MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Grokify | 2025-08-07 03:05:43+00:00
I still get substantial value out of Coursera. I started with Andrew Ng's original Machine Learning course way back when, and recently completed classes that I thought were well worth my time on Claude Code, Crew AI, AutoGen, and MCP.

While not revolutionary, a recent improvement is AI-based review, which is much appreciated for it's near instant review.

From a transformative perspective, I like the AWS Skill Builder SimuLearn classes. They say teaching is one of the best ways to learn, and I found the chat-based role play where you are the expert to be very interesting.
by patrickhogan1 | 2025-08-07 03:06:52+00:00
I’m being down voted. I don’t have an agenda. I’m simply sharing my experience. If you’re getting good results with Gemini CLI as an alternative to Claude Code, please let me know what you’re doing to get that performance.

I’m impressed by Gemini Pro 2.5’s NLP capabilities. I use that model in production on several projects. My comments are directed only at Gemini CLI. Which FWIW is better than OpenAI Codex CLI, but much worse (for me) than Claude Code.

Even with Pro, the strict token limits combined with the model's tendency to add unrequested modifications means I run out of tokens before completing my intended tasks. Others have the same issue https://github.com/google-gemini/gemini-cli/issues/4300
by onecommentman | 2025-08-07 03:07:30+00:00
This sort of documentation philosophy is part of US regulatory practices. The history of the enabling legislation is available online for all US regulations, as well as open comments made and agency responses to those comments.

“The most common reason for legislative history research is to determine the legislature's reason for creating or amending the law or the meaning of a term used in the law. This type of research finds the legislative intent.”

https://supportcenter.lexisnexis.com/app/answers/answer_view...

So context and motivation/decision and intention is preserved and made available to allow effective “debugging” of any US or State regulation.
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 | 2025-08-07 03:07:34+00:00
"First, HTTP/1.1 is only simple if you're not proxying."

Which is to say, proxy implementations are complex, not HTTP/1.1

"HTTP/2 is not perfect - it's significantly more complex than HTTP/1, and can be painful to implement."

Which is to say, HTTP/2 is complex

Making life easier for (overly) complex proxy software by introducing a more complex protocol

Sounds great

Increasing complexity will surely lead to "a secure web"
by kazinator | 2025-08-07 03:08:30+00:00
> In other words [because the access sequence is just 10 instructions], memory will be the bottleneck, not the instructions to calculate where an index is.

Ha, that is wishful thinking. If you do this in a tight loop in which everything is in the L1 cache, the instructions hurt!

"Memory bandwidth is the bottleneck" reasoning applies when you access bulk data without localized repetition.
by throwaway202508 | 2025-08-07 03:09:13+00:00
This article isn't even correct. 5YJ3 is the code for model 3. Not F.

Position 4 (3) - Vehicle Line: 1 = Model S 3 = Model Y 7 = Model X F = Model 3

None of these are correct. S = Model S X = Model X 3 = Model 3 Y = Model Y
by calebh | 2025-08-07 03:09:35+00:00
Perhaps the reason modern programs use so much memory vs what I remember from the Windows XP era is precisely because we went to 64 bits. Imagine how many pointers are used in the average program. When we switched over to 64 bits, the memory used by all those pointers instantly doubled. It's clear that 32 bits wasn't enough, but maybe some intermediate number between 32 and 64 would have added sufficient capacity without wasting a ton of extra space.
by didibus | 2025-08-07 03:10:07+00:00
It's true, China went through a ton of unification -> division -> reunification phases in history. There's even a famous quote for this: "what is long divided must unite, what is long united must divide"

I think one possible reason is that the Qin Dynasty really managed to assimilate everyone into the same shared values, religion, language, writing, and so on. Other empires didn't succeed to that level, and the people in them always had strong differences, language, values, religion, beliefs, writing, philosophy, and so on.
by gauravm | 2025-08-07 03:10:38+00:00
New blog post on Efficient AI Techniques: KV Caching and KV Sharing.

Efficient training and inference is table stakes for LLMs these days, and these two algorithmic efficiency techniques work really well for reducing LLM latency as well as memory usage, while retaining the model performance. Feel free to give it a read, and drop a note if I missed something.
by morsecodist | 2025-08-07 03:11:24+00:00
There are some great native apps out there and a lot of them do things you couldn't do on the web, but nowhere near close seems like a stretch to me. There are some great web apps out there. And while there are great native apps made with love there are also perfunctory, rushed, clunky ones that could have just been a website.

People often overlook some of the functional UX the web brings to the table. For example: on the web I get consistent search and text highlighting behavior, consistent notifications, consistent navigation behavior (back buttons, history), I can tab to focus (usually), and I can use plugins to customize the content. Even the idea that you can reset the application state with a refresh is something I wish I had on some native apps.
by jjani | 2025-08-07 03:12:12+00:00
It can be just as true for LLM output. One can use LLMs simply in a way to gather information, replacing Google by a much better one, and create lesson plans yourself based on the information provided. Nothing stands in the way of you doing that. Just like the many devs on this website who basically use it as a StackOverflow to ask questions to rather than "give me the full code of the solution" and just blindly copy-pasting that in.

LLMs with web search enabled also give sources.

There's not much reason to believe LLMs are incapable of outputting a similarly well-structured lesson plan as those provided by third parties. It fits well into what they're capable of.

The problem is, again, that the teachers in question clearly don't care about the quality of their teaching in the slightest. Are LLMs a tool that could amplify their awfulness further? Sure, but at the same time they can amplify the goodness of the hopefully larger group of teachers who do care.
by amluto | 2025-08-07 03:13:14+00:00
That IMO does not, in any respect, excuse the signature design. This JSON+blobs design is totally new other than needing to support a handful of preexisting fields. And it’s very much the case that a lot of the record is trusted in the sense that loading malicious data could compromise the integrity or availability of the machine.

So structure it like that! Have a whole file that is signed or otherwise integrity-checked in its entirely. Have another file with fields that are per-(user,machine) and integrity-check that. “Integrity-check” means that you validate the binary contents of the file before you even attempt to parse it, and then you parse the literal bytes that you checked.

It’s not the nineties anymore, and architects should know better.
by austin-cheney | 2025-08-07 03:13:40+00:00
Asperger's people are just as emotional as neuro-typical people. The difference is that the inability to reason beyond first person pronouns is restrictive and that can be intensely frustrating. Asperger's people are also extremely prone to disappointment because in their mind they are always great. The reality is that of course Asperger's people are always great in their own mind, because they cannot introspect just like they employ empathy.

The emotional drive to achieve task completion is broken because you lack the stimulus to do. You can pursue tasks because the busy work of task employment is stimulating until something more stimulating comes along. Then the task is abandoned and never resumed. People see this and think ADHD, a chemical defect, but its not. Its extremely low conscientiousness, a personality defect. That is why ADHD medication only provides stimulating side effects and does not provide solutions to the primary problem.

Psychopathy is only tangentially similar. To be a psychopath you need to have to a defectively low level of serotonin, which you would be regularly depressed but also entirely without fear. Furthermore, you would need to be a sadist. If you are not a sadist you are not a psychopath. It is very common for people who have dangerous professions like police and military to have suppressed serotonin, due to conditioning from their professional which partly explains why they have a 4x greater risk of suicide. Asperger's people have an estimated 9x greater risk of suicide, because they also have a defect level of serotonin, but they have additional risks due to frequent disappointment and poor social skills.

The way to learn better active listening for somebody with Asperger's is as simple as just stop talking. Seriously, shut the fuck up. This is going to be a very real challenge, but just try it. You will learn to read people, but it will be a challenge because you will have no interest in learning this without forcing yourself through extensive practice.
by TimorousBestie | 2025-08-07 03:14:29+00:00
He’s known for being a prolific blogger with multiple interests and excellent research skills.

The other two blog, yes, but now Scott flirts with race realism [1] and other Scott is hyperfixated on being pro-Israel at any cost. I can’t imagine they’re much fun at parties (or in communes, shtetl-optimized or not).

[1] https://www.stevesailer.net/p/scott-alexander-comes-out-of-t...
by stephen_g | 2025-08-07 03:14:32+00:00
Yes, Samba's vfs_fruit module (which has options for better interoperability with Mac OS) has the fruit:model setting lets you select which icon it will show up as. You can make it look like any Mac model or Apple TV or iPhones etc.

Setting it to the string RackMac or Xserve should get that icon.

Somebody pulled all the icons and their codes out here: https://callumgare.github.io/macos-device-icons/
by Boston_Baz | 2025-08-07 03:16:14+00:00
Its nearly a guarantee TSMC was going to be exempt. The dismal performance of their AZ location and Samsung's TX location shows how the US wouldn't even be anywhere near 20% domestic manufacture by 2035. Capital≠Competency. The 70k staffing shortage, difference in culture is the real issue here. This tariff would have turned into a kamikaze maneuver had it not been for the carveouts.

I was stunned when it was announced. I mean having contradicting tariffs and goals is one thing, but semis?! Wonder if this will finally get Intel their first Intl. buyer for their semis.
by krukah | 2025-08-07 03:17:24+00:00
Maybe the (relative) lack of ecosystem has kept you away, but I really recommend checking out both Dioxus and Leptos. Leptos is incredibly similar to React, but with Rust ergonomics, and it's been a pleasure to learn and use. With an LLM by my side that knows React and Rust pretty well, I've found myself not even needing the React libraries that I thought I would, since I can easily build on the fly the features/components I actually need.

I too, eventually gave up on React <> WASM <> Rust but I was able to port all my existing React over into Leptos in a few hours.
by mkw5053 | 2025-08-07 03:18:31+00:00
I also just got an email tonight for early access to try CC in the browser. "Submit coding tasks from the web." "Pick up where Claude left off by teleporting tasks to your terminal" I'm most interested to see how the mobile web UI/UX is. I frequently will kick something off, have to handle something with my toddler, and wish I could check up on or nudge it quickly from my phone.
by lossolo | 2025-08-07 03:18:35+00:00
Transformer does not need to emit a byte for byte clone of a training example to benefit from having seen it. It can store a distributed representation of many near duplicate implementations and then sample a novel linear combination. That still short circuits algorithm design so the burden of discovering the game loop, collision logic, sprite sheet etc. was ALREADY SOLVED during pre training.

When you temperature sample the same model twice you also get "different" code, diversity alone is not evidence of new reasoning. What matters is functional novelty under controlled transformations (renamed variables, resized canvas, obfuscated asset file names etc). On such metamorphic rewrites, models that appear brilliant on canonical prompts suddenly collapse, a hallmark of shallow pattern matching.

The paper I mentioned in my previos comment shows SOTA coding LLMs scoring 70%+ on SWE bench verified yet dropping 10–47% when the very same issues are paraphrased or drawn from unseen repos, even though the task semantics are identical. That is classic memorisation, just fuzzier than a CRC match.

As to qwen, even at 4 bit per weight, a 4B model retains ≈ 2.1 GB of entropy so enough to memorise tens of thousands of full game loops. The reason it garbled the alien movement logic is probably that its limited capacity forced lossy compression, so the behaviour you saw is typical of partially recalled code patterns whose edge cases were truncated during training. That’s still interpolation over memorised fragments, just with fewer fragments to blend. And this is something that is actually proven (https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.15720v1) by controlled fact memorisation studies and extraction attacks up through 70B params show a monotone curve so basically each extra order of magnitude adds noticeably more verbatim or near verbatim recall. So a 20B model succeeds where a 4B one fails because the former crossed the "capacity per training token" threshold for that exemplar. So nothing magical there.

Don't get me wrong, I’m not arguing against interpolation per se, generalising between held out exemplars is precisely what we want. The problem is that most public "just write space invaders” demos never verify that the endpoints were truly unseen. Until they do, a perfect clone is compatible with nothing deeper than glorified fuzzy lookup.
by freddie_mercury | 2025-08-07 03:19:38+00:00
The early hype of MOOCs wasn't "a few people in handful of fields will get up-skilled".

If that was all they claimed there wouldn't have been early hype around transformative potential.

Coursera had 1.7 million "students" in under 2 years and was growing faster than Facebook. The President of edX talked about "disrupting" the entire higher education system. Stanford, MIT, Princeton, Brown, Columbia, and Duke all offered MOOCs with the idea that anyone anywhere in the world could now get an MIT/Stanford level of education without needing to be on-campus (or pay a lot of money in tuition).

From the 2012 NYTimes article on MOOCs:

'Dr. Agarwal predicts that “a year from now, campuses will give credit for people with edX certificates.” He expects students will one day arrive on campus with MOOC credits the way they do now with Advanced Placement.'

Never happened.

'Dr. Stavens promises more change, and more disruption: “We are only 5 to 10 percent of the way there.”'

Turned out we were already 100% of the way there after 24 months of MOOCs being launched.
by jongjong | 2025-08-07 03:20:05+00:00
Yes IMO, the DOM is actually quite good. There are some valid complaints around superficial aspects of the API... For example, the ambiguous boundary between properties and methods being abused... But these are really superficial points.

The DOM cannot assume that it's just for building declarative applications, it needs to support imperative functionality too... IMO, the custom Web Components API solves the declarative problem very neatly, much more neatly than React or any other declarative framework I've come across.

I think it's wonderful how the DOM API has evolved slowly over time to meet user needs and it would be foolish to think we can just redesign it better from the bottom up without sacrificing some gems.

I think the people complaining about it are stuck in some utopian mindset. They have a specific frame of mind and they look at the DOM through the lens of a limited number of use cases which are relevant to them. They hold rigid, blanket beliefs around concepts like "Functional programming, side effects, reactivity" but these beliefs are siloed around each concept; they neglect the fact that the intersection of multiple approaches can transform the problem and radically alter the equation... For example, the modularization of Web Components and associated lifecycle methods, greatly reduce the dangers of imperative programming within component boundaries.

It's good to be aware that both strong acids and strong alkaline solutions are dangerous on their own, but one should recognize that mixing them together could completely change this fact.
by onfir3 | 2025-08-07 03:22:14+00:00
I partially applied the omarchy scripts on my Manjaro for trying it out. Feels cool to use it but not on the state were I'm more productive (not done yet though). Be careful if you try this, because part of the script overwrite your login manager

I have to mention that the 'web2app' function is super cool. It transforms and website to a desktop file launching it in an own chromium. That is super neat, especially in a tiling window manager

A version of the script which installs omarchy next to a running desktop would be nice
by mac-attack | 2025-08-07 03:22:43+00:00
Going from tailscale in the cloud -> self-hosting netbird required a richer mental model so I had to learn more about routing, why ZTNA is better, what is OIDC, etc

I do think that netbird's documentation is easier to read than tailscale's, but the tone does still assume a solid foundational networking background in places.

My uneducated guess is that the product is appealing to networking professionals, but a growing number of current/former tailscale users that are otherwise new to networking, but familiar w/ self-hosting. With the latter group, there's a steeper learning curve (that would also be there for headscale or most other self-hosted mesh VPN solution fwiw)
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-08-07 03:23:10+00:00
> when are you hiring so we can all enjoy working in a workers' utopia?

I generally never am. I believe strongly in paying a large premium to market for quality and then letting smart people be smart. I’m also perfectly comfortable hiring on gut feeling and references alone without a whole song and dance—I’ve only once had someone ghost their background check once and had to fire someone after a fuckup of a hire once more.

As a result, turnover is low and vacancies short to the point of non existence.
by rpdillon | 2025-08-07 03:23:20+00:00
> they just never let down a rope to the consumer market

So this is a coded statement that I fear most people won't get, but it's pretty profound.

If I'm getting bigyabai's point, they are saying that people that are professionals at choosing operating systems have overwhelmingly chosen Linux, and it's really in the consumer markets, where folks don't have any special knowledge or judgment, that Windows and MacOS thrive. That's a good insight, because it's completely true. Both Windows and MacOS cater to audiences that, for the most part, don't care or want to care about how technology works, and this makes them vulnerable. Apple and Microsoft capitalize on this.
by root_axis | 2025-08-07 03:23:46+00:00
I don't think they're doing it just because he says so, they're doing it because they are aligned with him. 40% of the country also agrees with him and 15% don't care either way.

Ultimately, this is the government the people have chosen, those of us in the other 45% have waning political power and cultural influence. Not really much can be done at this point besides hang on for dear life and hope the pendulum remains functional enough to swing back the other way.
by giardini | 2025-08-07 03:24:09+00:00
"Superintelligence" but no intelligence yet? Why not wait until we find a good definition of "intelligence" before crying "The end is near!". You're living in a sc-fi fantasy. Put your intelligence (whatever that is) to work on useful problems, wait and watch. Get out more and have a good time (good advice whether the end is near or not).

Me, I think the bottom is about to fall out of the AI boom for a variety of reasons - some economical, some business-related and some mathematical. I'm willing to hedge my bets and wait. There's plenty of work to do.
by LoganDark | 2025-08-07 03:25:43+00:00
Codes that are provided on demand by a service will always be far less secure than proper TOTP. Because in the case of proper TOTP, no secret ever leaves the service after initial configuration, but in the case of discount 2FA through email or especially SMS, a fresh secret has to be delivered to me each time, where it can easily be intercepted by all manner of attacks.
by 1659447091 | 2025-08-07 03:28:15+00:00
> I suspect that they're attempting to influence common knowledge (via AI summaries and search results)

I remember a time when this wouldn't be a reason that I had high confidence in. But as my fellow Texan and SCOTUS appointed president, George W. once said:

"fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again. You've got to understand the nature of the regime we're dealing with" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhmdEq3JhoY&t=1m55s

(side note, and more of a "things that make you go hmmm" than an assertion, watching this reminded me of all the other Bushism I had missed or forgot; if I were more prone to conspiracies, the similarities and circumstances between these two almost make it look like W. was the test run for the current kingmakers running the Project)
by spartanatreyu | 2025-08-07 03:29:42+00:00
> The only reason why Safari is "shit" is because web developers are too lazy to develop for the web and instead develop for Chrome.

Safari is only available on Apple devices, Chrome is available everywhere. Let's not pretend that laziness is the only reason why Chrome has the largest marketshare.

> The point of the web is that it's an open standard. Expecting everyone to use the bleeding edge version of the most aggressively feature-laden browser isn't just unreasonable, it's counter to the spirit of the platform.

I don't expect Safari to be the bleeding edge. I just expect the features to work. Lets take for example: IndexedDB

- IndexedDB was first brought up in two propsals in 2009/2010 - IndexedDB was available for pubilc testing in early 2012 by Firefox and Chrome and was released for both browsers unprefixed in late 2012. - IndexedDB was "released" for Safari in late 2014. However:

1. The released version was so bad and buggy that it basically didn't work at all.

2. It essentially broke all the websites/web-apps that were using it, and there was no easy alternative to use. The affected websites/webapps had to essentially be rearchitected and remade or just plain shut down.

3. Apple had no interest in fixing it which essentially poisoned the feature for all developers. It was so egregious it was actually used in the lawsuits against Apple their monopolistic app store practices, which eventually led to the EU to create their new sweeping anti-trust regulation changes for app stores and browsers.

- IndexedDB didn't have a working release on Safari until mid-2016 and didn't have the industry standard "last two major version" support until late 2017.

That means we had developers affected by IndexedDB's poisoning for about 5 years.

---

So by my earlier request of "I don't expect Safari to be the bleeding edge. I just expect the features to work.", Safari completely and utterly shit the bed. They shit the bed so bad it helped lead the EU to create new anti-trust regulations.

And that was just Apple trying to meet a standard feature.

And if you thought the IndexedDB debacle was over, they broke it again. See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27509206

---

Let's not even get into Safari breaking other features. I'd rather not type all this out: https://webventures.rejh.nl/blog/2024/history-of-safari-show...