostly) orthogonal to the matter.

You do not have to do any transformations on the input when using Argon2, while you must transform the input before using bcrypt. This was, again, an unnecessary and dangerous (careless) design choice.
by thimabi | 2025-08-07 20:40:58+00:00
I personally hated this decision.

Of course, I know that having a line-up of tons of models is quite confusing. Yet I also believe users on the paid plan deserve more options.

As a paying user, I liked the ability to set which models to use each time, in particular switching between o4-mini and o4-mini-high.

Now they’ve deprecated this feature and I’m stuck with their base GPT-5 model or GPT-5 Thinking, which seems akin to o3 and thus has much smaller usage limits. Only God knows whether their routing will work as well as my previous system for selecting models.
by Timwi | 2025-08-07 20:41:26+00:00
I have a theory that what we need to reduce conflict in the future is not more speed of communication but more fidelity. At present we can only communicate in spoken or written human language, and this language is not just imprecise and ambiguous, but also untrustworthy (easy to lie with).

If you imagine for just a second a future technology that can transmit genuine opinion, intention and feeling in a way that is hard to fake and therefore easy to trust, it should be easy to see how wars could be averted. So any technology that's even a small step in that direction would probably help.
by mystraline | 2025-08-07 20:41:43+00:00
Its also illegal to report hospitals that post PHI (protected health information) over POCSAG or FLEX - pager networks. Of course, theres no encryption or anything. The encoding is plain text.

Yes, it is also illegal to post PHI over pagers, due to HIPAA addendum in 2016.

But 1986 ECPA law forbids decoding pager messages unless they were intended for you.
by gosub100 | 2025-08-07 20:41:52+00:00
exactly, you worship an ideology. That's my point. The claim that saving government funds could actually help fund research (or have other positive effects) is a foregone conclusion. So you close your mind to the possibility because it would force you to agree with Trump on something, but your ideology (not unlike a militant islamic jihadist) has already prescribed you to declare "that side" as the enemy. That's why I said in another comment on this thread, that you (liberals) will deny any evidence that doesn't support your claim. And seeing how badly I was downvoted on my parent comment, it's clear they do NOT want to be forced to admit this about their tribe. It's a religion. you may not have a church or a leadership structure, but you believe what your tribe says, on faith. and most of you are atheists, so it jibs with the theory that you replaced the love-of-god (from your previous generations, where statistically your ancestors were religious) with love-of-government. That theory fits tighter than a glove to explain the turn-your-brain-off-and-believe state of modern leftism. Especially in a forum such as this, where the content is otherwise much more intellectual.
by ModernMech | 2025-08-07 20:42:25+00:00
Imagine you're super rich and you view everyone else as a mindless NPC who can be replaced by AI and robots. If you believe that to be true, then it should also be true that once you have AI and robots, you can get rid of most everyone else, and have the AI robots support you.

You can be the king. The people you let live will be your vassals. And the AI robots will be your peasant slave army. You won't have to sell anything to anyone because they will pay you tribute to be allowed to live. You don't sell to them, you tax them and take their output. It's kind of like being a CEO but the power dynamic is mainlined so it hits stronger.
by weego | 2025-08-07 20:42:47+00:00
I'm still stuck at the bit where just throwing more and more data to make a very complex encyclopedia with an interesting search interface that tricks us into believing it's human-like gets us to AGI when we have no examples and thus no evidence or understanding of where the GI part comes from.

It's all just hyperbole to attract investment and shareholder value and the people peddling the idea of AGI as a tangible possibility are charlatans whose goals are not aligned with whatever people are convincing themselves are the goals.

Thr fact that so many engineers have fallen for it so completely is stunning to me and speaks volumes on the underlying health of our industry.
by Waterluvian | 2025-08-07 20:42:52+00:00
So if I don’t use it for six months I’ve still paid for six months. If I close my account and they send that money back to me, yeah that’s probably fine.

The thing I’m mainly on about is the UX of not having to babysit another subscription. I once had a newsgroups sub that was exactly like this and it was amazing. You’d say “I want to spend at most X” and it would just ramp up towards X tier as needed.
by mejutoco | 2025-08-07 20:43:04+00:00
The key is if you consider weights source code. I do not think this is a common interpretation.

> The labs themselves modify models the same as you are allowed to by the license

Do the labs do not use source code?

It is a bit like arguing that releasing a binary executable is releasing the source code. One could claim developers modify the binary the same as you are allowed to.
by caconym_ | 2025-08-07 20:43:04+00:00
And yet I have vivid memories of many situations that weren't dangerous in the slightest, and essentially verbatim recall of a lot of useless information e.g. quotes from my favorite books and movies.

I am not sure exactly what point you're trying to make, but I do think it's reductive at best to describe memory as a tool for avoiding/escaping danger, and misguided to evaluate it in the frame of verbatim recall of large volumes of information.
by ori_b | 2025-08-07 20:43:23+00:00
Yeah, so if you want me to trust them, the harmful parts need to get removed from specs used in public contexts.

I would love to use public key cryptography to authenticate with websites, but enabling remote attestation is unacceptable. And pinky swears that attestation won't be used aren't good enough. I've seen enough promises broken. It needs to be systematic, by spec.

Passwords suck. It's depressing that otherwise good alternatives carry poisonous baggage.

If you make something possible, it will be used.
by fragmede | 2025-08-07 20:43:32+00:00
We don't have a rigorous definition for AGI, so talking about whether or not we've achieved it, or what it means if we have, seems kind of pointless. If I can tell an AI to find me something to do next weekend and it goes off and does a web search and it gives me a list of options and it'll buy tickets for me, does it matter if it meets some ill-defined bar of AGI, as long as I'm willing to pay for it?
by wewewedxfgdf | 2025-08-07 20:44:01+00:00
Tried it on a tough problem.

GPT-5 solved the problem - which Gemini failed to solve - then failed 6 times in a row to write the code to fix it.

I then gave ChatGPT-5's problem analysis to Google Gemini and it immediately implemented the correct fix.

The lesson - ChatGPT is good at analysis and code reviews, not so good at coding.
Ask HN: Source-available license with political stipulations?
by tastyface | 2025-08-07 20:44:14+00:00
Hi HN! I have friends in a country that has an ascendant religious-regressive party that threatens to strip away their rights, if not their freedom altogether. They feel like they’re at the end of their rope. There is no practical way for them to resist electorally anymore, but they’d like to throw as big a wrench in the works as they are able with the limited power that they have. I realize this no longer qualifies as open source or free software; but is there a license in use today that has political stipulations, e.g. financial supporters of X are prohibited from using this software? Thanks.

Similar past (unsuccessful) discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13250450

By the way, I do not wish to turn this question into a political flame war. I also don’t think it’s unprecedented: some of the more popular licenses in use today are specifically intended as political wedges (GPL). And see also the JSON “use for good, not for evil” license.

On a more personal note, I’d like to use a similar license that prohibits military or military-adjacent use.
Show HN: GPT-5 available for free on Gensee
by yiyingzhang | 2025-08-07 20:44:17+00:00
TL;DR: we just made GPT-5 available for free on Gensee, a developer-oriented AI Agent optimization and deployment platform: https://platform.gensee.ai/

This is a crazy week with a bunch of model releases: gpt-oss, Claude-Opus-4.1, and now today's GPT-5. It may feel impossible for agent developers to keep up, with all the manual migrating, re-testing, and analyzing.

We built Gensee to solve exactly this problem. Gensee lets you see the immediate impact of a new model on your already built agents and workflows. Here’s how it works:

- Instant Model Swapping: Have an agent running on GPT-4o? With one click, you can clone it and swap the underlying model to GPT-5 family. No code changes, no re-deploying.

- Automated A/B Testing & Analysis: Run your test cases against both versions of your agent simultaneously. Gensee gives you a side-by-side comparison of outputs, latency, and cost, so you can immediately see if GPT-5 improves quality or breaks your existing prompts and tool functions.

- Smart Routing for Optimization: Gensee automatically selects the best combination of models for any given task in your agent to optimize for quality, cost, or speed.

- Pre-built Agents: You can also grab one of our pre-built agents and immediately test it across the entire spectrum of new models to see how they compare.

The goal is to eliminate the engineering overhead of model evaluation so you can spend your time building, not just updating.

We'd love for you to try it out and give us feedback, especially if you have an existing project you want to benchmark against GPT-5.

Join our Discord: https://discord.gg/qQr6SVW4
by hinkley | 2025-08-07 20:44:30+00:00
I believe open source is approximately an order of magnitude larger than it would be if developers controlled their own purchasing. What FOSS introduced was the ability to use software without someone with a little power saying no, you can’t, because we won’t pay for it.

Jetbrains threaded this needle for years by having professional licenses tied to an individual with clauses for time and location shifting. So you could use their software at home, drive to work and also use the same license there.

And they priced it at around the cost of three tech books per year, which it is at least that useful for productivity. I suspect we would be in better shape now if others had copied their model. Rather than the (defunct) Microsoft model of ignoring home piracy and demanding commercial licenses from any company large enough to make it economical to fire off a cease and desist to them and demand back pay.
by tuckerman | 2025-08-07 20:44:39+00:00
I mostly agree with your assessment of what we should/shouldn't call open source for models but there is enough grey area to make the other side a valid position and not worthy of being dismissed so easily. I think there is a fine line between model weights and, say, bytecode for an interpreter and I think if you released bytecode dumps under any license it would be called out.

I also believe the four freedoms are violated to some extent (at least in spirit) by just releasing the weights and for some that might be enough to call something not open source. Your "freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it do what you wish" is somewhat infringed by not having the training data. Additionally, gpt-oss added a (admittedly very minimal) usage policy that somewhat infringes on the first freedom, i.e. "the freedom to run the program as you wish, for any purpose".
by taylodl | 2025-08-07 20:44:40+00:00
Most companies would dream to be "on the ropes" the way Intel is. Why is that?

1. Intel Foundry generated $17.5B in revenue in 2024. Intel's chipmaking abilities are on the path to outproduce both TSMC and Samsung. Microsoft is purportedly going to use Intel Foundry to produce their ARM chips.

2. Intel has over 214,000 patents globally and Intel has been aggressively monetizing those patents - to the tune of billions of dollars.

Those are some problems to have!

What's missing of course is chip design, but who cares? Everybody and his brother are designing chips these days. The issue is they can't manufacture them and building a foundry is capital-intensive: billions of dollars capital-intensive. Intel is investing and expanding in that area. Their future is fabbing chips - and they're making billions of dollars in annual revenue doing so.
by breuleux | 2025-08-07 20:44:45+00:00
> These reduction to absurdity arguments about the temperature of the earth assume we're not going to space. I don't understand why you reject this idea outright.

Most people just want to stay home, they don't want to go anywhere, let alone space. Regardless of whether some humans or manmade probes go to space, inhabited regions need their growth to be checked in order to maintain a stable, long-term steady state, lest we want to keep shipping billions and billions of people from the center to ever-farther reaches of the galaxy (a logistical and humanitarian nightmare).
by fab23 | 2025-08-07 20:44:54+00:00
He has given his AWS account out of hands.

I have read both his article in full. As I see it the issue is that he has given his account out of his own hands. But I guess he did not understand the consequences of this.

He put his own AWS account as a member into another companies "AWS Organizations" (https://docs.aws.amazon.com/organizations/), so they could pay his bills. As I understand if the so called Management Account gets deleted (reason may not matter), this will also delete all the member accounts, probably as they don't have any payment setup active any more. A good overview gives "Terminology and concepts for AWS Organizations"(https://docs.aws.amazon.com/organizations/latest/userguide/o...).

I had done this setup in the company I worked for. We "merged" two independent accounts (one from the company we acquired) as members into an AWS Organization with consolidated billing below a newly created management account. We let our AWS account manager take care of transferring the payment settings (we already payed with invoice and bank transfer) from our own (now only a member) account into the (newly) management account. With this we had only one invoice per month and everything is legally owned by the owner company. With this also some discounts or savings plans can be used from all accounts. Over the years we also created several new member accounts out of the management account, which is easy and does not need the setup of any payment information at all.
by vl | 2025-08-07 20:45:02+00:00
And also it requires extraordinary navigation precision. These launches are going to be spread in time, which means that they don't happen from the same place (all celestial bodies move relative to each other). Which in turn means that when you approach the pellet there is going to be perpendicular velocity component.

Even without taking this into account all systems are going to need active guidance - there is no way you do single burn and end up in the same place in the same time few light years away.

The best schema is probably launching all fuels containers that should be picked up for retro burn at the same time with much higher acceleration (orbital rail gun and then a burner), and with very slightly smaller final speed.

Then on the main craft you do short retro burn to match speed to fuels containers, attach them and do full retro burn for orbital insertion.

Benefit of this schema is that you don't need to accelerate everything slowly using main engine, so your original booster can be way smaller. (Energy-wise it only works if you have stationary means to accelerate high-g-capable payloads, i.e. orbital railgun, in this case you don't have to accelerate extra fuel required for initial burn)