MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by godelski | 2025-08-15 09:17:51+00:00
> these features will affect their bottom line. They just don't see value

That's the problem. These are useful features. Look around you, people are... using them. I got a ton of upvotes for my comment. I'm not saying that to brag, I'm saying that because it is evidence that these things are in demand.

The issue is that most of this "what has value" is just as made up as anything else. Most people don't even know what they want. They get features and then they know they want it, but often not before. So it is affecting their bottom line, but the problem is group think.
by windward | 2025-08-15 09:19:33+00:00
You can't just pile on more context, it has to be a brief distillation of the right context. Otherwise as it gets longer and longer, each point becomes less likely to be considered. Or,r worse, it gets considered in the negative. It feels at times like training a dog. You can't say "don't sit"!

It's understandably frustrating that the promised future ended up being humans having to work how machines want.
by TechRecruiting | 2025-08-15 09:20:22+00:00
We are currently looking for a skilled & passionate Senior Quality Assurance Engineer to become part of one of our SCAYLE Panel team.

Our Panel team is the heart of SCAYLE, driven by the passion to deliver and support a user interface for maintaining product, shop, customer and order data. As a Senior Quality Assurance Engineer, you will play the main role in elevating our product’s quality in terms of technical performance, usability and stability.

We are seeking an enthusiastic individual who thrives in a hands-on team environment that embraces change and is solution-oriented. If you are ready to make a significant impact in the tech industry and be part of a dynamic team, then we encourage you to apply and join us in shaping the future of SCAYLE.

What you will do:

- Design and deploy innovative features for the Sellers Center to enhance the online retail experience.

- Collaborate with product managers, UI/UX designers, and fellow engineers to brainstorm and create effective solutions.

- Utilize the SCAYLE platform to manage product and order information efficiently.

- Enhance application performance through strategic SQL Query optimizations.

- Engage in code reviews to uphold high standards of code quality and foster ongoing improvement.

- Offer technical support, and troubleshooting issues to ensure consistent service for users.

- Explore AI-supported features to streamline workflow processes.

Who you are:

- Minimum of 5 years of experience in quality assurance, testing, and debugging for large-scale backend projects

- Proficient in JavaScript/TypeScript with proven experience in automation testing using these languages

- Experience in both manual and automation testing, preferably with Cypress

- Strong ability to quickly understand complex technical systems

- Detail-oriented while maintaining a focus on the business value of software

- Familiarity with agile methodologies and a quality-focused mindset in agile environments

- Excellent communication skills with the ability to manage different stakeholders

- Fluent in spoken and written English

YOU ARE THE CORE OF SCAYLE.

We take responsibility for creating an inclusive and exceptional environment where all genders, nationalities, and ethnicities feel welcomed and accepted exactly as they are. We believe that a diverse workforce essentially contributes to the SCAYLE culture. In order to maintain talent and diversity, we emphasize the care for physical health, mental health, and overall well-being. Our values and work ethics essentially contribute to our brand mission: empower acceptance and shape an inclusive, fair, and circular fashion culture.

We are looking forward to receiving your application – preferably via our online application portal! Thus, we can ensure a faster process and for you it is very easy to upload your application documents. :-)
by DrScientist | 2025-08-15 09:20:33+00:00
Picking at tangential points while avoiding the main argument hmm....

Admit it - you misunderstood my original point and accused me of then changing the argument.

Bottom line - the original poster was implying there was no harm because simple copying doesn't create a loss. I was pointing out that a key test ( in considering copyright issues ) is whether such an action causing harm - and in this case there are many very good cases to be made about resulting loss of revenue.

Let's be clear, I think LLMs etc are a huge technical advance - I just think it's wrong to try and ignore the law because it get's in the way of large companies attempts to make money.
by wizzwizz4 | 2025-08-15 09:21:48+00:00
> Without a formal statement from the BBC or credible reporting confirming a ban, the claim remains unsubstantiated.

Good news! https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/statements/gaza-doctors-un...

> Yesterday it became apparent that we have reached the end of the road with these discussions. We have come to the conclusion that broadcasting this material risked creating a perception of partiality that would not meet the high standards that the public rightly expect of the BBC. Impartiality is a core principle of BBC News. It is one of the reasons that we are the world’s most trusted broadcaster.

Alternatively, credible reporting: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crenz9d3181o

> The production company's founder, Ben de Pear, said earlier this week the BBC had "utterly failed" and that journalists were "being stymied and silenced".

> Responding to De Pear's comments, a BBC spokesperson said the BBC "totally reject[s] this characterisation of our coverage".

> An open letter, which was also signed by cultural figures such as Dame Harriet Walter, Miriam Margolyes, Maxine Peake, Juliet Stevenson and Mike Leigh, said: "This is not editorial caution. It's political suppression."

Plenty of other UK news agencies have covered the story, too: it's really not hard to substantiate this one. Consider how many people read each HN comment, and then please put a bit of time into researching the things you say.
by danielrico | 2025-08-15 09:22:00+00:00
> When I save twenty hours of a client's money and my own time, by telling them that a new software feature they want would be unnecessary if they changed the order of questions their employees ask on the phone, I've done my job well.

I like to explain my work as "do whatever is needed to do as little work as possible".

Being by improving logs, improving architecture, updating logs, pushing responsibilities around or rejecting some features.
by Jlagreen | 2025-08-15 09:22:02+00:00
The console market is low margin because they seem to find someone ready to take low margin (e.g. AMD). Nvidia was in console market before but left it due to low margin. Nvidia only sells old low development chip with probably good margin to Nintendo. The chips in the Switch 2 are using node from 2020 and are super cheap in manufacturing and Nvidia had low efforts in developing them.

AMD however has to design new special APUs for Xbox and PS. Why do they do that? They could just decide to step away from the tender but they won't because they seem to be desperate for any business. Jensen was like that 20 years ago but he has learned that some business you simply step away from.
by _wire_ | 2025-08-15 09:22:58+00:00
This post, like too many posts here, is silly ephemera devoid of any context.

How about a link to a torrent of old 2600 magazines?

BTW--No one ever needs to post another link to the Mother of All Demos ever again!

If a nerd here needs a site project, why not make an AI powered XYZ of the Day that lets you choose a context, XYZ, and it aggregates lore about it and spits it up at regular intervals. Then future generations can set XYZ = history of user interfaces and be arbitrarily refreshed with Engelbart references without pretending it's news.

It's kind of sad to realize that over a year 100,000 posts will be made here and 5–10 of them will regurgitate Engelbart or Alan Kay, but none of them will introduce a new paradigm for human computer interaction.

Honestly, could the epic advance of transformer AI be any duller than its current form of reprising the chat game Adventure?

You're in a twisty maze of passages all alike. You find a slime mold. (burp) You find a blob of React code! (hic) There are 3 b's in blueberry. (barf) Here's a picture of a cat with a body that looks like a furry Taylor Swift.

--

♪ You're the generation that bought more shoes and you got what you deserved... ♪
by mrkeen | 2025-08-15 09:24:17+00:00
No idea how common it is. It's never been my main work language but I've been using it at work for prototyping/scripting/automation/analysis etc for at least ten years now.

It looks like what I've done is most similar to https://www.parsonsmatt.org/2018/03/22/three_layer_haskell_c...

And I think this was the post that proposed tagless-final over free-monads: https://markkarpov.com/post/free-monad-considered-harmful.ht...
by mastermage | 2025-08-15 09:24:22+00:00
I have recently had the experience of Labguage School in Japan and they also realy heavily lean into having just circle the correct parts or do somethign like insert correct Particle here.

While I have tremendous respect for the Japanese Language and people. The Japanese in all my exposure to it do not know how ot tech languages. Be it their own to people that do not know it or English to their own people.
by croon | 2025-08-15 09:26:18+00:00
Is "Kavanaugh"ing someone to direct the FBI not to investigate or interview witnesses?

> Wray: "I apologize in advance that it has been frustrating for you. We have tried to be clear about our process. So when it comes to the tip line, we wanted to make sure that the White House had all the information we have.[180] So when the hundreds of calls started coming in, we gathered those up, reviewed them, and provided them to the White House."

> Whitehouse asked: "Without investigation?" After a long pause, Wray answered, "We reviewed them and then provided them to..." Whitehouse interjected: "You reviewed them for purposes of separating them from tip-line traffic, but did not further investigate the ones that related to Kavanaugh, correct?"[180] Wray confirmed that process. Whitehouse asked, "Is it also true that, in that supplemental B.I. (background investigation), the FBI took direction from the White House as to whom the FBI would question, and even what questions the FBI could ask?"[180] Wray confirmed that process.[180]

> Kavanaugh had Eighty-three ethics complaints brought against him regarding his behavior during those Supreme Court confirmation hearings. Chief Justice John Roberts appointed a special federal panel of judges to investigate them. In December 2018, the panel dismissed all the complaints, calling them "serious" but deciding that lower court judges are without any authority to investigate Supreme Court appointees.[181]

> In October 2024, Whitehouse published a final report supporting the view that the supplemental investigation was heavily curtailed by the Trump administration. [182]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brett_Kavanaugh_Supreme_Court_...
by zvr | 2025-08-15 09:26:56+00:00
An important lesson to learn is the way X11 does copy/paste (hint: it doesn't).

You select (typically via the mouse) something on the screen. The client (the software that handles this, e.g.terminal emulator, browser, office editing suite) declares ownership on a "selection". There are at least 3 of them: PRIMARY, SECONDARY, and CLIPBOARD.

Nothing gets copied!

When you go to some other client (or even the same) and do a "paste", a request is sent to the first client (the selection owner), "please give me the content". The second client gets the content and does whatever it wants with it, typically inserting it somewhere.

Contrast this way of operation to what other systems (like Windows and Mac) do: the content is copied to a central place, and then copied out to be "pasted". If one wants this behavior in X11, one needs to run something like a "clipboard manager" which can trivially implement this. I must admit, when using Windows, instead of Ctrl-V for pasting, I have completely switched to Windows-V, which gives you at least a history of the copied content.

Going further, on X11, the additional wonderful part is that there are also content-negotiation primitives built-in in this exchange!

So it could be the case that you select some formatted text in your browser, you want to paste it in your text editor (e.g. gvim), the editor asks ("give me the content, in Markdown (or HTML) format") and this is what gets transferred and eventually inserted. Or, if you select an image, you can paste the SVG text that generated it.

I have no idea what Wayland does, but this is another functionality that is extremely helpful and will be missed if not available, when/if X11 is replaced.
by JimDabell | 2025-08-15 09:27:01+00:00
I have a similar workflow with jj.

jj will start recording all of your changes as a real commit that it constantly rewrites as you edit files. You can write the log message for it up front or later. Think of it as an index that every change automatically gets staged to, except it’s just a commit, so instead of two concepts that work differently, you just have one. And you get the benefits of real commits, so for instance you can’t accidentally lose anything you staged that isn’t committed.

When you would create a branch and then stage changes with Git, what you would do in jj is split. The changes you don’t pick end up as the next auto-updating commit, and the changes you do pick use the log message you already set when you were working on them. So if you’ve got a bunch of changes you want to record as a series of commits, you just split however many times you want.

You don’t have to think about branching while you are doing this. The HEAD of master doesn’t automatically move when you are making these changes, so the effect is that you’re working on an anonymous branch already without having to create one. You can give it a name whenever you want by setting a bookmark. Or if you decide that the changes you make need to go into two branches, then you can add two bookmarks.

For instance, if you have:

A (master) => [changes]

Then [changes] is already a commit. Suppose you realise that you have fixed a bug and added a feature, but you want these as separate pull requests. You’d split, giving the bug fix a log message:

A (master) => B (bug fix) => [changes]

Then you’d give the feature a log message:

A (master) => B (bug fix) => C (feature)

Even though we started on master and made a bunch of commits without even thinking about branches, we haven’t changed master at all. So in effect, it’s like B and C are on some anonymous branch that was transparently created for you.

Now you want to open the pull requests, so you add a bookmark for B and a bookmark for C, and push them to your remote. B and C show up as branches that you can open pull requests for.

So your workflow is basically the same as it is now, there’s just fewer moving parts for you to think about as you work, and fewer concepts for newbies to learn.
by imiric | 2025-08-15 09:27:14+00:00
> The sooner people stop worrying about a label for what you feel fits LLMs best, the sooner they can find the things they (LLMs) absolutely excel at and improve their (the user's) workflows.

This is not a fault of the users. These labels are pushed primarily by "AI" companies in order to hype their products to be far more capable than they are, which in turn increases their financial valuation. Starting with "AI" itself, "superintelligence", "reasoning", "chain of thought", "mixture of experts", and a bunch of other labels that anthropomorphize and aggrandize their products. This is a grifting tactic old as time itself.

From Sam Altman[1]:

> We are past the event horizon; the takeoff has started. Humanity is close to building digital superintelligence

Apologists will say "they're just words that best describe these products", repeat Dijkstra's "submarines don't swim" quote, but all of this is missing the point. These words are used deliberately because of their association to human concepts, when in reality the way the products work is not even close to what those words mean. In fact, the fuzzier the word's definition ("intelligence", "reasoning", "thought"), the more valuable it is, since it makes the product sound mysterious and magical, and makes it easier to shake off critics. This is an absolutely insidious marketing tactic.

The sooner companies start promoting their products honestly, the sooner their products will actually benefit humanity. Until then, we'll keep drowning in disinformation, and reaping the consequences of an unregulated marketplace of grifters.

[1]: https://blog.samaltman.com/the-gentle-singularity
by nabla9 | 2025-08-15 09:27:48+00:00
>Industry insiders have said the Chinese chips suffer from stability issues, slower inter-chip connectivity, and inferior software compared with Nvidia’s products.

>Huawei sent a team of engineers to DeepSeek’s office to help the company use its AI chip to develop the R2 model, according to two people. Yet despite having the team on site, DeepSeek could not conduct a successful training run on the Ascend chip, said the people.
by NalNezumi | 2025-08-15 09:28:40+00:00
>Actually everyone starts off kind

You only need to hang around toddlers or teens for less than a day to realize people do not start off kind.

People start off egocentric. Unaware or unable to take in to account the people around them are individuals with conflicting wants to you. Also unaware that we are egocentric BUT with social instinct built in to us: if we are surrounded by miserable people, or people angry at us, we don't feel good either.

So we learn that kindness, while sometimes initially painful or less opportunistic, in the long term leads to satisfaction.
by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 | 2025-08-15 09:28:42+00:00
It is interesting. I care and I don't at the same time. There is a part of me that watches it all from a distance. We have all seen some of those dances before including government grasping at whatever explanation sounds plausible enough to let it go through. I don't know if it is the morning or what, but maybe UKsians need a morning kick with their coffee. Who knows. Maybe they even want to be protected from unsanctioned discourse.
by aarroyoc | 2025-08-15 09:31:01+00:00
I'm just a Chinese student from the West so take it as just my two cents but I don't think it will evolve to phonetic syllabaries. Chinese has a lot of homophones so it's useful while reading to have an extra semantic meaning. They also say that once you're used to it, you read faster but at my level I can't confirm it. So with modern input devices you're basically simplifying the hard part of the characters, which is writing, and keeping the reading part where they're better than pure phonetic systems.
by TheOtherHobbes | 2025-08-15 09:31:29+00:00
The definition of a monopoly is that it can engage in monopolistic practices. Poaching IP to destroy a small company is very much a monopolistic practice, and has a chilling effect on the rest of the market.

Of course in Apple's case this Masimo story is not the only monopolistic practice.

The correct analogy would be a watch market dominated by Casio and Swatch with no independent smaller brands.

Because every smaller brand that becomes somewhat successful is bought out by the Big Two. Or never gets that far because new IP somehow ends up being the sole property of the Big Two through various other means.

(Technically an oligopoly, but still maintained by monopolistic lock-ins and actions.)
by icarouse | 2025-08-15 09:31:34+00:00
This sounds like a misinterpretation. The OSA is primarily about making online service providers responsible for age verification, if they supply adult content. No different in principle from having to prove one's age to buy cigarettes, alcohol, knives, etc.

No-one says "cigarettes are censored!", because, obviously, they're not. Same for adult content online. It can still be accessed, as long as proof of age is provided.
Ask HN: Why Custom Agents Orchestrators?
by nivedit-jain | 2025-08-15 09:32:46+00:00
I am observing a lot of people writing custom orchestrators to manage their agentic workflows, I fail to understand why?

This is really troubling me, is it just an ego question to write custom orchestrators or just about laziness to search online or there is some actual need which current frameworks/orchestrators (langgraph, autogen and so many others) are unable to fulfill.

Help me!
by dustincoates | 2025-08-15 09:33:00+00:00
Without passing judgment on the act, this is incredibly misleading. I found the source of the original quotes[0], and they are taken quite out of context.

From the article:

>First, we are told, the relevant secretary of state (Michelle Donelan) expressed “concern” that the legislation might whack sites such as Amazon instead of Pornhub. In response, officials explained that the regulation in question was “not primarily aimed at … the protection of children”, but was about regulating “services that have a significant influence over public discourse”, a phrase that rather gives away the political thinking behind the act.

From the source (emphasis mine):

> On 18 March 2024, the Secretary of State was provided with a Submission which made it clear that Category 1 duties were not primarily aimed at pornographic content or the protection of children _(which were dealt with by other parts of the Act)_. Rather, the aim of Category 1 was to capture services that have a significant influence over public discourse. The submission offered, as a possible option, requesting information from Ofcom as to _how content recommender systems function on different types of service_.

The quote leaves out "which were dealt with by other parts of the Act" and the fact that the subject was specifically "Category 1 duties" not the Act in its entirety. It also doesn't mention that the subject was on content recommender systems.

_Again_ this is not a judgment on the Act itself, but providing the full context, which does change the message.

0: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_v_Secret...
by JimDabell | 2025-08-15 09:35:10+00:00
> > By definition overly emotional is bad

> Human reactions are by definition not bad.

I said “overly emotional” was bad by definition, not “human reactions”. Don’t change my words then argue against what you changed them to.

> Try an experiment for me. Tell your partner that you want to split up. Once they finish crying, tell them that they're being "overly" emotional. See how that goes for you.

Why? They would not be overly emotional. Crying in response to being broken up with is a normal amount of emotion. Same goes for the mother example.

The whole point of overly emotional is that it is a label that specifically describes the emotions as being in excess. The label means “bad” – it’s bad by definition. If it were not bad in this way, then it would just be “emotional”, not “overly emotional”. Attaching “overly” is describing it as bad.

> > Why are you misrepresenting this as “it will make me sad”?

You did not even attempt to answer this.

GP said they received hate and insults. You misrepresented that as “it will make me sad”. Hate and insults are not somebody saying “it will make me sad”. You misrepresented what GP was saying. Why?
by DiogenesKynikos | 2025-08-15 09:36:03+00:00
> Neither Gaza nor Lebanon are insurgencies - Israel is trying to destroy terrorist organizations, not rebellions.

Terrorism and insurgency are not mutually exclusive.

The classic example of a modern insurgency, the Algerian resistance against the French, was led by a terrorist organization, the Front de libération nationale (FLN). More correctly, it was a political organization that used terrorism as a tactic, and which eventually became the government of an independent country.

Hamas is a pretty similar case to the FLN (though the PLO was more similar in the old days, in terms of ideology).