MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by gethly | 2025-08-06 07:37:41+00:00
The project i am working on right now: gethly.com - a hosting and sales platform for digital content creators(paywall, similar to patreon). It is done, I am just continuing working on it(liked adding mobile UI today/tomorrow or soon supporting content hosted elsewhere). I first touched html 25 years ago, so I have been in the programming and internet "game" for quite some time and have seen how the internet has changed. And so I do not think I will be doing any more projects. I think I have reached the end of my road and this is it for me as I do not see internet being business-viable any longer. Certainly not like it used to be in the golden days of 2000s and 2010s, before Facebook and Tinder. That is where it all started to go to shit(not saying it is related, just the time frame).
by rapnie | 2025-08-06 07:38:16+00:00
Problem 3 has another effect. There's a whole industry of conspiracy theorists who will point to that paper to give credence to their own BS, while they create Youtube videos and wild pop-sci articles to influence the general public on whatever their agenda is.

I have a friend who recently has 'taken an interest in science' and is now passing Youtube videos all of the time that are total crap, but make reference to 'scientific' papers. I 'learned' how earth is already doomed because Betelgeuse went supernova, and that there are deep shafts below the pyramid of Gizeh that only an alien race could have dug. Stuff like that.

Net outcome where it comes to science may be that this helps erode people's trust in science.
by lamontcg | 2025-08-06 07:40:17+00:00
The virus didn't mutate into less aggressive strains, everyone got T-cells through vaccination or infection, which made subsequent infection less severe.

Which is borne out through the higher death rate in Republicans who didn't get vaccinated, compared to Democrats who did.

And we had situations like Hong Kong which got absolutely hammered by Omicron, even though that strain was supposedly "less severe", because of the low levels of prior infection and vaccination when Omicron hit there.
by perching_aix | 2025-08-06 07:41:17+00:00
> Now he gets to live out the rest of his life fighting cravings, telling himself he's not allowed to enjoy food. How utterly sad.

I don't understand what drives people to write such intentionally asinine comments. Do you get off on hurting others or something?

There were quite a few foods I let go of when I decided to drop weight. Can't say I miss them much, certainly not to the extent to say something like "wow, i can't enjoy food anymore" or "now i'm fighting cravings all the time!!". And I legitimately have no interest in reintegrating them into my diet.

Turns out, some kinds of food are just dumb to consume, and my enjoyment of them is legitimately secondary. To the extent that discovering how harmful they were, they became inherently less enjoyable, and it was well possible for the habits and the cravings to subside over time. You don't try to go hit a balance with crack addiction, why would you try to hit a balance consuming 5 bazillion calorie rubbish?

Cutting out certain classes of foods from one's diet is absolutely possible and there's nothing necessarily wrong with it.
by astrange | 2025-08-06 07:41:55+00:00
Personally I've found it's very good at writing support tools / shell scripts. I mostly use it to parse the output of other tools that don't have machine-readable output yet.

Claude Code (which is apparently the best in general) isn't very good at reviewing existing large projects IME, because it doesn't want to load a lot of text into its context. If you ask it to review an existing project it'll search for keywords instead of just loading an entire file.

That and it really wants to please you, so if you imply you own a project it'll be a lot more positive than it may deserve.
by tripzilch | 2025-08-06 07:42:06+00:00
Oof ... to call other people's decades of research into directed machine learning "a colossal waste of researcher's time" is indeed a rather toxic point of view unsurprisingly causing a bitter reaction in scientists/researchers.

Even if his broader point might be valid (about the most fruitful directions in ML), calling something a "bitter lesson" while insulting a whole field of science is ... something.

Also as someone involved in early RL, he should know better.
by maxglute | 2025-08-06 07:42:22+00:00
My comment was more specific to the article, i.e. counter "SMALL" UAS / tactical / infantry battlefield scale.

Pacific theater / operation/strategic scale, IMO bigger drones and traditional loitering munitions kind of just blend together. A shaheed is just a poor man's cruise missile. Iran didn't have #s or ability to coordinate / mass #s for any strategic effect. I think Israel has like magazine depth of ~800 interceptors for low tier / subsonic threats and 1000s in stockpile. Iran was (E: *NOT) capable of saturating that.

Depending on relative size / force balance, can still drag on war of attrition after factories turn with sufficient stockpiles. I'm kind of thinking nation state actors, the hedge is really storing a few 10-100,000 loitering munition tier drones in tunnels to ensure some sort of conventional MAD with neighbours. But really that's for... competent / connected nation state actors who has backup ISR, i.e. piggy off US/ eventually PRC global ISR for targeting. I imagine a resourced nation can build out shaheed tier manufacturing underground.

Incidentally, we had news earlier this year that PRC/Polytech is acquiring 1M, as in 1,000,000 loitering drones. Presuming shaheed tier (2000km sky moped) since Polytech has show shaheed clones in past. That's enough to easily saturate all defenses in first island chain even if US+co prepositions every piece of interception hardware ever made or plan to acquire in next 10+ years. That's strategic level shaheed spam.

My main takeaway is cheap loitering munition/drones can reasonable replace potentially short range fires (~2000km), if there's enough of them to casually bleed interceptors, AND if there's survivable theater level kill chain. Last part is really... what separates Ukraine, Iran... maybe Russia's current... hobbyist tier efforts. RU launching 500+ salvos are still trying to evade anti air, with many interceptions because they don't have ISR / killchain to eliminate antiair. It's easy to build a lot of shooters, it's hard to build out the sensors to hit important things. In a highend fight, at least one side (and possibly both) side is going has the ISR and magazine depth to ensure antiair becomes irrelevant and then it will be matter of munitions + concrete attrition math
by Ygg2 | 2025-08-06 07:42:46+00:00
> When and why has "stable" become synonymous with "unmaintained"?

Because the software ecosystem is not static.

People want your software to have more features, be more secure, and be more performant. So you and every one of your competitors are on an update treadmill. If you ARE standing (aka being stable) on the treadmill, you'll fall off.

If you are on the treadmill you are accumulating code, features, and bug fixes, until you either get too big to maintain or a faster competitor emerges, and people flock to it.

Solving this is just as easy as proving all your code is exactly as people wanted AND making sure people don't want anything more ever.
by avidiax | 2025-08-06 07:43:03+00:00
> Why not just connect two shitty models together and tell them to hallucinate to each other and skip the whole need to think about anything.

Western countries have better conditions than much of the world for a variety of reasons, but among them is education and culture.

Raising the next generation to outsource all thinking to AI and form a culture around influencing people 45 seconds at a time will destroy those prerequisites to our better lifestyle, and it will be downhill from there.

You might argue that the AI can be a mentor or can guide society appropriately. That's not wholly untrue, but if AI is "a bicycle for the mind", you still have to have the willingness and vision to go someplace with it. If you've never thought for yourself, never learned anything independently, I just don't see how people will avoid using AI to be "stupid faster".
by noduerme | 2025-08-06 07:43:08+00:00
I wish I could write all the business logic I write on an NES and never have to worry about requirements going bad. I guess the thing is, if you're writing anything on top of a network layer of any kind, eventually it's going to require patches unless you literally own all the wires and all the nodes in the network, like a secure power plant or some money clearing system in a bank that's been running the same COBOL since the 1960s. And since you're probably not writing code that directly interfaces with the network layer, you're going to be reliant on all the libraries that do, which in turn will be subject to change at the whims of breaking changes in language specs and stuff like that, which in turn are subject to security patches, etc.

In other words, if you need your software to live in the dirty world we live in, and not just in a pristine bubble, things are gonna rot.

Picking tools and libraries and languages that will rot less quickly however seems like a good idea. Which to me means not chaining myself to anything that hasn't been around for a decade at least.

I got royally screwed because 50-60% of my lifetime code output before 2018, and pretty much all the large libraries I had written, were in AS3. In a way, having so much code I would have maintained become forced abandonware was sort of liberating. But now, no more closed source and no more reliance on any libs I don't roll or branch and heavily modify myself.
by chromehearts | 2025-08-06 07:43:51+00:00
Nice post really . I like the meta conversation .

But in my opinion, it's a bit hypocritical to blame / be mad at LLMs etc. ruining the fun of coding because & then use AI generated profile pictures.

Why not draw your ghibli styled profile picture yourself? Why use an AI generated image? Doesn't using image generators ruin the fun of drawing? Vibe-drawing?

> He criticizes "Large tech companies and investors" for prioritizing "vibe coding," but not a specific company or individual.

You could rewrite this generated response to match artists point of view as well

lol
by Cthulhu_ | 2025-08-06 07:43:51+00:00
Those aren't artillery shells though, the explosive part of those weighs seven kilos, which is too much for the mass produced drones they use. As others mentioned, they use RPGs (3 kgs), mortar shells (~1.5 kgs), grenades (<1 kg), sometimes land mines, and specialized drone explosives for suicide drones.

I do like seeing the production facilities of these drones, how they simplified the designs but also made design decisions to deal with the scale, they're built so they can be stacked easily. Mind you, this is probably the case with these drone show drones too.
by woile | 2025-08-06 07:43:55+00:00
That's if people think obesity is just the individual's fault. In nutrition there's a distinction between psychology factors, the environment (called the obesogenic environment), genetics, social factors, etc. If you live in the US it must be really hard to avoid being overloaded by food, so I think the real angry group of people will be companies, not being able to force people to eat more, I welcome that!
by delroth | 2025-08-06 07:44:02+00:00
Which is not something that happened, even according to Max Howell himself: https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-logic-behind-Google-rejectin...

> I feel bad about my tweet, I don’t feel it was fair, and it fed the current era of outragism-driven-reading that is the modern Internet, and thus went viral, and for that I am truly sorry.
by ifwinterco | 2025-08-06 07:44:31+00:00
I don't know about how hard it is to manufacture GLP-1 agonists specifically, but there's an existing enormous grey/black market for peptides for bodybuilding.

It started in the 90s with synthetic GH and since then the number of research peptides has exploded, all of which are readily available on the grey market.

So all the infrastructure for producing and distributing peptides was already there before GLP-1s were a thing, which probably explains why it didn't take long
by csomar | 2025-08-06 07:44:41+00:00
In my opinion, lots of open source was developed as a sort of portfolio to get hired. From 2019 onward, my impression is that your open source projects (regardless of how much they are used) matters less and less and it’s about HR mysteriously picking you up in their process than anything else. I think, now, your open source portfolio matters exactly nothing in the decision to get hired.

I remember back in 2014-2019, it was hard and competitive to contribute to open source projects as they were tightly guarded. There are many projects that I use now in package.json that are looking for a maintainer. A complete 180 flip.

My guess is that real free open source will disappear in a few years and what will remain are open source projects monetized by some business somehow.

It’s a sad reality but that’s what the current people at the top have decided today.
by 3mr | 2025-08-06 07:45:01+00:00
Here is the quote above with additional context :-

"NASA’s Orbiting Carbon Observatory, 2 (OCO-2) provides the most complete dataset tracking the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂), the main driver of climate change. Since its launch (July 2014), OCO-2 measures sunlight reflected from Earth’s surface to infer the dry-air column-averaged CO2 mixing ratio and provides around 100,000 cloud-free observations.

However, the OCO-2 data as observed by the on-board instrument have large data gaps in coverage due to the narrow 10-km ground track and an inability to see through clouds and aerosols. To provide a gap-filled view of Earth’s carbon cycle and atmosphere NASA’s Global and Modeling Assimilation Office (GMAO) ingests OCO-2 retrievals every 6 hours with a modeling and assimilation technique and derives the Gridded Monthly OCO-2 Carbon Dioxide/OCO-2 GEOS Level 3 product."

According to your source, the satellite provides the most complete dataset.
by crinkly | 2025-08-06 07:45:21+00:00
So my daughter got sent home with some math questions. Thought they looked a bit dry but thought nothing further of it. I checked the answers for her which were all ok.

Couple of days later she comes home and tells me I was wrong about some of them which I know I was not. Apparently they self marked them as the teacher read the answers out. Decided to phone in and ask about the marking scheme which I was told I was wrong too and basically I should have done better at GCSE mathematics.

I relayed my mathematical credentials and immediately the tone changed. The discussion indicated that they’d generated the questions with CoPilot and then fed that back into CoPilot and generated the answer sheet which had two incorrect answers on it.

The teacher and department head in question defended their position until I threatened to feed them to the examination board and leadership team. The following of the tech was almost zealot level religious thinking which is not something I want to see in education.

I check all homework now carefully and there have been other issues since.
by worldsayshi | 2025-08-06 07:45:22+00:00
> They would just do it.

Telling your mind to do a thing is only ever easy in retrospect and when you find a "trick" that works for you. For some people that trick is getting clear feedback about glucose levels in your bloodstream. But any trick that works for one person might not work for the next. So it is good that there are many approaches.
by Arkhaine_kupo | 2025-08-06 07:45:55+00:00
Hot water disrupts marine life for one very very big problem.

Depending on the locatin of the hot water you can cause disruptions to water currents, the north atlantic waterway is being studied to how much global warming is affecting it.

If greenland melts, and the water doesnt get cold up there, then the mexico current to europe ends and England becomes colder than Canada.

If your AI model has a data center in the atlantic, it could be furthering that issue.

(Millions of animals are also dead)
by dgoldstein0 | 2025-08-06 07:46:13+00:00
So one effect I've seen over the last decade of working: if it never needs to change, and no one is adding features, then no one works on it. If no one works on it, and people quit / change teams / etc, eventually the team tasked with maintaining it doesn't know how it works. At which point they may not be suited to maintaining it anymore.

This effect gets accelerated when teams or individuals make their code more magical or even just more different than other code at the company, which makes it harder for new maintainers to step in. Add to this that not all code has all the test coverage and monitoring it should... It shouldn't be too surprising there's always some incentives to kill, change, or otherwise stop supporting what we shipped 5 years ago.
by anon_e-moose | 2025-08-06 07:46:15+00:00
> while one can't control the company's behavior, a person can control their own behavior. As such, it is perfectly reasonable to criticize them when they choose to act without integrity.

That leads to a society where people are punished and corporations are not, simply because they are too big to be criticised.

Much more often than people, large and publicly quoted corporations end up becoming inherently evil.

The total self-serving lies made by individuals will always be a drop in the ocean when compared to the self-serving lies of a single S&P500.

They're both wrong, but the real issue here is to start by criticizing and correcting the corporations, not the people. Once it feels like a drop in a glass of water, we can start thinking of criticizing the people.
by astrange | 2025-08-06 07:47:10+00:00
Compilers definitely don't have formal specs. Even CompCert mostly but doesn't entirely have them.

It can actually be worse when they do. Formalizing behavior means leaving out behavior that can't be formalized, which basically means if your language has undefined behavior then the handling of that will be maximally confusing, because your compiler can no longer have hacks for handling it in a way that "makes sense".
by watwut | 2025-08-06 07:47:29+00:00
> This article isn’t about AI acting as a medical device. It’s about it acting as a mental health practitioner.

Which makes it medical device.

> If you’re going to have it pass tests, those should be graduation requirements, clinical training, and licensing exams.

And obviously also loss of practice if they break ethical norms or if there is other issue with that.
by notanaverageman | 2025-08-06 07:48:11+00:00
Not that I regret it, but I found out that creating a community around an open source project is not like what you expect. I've been working on a tool for a very popular project for more than two years, adding features, refining it etc. since I had my time. Reading many comments on HN and Reddit on how people don't like current dominant tool or its alternatives, what features they expect etc. I thought I've got one that people would like to use.

I have open sourced it and shared it on a few places and got zero traction. Ok, I thought, I can talk about it here and there, so it would get more visibility. People don't like it much since I'm promoting my own tool. I posted a blog post about some technique on tool's website and people seemed to like it on Reddit. A few people wrote comments like "interesting" or "amazing" and I was happy for the first time. Then someone wrote that you should not make your friends/alt-accounts comment on your posts, it's cringe and that happiness went away.

I've been a lurker on social media nearly whole my life. Putting myself out there feels like an unpleasant experience. I'm still deciding whether to continue or just go back to lurking and keep my tool to myself.
by hhjinks | 2025-08-06 07:48:54+00:00
GTA VI's story mode won't be surpassed by a world model, but the fucking around and blowing things up part conceivably could, and that's how people are spending their time in GTA. I don't see a world model providing the framing needed to contextualize the mayhem, thereby making it fun, anytime soon myself, but down the line? Maybe.
by Cthulhu_ | 2025-08-06 07:48:55+00:00
Note that the one drone is not the other; when they talk about Russian mass drone attacks, they will refer to Shahed etc drones, which are autonomous, not unlike the WW2 V1 "drones".

But yeah, drone swarms with fewer operators will be, probably already is a thing. But what I've seen so far, they're just not very useful; drones look to be generally used on individual targets, if there's a bigger or more targets, they'll use something bigger like a HIMARS, glide bomb, or if it's closer by, an artillery strike.
by dragonwriter | 2025-08-06 07:49:10+00:00
> In fact it's worse than many local models that can do it, including e.g. QwQ-32b.

I'm not going to be surprised that a 20B 4/32 MoE model (3.6B parameters activated) is less capable at a particular problem category than a 32B dense model, and its quite possible for both to be SOTA, as state of the art at different scale (both parameter count and speed which scales with active resource needs) is going to have different capabilities. TANSTAAFL.
by thntk | 2025-08-06 07:49:29+00:00
The model architecture only uses and cites pre-2023 techniques from the GPT-2 and GPT-3 era. Probably they intentionally tried to use the most bare transformers architecture possible. Kudo to them to have found a clever way to play the open-weights model game, while hiding any architectural advancements used in their closed models, and also claim they have moats in data quality and training techniques.

They hide many things, but some speculated observations:

- Their 'mini' models must be smaller than 20B.

- Does the bitter lesson once again strike recent ideas in open models?

- Some architectural ideas cannot be stripped away even if they wanted to, e.g., MoEs, mixed sparse attention, RoPE, etc.
by KronisLV | 2025-08-06 07:49:34+00:00
I've used self-hosted GitLab a bunch at work, it's pretty good there still. In my opinion GitLab CI is also a solid offering, especially for the folks coming from something like Jenkins, doubly so when combined with Docker executors and mostly working with containers.

I used to run a GitLab instance for my own needs, however keeping up with the updates (especially across major versions) proved to be a bit too much and it was quite resource hungry.

My personal stack right now is Gitea + Drone CI + Nexus, though I might move over to Woodpecker CI in the future and also maybe look for alternatives to Nexus (it's also quite heavyweight and annoying to admin).
by latexr | 2025-08-06 07:49:39+00:00
I’d be curious to see the outcome of changing the license to a Fair Source License or explicitly “You are not allowed to use this software if you are Anthropic, otherwise MIT”. They could still use the current version, but for any in the future they’d be forced to fork it or be prepared to face yet another legal battle (I can imagine some lawyers already salivating at the thought).

It’s also curious the author is looking inside the app for proof their software is being used. If it’s MIT, mustn’t the license be included and available somewhere easier to verify?
by ifwinterco | 2025-08-06 07:49:44+00:00
At least in the UK, drugs are legal by default in the sense that a specific chemical has to be classified under the misuse of drugs act to be a "drug".

However, specific classes of drugs (synthetic cannabinoids and substituted phenylethylamines etc.) are banned in their entirety by designer drug legislation. This is to stop people producing stuff like mephedrone etc., because there's an almost endless potential for minor chemical substitutions while still retaining the effects.

AFAIK peptides are not covered by any of that legislation, so they are a grey area, hence why they get sold as "research chemicals" "not for human use" etc. Separately it's probably illegal to produce patented drugs like semaglutide through non-official channels, but that would be a civil/commercial matter, not a drugs offence per se