MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by zhyder | 2025-08-04 16:58:39+00:00
AI interviews don't make sense when it's each company making the candidate do separate interviews, coz the company isn't spending any human time (no skin in the game) and can easily abuse candidates' time. I think it'd make sense tho if there were shared interviews, e.g. candidate does just one interview for all backend SWE roles (or all SWE roles that use AWS EC2 and Dynamo, or whatever further specialization)... any number of companies should then be able to access the AI insights of that interview, together with other candidates' interviews for that same role.

Then hiring manager can still bring the 2-5 best-fitting candidates onsite for 1-3 human-led interviews (hopefully fewer than what were needed before). The benefit of the AI interview would be to give way more signal than a resume can, making matching more efficient for both sides.
by ramesh31 | 2025-08-04 16:58:39+00:00
Maybe it's just me, but the OTA aggregators seem like a relic from a bygone era at this point. Its been at least a decade since I've seen a hotel that didn't have their own online booking system, and using it guarantees you will never have any issues that the hotel themselves can't (or won't) handle. It seems like these companies are existing solely on inertia and marketing at this point; there's not only zero benefit to using them, but they can and do completely screw you over and ruin vacations on a regular basis.
by gwbas1c | 2025-08-04 16:58:50+00:00
I would be careful about taking too negative of a view of this:

> Still, stretched-thin HR teams say it’s the only way to handle thousands of applicants.

I sometimes wonder if a better solution is to limit the number of jobs someone can apply to; IE, push job seekers to be more selective and screen openings more carefully.

Alternatively, if there was a way for an employer to prioritize applicants that have sent out less applications, it might also help.

---

I also would be weary of people who blame the process. It seems that some people like to find an excuse instead of really reflecting on their situation.
by bigyabai | 2025-08-04 16:58:57+00:00
None of this is really new for combat aviation circles, and frankly a lot of the assertions were proven right. When a Chinese missile bus shoots down a French multirole fighter with a 5x higher MSRP, there has to be some sort of systems advantage helping Pakistan.

So, how can we ascertain which systems it could be? Simple, you look at the declassified inventory. Pakistan hasn't hidden their import of Saab AWACS aircraft, we know they have the ability to extend radar with datalink far beyond what's expected out of a J-10C. For Indian officers, the only remaining question in this kill chain is whether a capable enough missile exists to secure the kill, and that information is public knowledge too. Pakistan took out a loan to purchase this capability-set: https://theasialive.com/pl-15e-missile-transfer-to-pakistan-...

There was a brief period of uncertainty after the shootdown, and definitely a lot of misinformation on social media. A lot of the conclusions were the sorts of things you could surmise looking at a stat sheet, though.
by 6gvONxR4sf7o | 2025-08-04 16:59:02+00:00
We've had technological progress that rapidly shifts the number of person-hours per <output> for generations. We don't have to guess. We've seen this play out many times already.

At first, we spend our time one way (say eight hours, just to pick a number). Then we get the tools to do all of that in six hours. Then when job seeking and hiring, we get one worker willing to work six hours and another willing to work eight, so the eight-hour worker gets the job, all else equal. Labor is a marketplace, so we work as much as we're willing to in aggregate, which is roughly constant over time, so efficiency will never free up individuals' time.

In the context of TFA, it means we just shift our time to "harder" work (in the sense of work that AI can't do yet).
by bangaladore | 2025-08-04 16:59:20+00:00
The HN title does not match the actual article title. Didn't look super closely, but I don't see anything in the article suggesting the article title was changed after publishing.

> Gigabyte removes unofficial PCIe 5.0 support from B650 motherboards in latest BIOS update

It seems that the board was actually running in PCIe 5.0 mode, even though it was only supposed to (by the specs/manual) do PCIe 4.0

It was never advertised as supporting 5.0
by f1shy | 2025-08-04 16:59:27+00:00
This is exactly how I see it. Is not about the tool, is how it is used. In 1990 that would have been “IDK I got it from a BBS” and in 1980 “got if from a magazine“. It doesn’t matter how you get there, you have to understand it. BTW I had a similar problem as I was manager in HW development, where the value of a resistor had no documented calculation. I would ask: where does it came from? If the answer was “I tried and it worked”, or “tested in lab until I found it” or in the 2000 “I run many simulations and was the best value” I would reject and ask for proper calculations, with WCA.
by nlawalker | 2025-08-04 17:00:05+00:00
Stock price doesn't have any effect on the value of ESPP at Microsoft, but you're right that it does on the RSUs. At least one company exec has directly proposed this as a counterbalance to "no pay raises" (From 2023: https://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-exec-defends-compa...).

That said, anyone can own Microsoft stock. With respect to current employees - the common wisdom has always been not to own too much stock in your employer, with the rationale that if things aren't going well and the stock is tanking, you're likely to get laid off and then you're even worse off. But these days I'm thinking that the opposite is true, at least in bigtech: The more likely scenario is that you get laid off regardless and the stock goes up in response.
by simion314 | 2025-08-04 17:00:07+00:00
We are not on reddit here, have you paid attention?

Now seriously, you brought some old excuse here for some very inteligent reason, explain please? Do spouses will read that the guy bought something from Steam and she will then conclude the dude is playing very adult games? The excuse does not work as far as I can see, so explain your thoughts or explain why you are just pasting random excuses and then act like a redditor
by observationist | 2025-08-04 17:00:35+00:00
They exist to optimize the internet for the platforms and big providers. Little people get screwed, with no legal recourse. They actively and explicitly degrade the internet, acting as censors and gatekeepers and on behalf of bad faith actors without legal authority or oversight.

They allow the big platforms to pay for special access. If you wanted to run a scraper, however, you're not allowed, despite the internet standards and protocols and the laws governing network access and free communications standards responsibilities by ISPs and service providers not granting the authority to any party involved with cloudflare blocking access.

It's equivalent to a private company deciding who, when, and how you can call from your phone, based on the interests and payments of people who profit from listening to your calls. What we have is not normal or good, unless you're exploiting the users of websites for profit and influence.
by esbranson | 2025-08-04 17:00:54+00:00
I stand corrected, chat bot agrees, it's most like Ohio or Illinois in population and GDP.

> Ohio has long been a national leader in EHR adoption, with nearly 5,000 primary care physicians signed up through the Ohio Health Information Partnership—more than any other state as of around 2011.[1] Cincinnati-based HealthBridge operates one of the largest and most robust regional Health Information Exchanges (HIEs) in the U.S., servicing over 30 hospitals and 7,500 physicians across multiple states.[1]

> In Ohio, a qualitative 2022 study surveyed provider and leadership perspectives on interoperability, finding high adoption rates: 96% of Medicaid‑PI‑eligible providers and hospitals had adopted EHR systems; non‑eligible providers reported adoption at 72%.[2] Epic Systems dominates the state as the top EHR vendor—used by 37% of Medicaid‑PI recipients and over 56% of other providers; smaller practices more often use NextGen, eClinicalWorks, etc.[2]

> The 2021 Illinois Health IT Survey, based on 175 respondents representing ~3,800 providers, shows 100% EHR adoption among respondents—up from 61% in 2011.[3] Participation in an HIE rose from 32% in 2016 to 51% in 2021.[3]

> For Illinois, key barriers reported: lack of provider Direct message addresses, reluctance of referring providers to accept messages (58%), and vendor cost constraints (46%).[3] Top reported improvements: decreased medication errors (64%), improved throughput (60%), and better reporting and referrals (60% and 57%).[3] The most difficult challenge: meeting program objectives (37%), followed by implementation cost and time (22%).[3]

Overall chat bot indicates Poland has unique patient IDs so no record duplication compared to poor US implementations, high interop within P1 compared to poor interop between US vendors, and good patient data access compared to poor implementation by US vendors. Chat bot gave little about burnout but mentioned Polish and US AI developments under way. I would assume there's poor interop between Poland and other EU states, likely much worse than the US IMHO. Not really any mention of other topics like clinician workflow, burnout, and productivity re Poland.

[1] https://www.healthpolicyohio.org/files/publications/hitprime...

[2] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10007006/

[3] https://hfs.illinois.gov/content/dam/soi/en/web/hfs/sitecoll...
by John23832 | 2025-08-04 17:01:14+00:00
> and not developing the emotional and household maturity an adult woman expects.

It's funny how there is never a discussion of problems with young women in this way.

Young women are often seen as victims to society. The "Patriarchy", unreasonable social media beauty standards, etc.

Young men are seen as failures to society. Something that they did was wrong or incorrect, and that's why they're in the situation they're in.

Even as (what I would consider) a well adjusted man, this seems unreasonable to me.
by foxglacier | 2025-08-04 17:01:16+00:00
This whole article is based on misinterpreting Microsoft's "AI applicability score" for "risk of job being made redundant by AI". From the original paper:

"This score captures if there is nontrivial AI usage that successfully completes activities corresponding to significant portions of an occupation’s tasks."

Then the author describes their job qualitatively matching their AI applicability score by using AI to do most of their work for them.

If there's a lot of unmet demand for low-priced high-quality translation, translators could end up having more work, not less.
by ben_w | 2025-08-04 17:01:38+00:00
200 years? And went wrong in 1970? The USA absolutely wasn't a good system in 1770, and has sucked for a lot of people for large fraction of those years.

Who could vote was all over the place for a long time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_voting_rights_in_t...

Civil War was about as far from "balanced" as you can get, and the problems weren't even on the axis of "hammer and sickle" vs "single megacorporation".

The New Deal was a radical change in the economic organisation of the USA, basically ended Laissez-faire. Before that point, there was enough social unrest that, for the people at the time, I think it wouldn't have seemed at all implausible the USA would have faced an actual communist revolution similar to the one in Russia, because of events such as e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain
by Fraterkes | 2025-08-04 17:01:49+00:00
The guy that runs shadertoy talked about how the hostingcost for his free site shot up because Openai kept crawling his site for training data (ignoring robot.txt) I think that’s bad, and I have also experimented a bit with using BeautifulSoup in the past to download ~2MB of pictures from Instagram. Do you think I’m holding an inconsistent position?
by ryanf | 2025-08-04 17:01:59+00:00
Yeah, I completely agree with that reply, thanks for the link.

BTW that Reddit post also has replies confirming my suspicions that the technical content wasn't trustworthy, if anyone felt like I was just being snobby about the LLM writing: https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/1mh7q73/comment/n6ubr...
by zahlman | 2025-08-04 17:02:16+00:00
Because the explanations will often not be sane; when they are sane, they will focus on irrelevant details and be maddeningly padded out unless you put inordinate effort into trying to control the AI's writing style.

Ask pretty much any FOSS developer who has received AI-generated (both code and explanations) PRs on GitHub (and when you complain about these, the author will almost always use the same AI to generate responses) about their experiences. It's a huge time sink if you don't cut them off. There are plenty of projects out there now that have explicit policy documentation against such submissions and even boilerplate messages for rejecting them.
by Oras | 2025-08-04 17:02:25+00:00
My experience with AI coding is it might be slower to develop for short term, but it’s saving ton of time for the long term.

Here is an example.

I decided to create a new app, so I write down a brief of what it should do, ask AI to create a longer readme file about the platform along with design, sequence diagram, and suggested technologies.

I review that document, see if there is anything I can amend, then ask AI for the implementation plan.

Up until this point, this would probably increased the time I usually use to describe the platform in writing. But realistically, designing and thinking about systems were never that fast. I would have to think about use cases, imagine workflows in my mind, do pen and paper diagrams which I don’t think any of the productivity reports are covering.
by firefoxd | 2025-08-04 17:02:55+00:00
In my team, it's making one dev more prolific, and everybody else work harder.

The most junior dev on my team was tasked with setting up a repo for a new service. The service is not due for many many months so this was an opportunity to learn. What we got was a giant PR with hundreds of new configurations no one has heard of. It's not bad, it's just that we don't know what each conf does. Naturally we asked him to explain or give an overview, he couldn't. Well because he fed the whole thing to an LLM and it spat out the repo. He even had fixes for bugs we didn't know we had in other repos. He didn't know either. But it took the rest of the team digging in to figure out what's going on.

I'm not against using LLM, but now I've added a new step in the process. If anyone makes giant PRs, they'll also have to make a presentation to give everyone an overview. With that in mind, it forces devs to actually read through the code they generate and understand it.
by dabockster | 2025-08-04 17:02:55+00:00
The EU took sideloading mainstream. It's only a matter of time before that becomes the norm.

You also need to consider the fact that Epic Games is big enough that they could have just used an exploit to sideload Fortnite back on the iPhone, and the lawsuit was basically PR to draw attention to the App Store's ambiguities. That in itself shows App Stores are slowly on their way out.
by ToucanLoucan | 2025-08-04 17:03:19+00:00
> If you put the code up for review, regardless of the source, you should fundamentally understand how it works.

Inb4 the chorus of whining from AI hypists accusing you of being an coastal elitist intellectual jerk for daring to ask that they might want to LEARN something.

I am so over this anti-intellectual garbage. It's gotten to such a ridiculous place in our society and is literally going to get tons of people killed.
by pests | 2025-08-04 17:03:27+00:00
While I usually hate all the accusations of writings being LLM generated, I find your example a bit odd as that phasing is very typical of ChatGPT, especially when it was glazing everyone after that one update they had to reverent.

“It’s not just _________. It’s _________________.”

This was in almost every response doubling down on the users ideas and blowing things out of proportion. Stuff like…

“It’s not just a good idea. It’s a ground up rewriting of modern day physics.”
by Andrex | 2025-08-04 17:03:38+00:00
As vibe coding becomes more commonplace you'll see these historical safeguards erode. That is the danger IMO.

You're right, saying you got something off SO would get you laughed out of programming circles back in the day. We should be applying the same shame to people who vibe code, not encourage it, if we want human-parseable and maintainable software.
by derbOac | 2025-08-04 17:03:43+00:00
> That said, in my humble (amateur!) opinion the framing from IEEE leaves a little to be desired, for one simple reason: they don't mention that most of what we're looking for is in the cortex (outer layer) of the brain, anyway!† And it kind of has to be, AFAIK...

I have friends who do research in this area pretty heavily and my impression is the same, that it's pretty limited to the outer layers of brain, and not super high in resolution.

There are advantages but they are more practical than anything else. Of course, practical can be critical but there a large percent of applications where it would have little utility. But hopefully things will improve.
by soiltype | 2025-08-04 17:04:02+00:00
sic semper operarius.

you will never be given your time back by an employer. you have to take it. you might be able to ask for it, but it won't be freely given, whether or not you become more efficient. LLM chatbots and agents are, in this sense, just another tool that changes our relationship to the work we do (but never our relationship to work).
by keepper | 2025-08-04 17:04:15+00:00
"it's never the crime... its the cover up". So in this case, they are kinda screwed.

I've owned two Tesla's ( now a Rivian/Porsche EV owner). Hands down Tesla has the best cruise control technology in the market. There-in lies the problem. Musk constantly markets this as self driving. It is NOT. Not yet at least. His mouth is way way way ahead of his tech.

Heck, stopping for a red light is a "feature", where the car is perfectly capable of recognizing and doing so. This alone should warrant an investigation and one that i completely, as a highly technical user, fell for when i first got my model 7 delivered... Ran thru a red light trying out auto pilot for the first time.

I'm honestly surprised there are not more of these lawsuits. I think there's a misinterpretation of the law by those defending Tesla. The system has a lot of legalese safe-guards and warnings. But the MARKETING is off. WAY OFF. and yes, users listen to marketing first.

and that ABSOLUTELY counts in a court of law. You folks would also complain around obtuse EULA, and while this isn't completely apples to apples here, Tesla absolutely engages in dangerous marketing speak around "auto pilot". Eliciting a level of trust for drives that isn't there, and they should not be encouraging.

So sorry, this isn't a political thing ( and yes, disclaimer, also a liberal).

Signed... former Tesla owner waiting for "right around the corner" self driving since 2019...
by jmull | 2025-08-04 17:04:17+00:00
On the allure of vide coding the author says,

> It is really fun to just have high velocity, and it is really fun to not do code reviews and to just push stuff.

Was slurfish fun?

Looks like if you don't like doing deep and thorough code reviews, LLM-generated code is not for you.

As the author concludes, "...LLMs are a tool. They let you generate a lot of code really fast...it is up to you to review it"
by ratelimitsteve | 2025-08-04 17:04:56+00:00
>I’ll ask them something about the design and they’ll reply: “IDK Claude did that.”

I would want someone entirely off of my team if they did that. Anyone who pushes code they don't understand at least well enough to answer "What does that do?" and "Why did you do it that way?" deserves for their PR to be flat out rejected in whole, not just altered.
by mark_l_watson | 2025-08-04 17:05:13+00:00
I am retired now, but the AI interviewers thing still pisses me off. For most of my career, I would be the first face both intern and employment applicants would see. I took pleasure in getting them excited about our company and doing a light pre-screen. Interviewing is tough abd I liked to treat applicants as human beings, respectfully even if it was obvious they weren’t a good fit (which I would let know instantly.)
by buu700 | 2025-08-04 17:05:21+00:00
Big companies may save money on salaries, which would have first-order effects on the job market — but you could say the same about cloud computing, or computers, or mechanical reapers. Now what about all the companies that previously couldn't afford to exist because someone with a good idea didn't have six+ figures of discretionary income to throw at it?

If AI proves useful enough to effect sustained savings for Big Tech to the degree that you're suggesting, then the flip side of that coin is that it's effectively ZIRP on steroids for startups. The successful businesses which come out of that will ultimately have human labor needs of their own. Job market continues to trend upwards, only with lower concentration and greater overall resulting economic value in the form of more products and services.

Or AI/robotics/etc. gets so good that eventually no one needs human labor, and every company trends toward just being a CEO + board + AI. In that world, unless we expect everyone and their grandma to become an entrepreneur, something to the effect of a UBI would be necessary to keep the world turning without major societal upheaval.

On the other hand, AI skeptics can plan to sit back and eat popcorn while they watch the bigcos suffer the consequences of their mistakes and yield ground to startups. Either way, AI will have been a democratizing force.
by queenkjuul | 2025-08-04 17:05:25+00:00
Yeah last year i was talking to a recruiter about a job i was fairly excited about until they told me i had to take an AI "interview," and they warned me not to use two monitors because any time i wasn't looking right at the camera the AI would think i was cheating.

You want to hire a senior software engineer and step one is an "interview" with an app that can't tell the difference between glancing away from a camera and reading from a script?

Clearly not somewhere i want to work.
by hinkley | 2025-08-04 17:05:39+00:00
JSON encoding is a huge impediment to interprocess communication in NodeJS.

Sooner or later is seems like everyone gets the idea of reducing event loop stalls in their NodeJS code by trying to offload it to another thread, only to discover they’ve tripled the CPU load in the main thread.

I’ve seen people stringify arrays one entry at a time. Sounds like maybe they are doing that internally now.

If anything I would encourage the V8 team to go farther with this. Can you avoid bailing out for subsets of data? What about the CString issue? Does this bring faststr back from the dead?
by raincole | 2025-08-04 17:05:58+00:00
I'm sorry, but that's some crazy take.

Sure, the internet should be open and not trusted. But physical reality exists. Hosting and bandwidth cost money. I trust Google won't DDoS my site or cost my an arbitrary amount of money. I won't trust bots made by random people on the internet in the same way. The fact that Google respects robots.txt while Perplexity doesn't tells you why people trust Google more than random bots.
by joseda-hg | 2025-08-04 17:06:02+00:00
I don't think it's common, but I've definitely seen it

I've also seen "Ask ChatGPT if you're doing X right?", and basically signing off whatever it recommends without checking

At this point I'm pretty confident I could trojan horse whatever decision I want from certain people by sending enough screenshots of ChatGPT agreeing with me