MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by nilslindemann | 2025-08-15 18:01:18+00:00
Indeed, PayPal is not gone for everyone, luckily. I am from Europe and can still buy games using PayPal, just did. This makes me happy, as I am trying for over two weeks now to buy credits on Open AI, just to be able to translate texts from the FastAPI docs to German. Open AI and others do not support PayPal and not even a prepaid credit card, which my local bank sold me as "works everywhere". It is frustrating.
by maverwa | 2025-08-15 18:01:39+00:00
I won’t complain about anyone investing into wine/proton. GOG/CDPR just seem less willing or less capable of spending that money. Valve is essentially printing money. From sales, but also from other, morally less likeable sources like gambling. It’s nice to see them spending at least a tiny part of this in ways that serve the greater good (besides their own business).

Same point: it’s not good, but that’s reality for you.
by SCHiM | 2025-08-15 18:01:47+00:00
Could you explain:

1) What are the limitations of the scaling you do? Can I do this programmatically? I.e. send some requests to get additional pods of a specific type online?

2) What have you done in terms of security hardening? you mention hardened pods/cluster, but specifically, did you do pentest? Just follow best practice? Periodic scans? Stress tests?
by cpursley | 2025-08-15 18:02:34+00:00
Here's one Claude-vibed project that makes me money that I run in addition to my saas, which is Elixir. I'm not strong in TypeScript and this is an Astro static site, so Claude has been really helpful. Backend is Supabase (postgres) and a few background jobs via https://pgflow.dev (pgmq) that fetch and populate job openings and uses some AI steps to filter then classify into the correct categories (among other things, there's also an job application flow and automated email newsletter): https://jobsinappraisal.com

I also "vibed" up this: https://livefilter.fly.dev/todos (https://github.com/cpursley/livefilter) and this: https://star-support-demo.vercel.app/en/getting-started (https://github.com/agoodway/star-support-demo)

I hand wrote very little of this code, but can read most of it - the SQL and Elixir at least ;)
by MentatOnMelange | 2025-08-15 18:02:41+00:00
Probably because free market solutions were as much an ideology as it was an economic system. The average joe has been told since Reagan that lower taxes for the wealthiest businesses and people, deregulation and cutting back social programs will trickle down to benefit them. This has turned out to be wrong, and whether it was an intentional lie or a genuine plan that failed, we need to acknowledge it.

The fact Trump's main message was tarrifs, and yet his polling numbers go down the more tarrifs are in the news now, should tell you something. People are looking for solutions and when there's a lack of good ideas, they vote for the bad idea over the status quo
by f1shy | 2025-08-15 18:02:43+00:00
Was really so (specifically “lethal”? Do you have sources?

I know trade secret was much more important. Also the spirit of patents is to allow development by making all public.

But do they?! I’m tired of trying to extract useful information off patents, they are empty of content and full of BS is laywer language. Real important details are kept secret, as long as possible.

The current system is de facto not working properly. I’m not saying is the worst, or I have better ideas, but is clear that the system is being heavily abused in all corners.
by jsnell | 2025-08-15 18:02:44+00:00
No, but what I'm saying is that these scrapers are already not using GPUs or ASICs. It just doesn't make any economical sense to do that in the first place. They are running the same Javascript code on the same commodity CPUs and the same Javascript engine as the real users. So switching to an ASIC-resistant algorithm will not raise the bar. It's just going to be another round of the security theater that proof of work was in the first place.
by thewebguyd | 2025-08-15 18:02:52+00:00
> fund common crawl or something so that they can have a single organization and set of bots collecting all the training data they need and then share it

That, or, they could just respect robots.txt and we could put enforcement penalties for not respecting the web service's request to not be crawled. Granted, we probably need a new standard but all these AI companies are just shitting all over the web, being disrespectful of site owners because who's going to stop them? We need laws.
by cosmicgadget | 2025-08-15 18:03:01+00:00
Before the incident:

> GSA leadership continued to push for the agency to roll out Grok for internal use. “We kept saying ‘Are you sure?’ And they were like ‘No we gotta have Grok,’” one employee involved with the discussions tells WIRED.

Then:

> “The week after Grok went MechaHitler, [GSA leadership] was like ‘Where are we on Grok?’” the same employee claims. “We were like, ‘Do you not read a newspaper?’”

The political appointees were intent on getting Elon's product on contract even after it went full Kanye.

This is one of the many reasons it sucks that the Supreme Court is intent on letting us return to the spoils system.
by Marsymars | 2025-08-15 18:03:05+00:00
I'm not aware of any airline where a 50L + 45L bag together are legally allowed as carry-on + personal item.

e.g. If you max out the allowed dimensions with United you get a 45.08L carry on and a 23.65L personal item.

And most "cheapest tickets" now no longer include a carry on bag, only a personal item.
by Melonai | 2025-08-15 18:03:21+00:00
I myself have been preparing for that day, learning simplified Mandarin and trying to expose myself to Chinese online presence. :)

I'm not sure that China will ever "overtake" the US in global technology mindshare, but they are getting closer, and if that ever properly happens, I'm quite ready, and if not, at least I get a whole new language out of it and a better understanding of a huge culture that felt a lot more out of reach before.

For context, I'm from Russia, so maybe it's easier for me to trade one foreign hegemony for another than for many others..
by anigbrowl | 2025-08-15 18:03:53+00:00
There is a middle ground that can be found, but the extremes on both sides make it impossible to compromise.

I don't agree about this. I do not support the Everytown group (who I agree are skewing facts) but long before they came along, the pro gun lobby was absolutely intransigent on their own. Any reasonable proposal/discussion that had broad support could get derailed by second amendment absolutists. It's gotten considerably worse over the ~35 years I've been on the internet because online social communication rewards people for being assholes; so many online debates degenerate into the pro gun people just screeching that their opponents are hoplophobes or commies, and posting 'SHALL NOT ?BE INFRINGED' over and over.

I like guns and enjoy shooting, but I absolutely despise 'gun culture'and the firearms lobby. They have never been good-faith actors in my experience.
by Dig1t | 2025-08-15 18:04:15+00:00
>and building two $250k houses will take twice the time and close to twice the costs

Building densely is actually more profitable, there’s already incentive to build as densely as possible for developers. Adding an extra story and creating a duplex, triplex, etc doesn’t cost much more and means you can sell multiple more units. Building as tall as possible and getting more units into the same footprint is almost always more profitable than just building one single family house.

The problem is that zoning limits what type of building is allowed to be built on a site. Who controls zoning? Existing homeowners that already live in the area, so of course they are going to make sure that new builds are low-density, as it impacts them less (parking, traffic) and keeps their home values high.

Source: I tried to build dense housing myself and was stymied by zoning.
by agent327 | 2025-08-15 18:04:19+00:00
Next the police will be knocking on your door, just to make sure you are not skipping ads in the newspaper.

"M'am, that vase in front of your TV could be used to block ads. You are going to have to move that."

Anyway, I see a great future for adblockers that render the whole page in a back buffer, and then copy it to a front buffer where it is masked by a bitmap that just has black squares where the ads used to be. That doesn't "change the original, copyrighted document", so it should be fine. And I presume putting that vase in front of your screen is still acceptable, even in Germany.

If publishers want more control, they always have the option of downloading the entire page as a bitmap.
by lawik | 2025-08-15 18:04:20+00:00
I've done this. The NIF worked as in that it ran and was a correct enough NIF. It did not work in terms of solving what I needed it to do. Iteration was a bit painful because it was tangled with a nasty library that needed to be cross-compiled. So when I made a change it seg faulted and I bailed.

I essentially ran out of patience and tried another approach. It involved an LLM running C code so I could check the library output compared to my implementation to make sure it was byte-for-byte.

The C will never ship. I don't have practice writing C so I am very inefficient at it. I read it okay. LLMs are pretty decent help for this type of scrap code.
by martin-t | 2025-08-15 18:04:25+00:00
The other replies are good.

The general principle is inverting who has power. It should always be with people doing real positive-sum work, not those with money whose primary business of redistributing money and taking a cut.

If they are allowed to ask for something, they will and because they have more power, they are able to pressure people into unfavorable deals. They don't need your band, there's plenty of others who will take the deal. But you need their money or someone else's but that somebody else will offer similar terms, unless those exploitative terms are illegal because people united against parasitism.
by parineum | 2025-08-15 18:04:52+00:00
> LLMs are pretty clearly AI and AGI under commonly understood, lay definitions.

That's certainly not clear. For starters, I don't think there is a lay definition of AGI which is largely my point.

The only reason people are willing to call LLMs AI is because that's how they are being sold and the shine isn't yet off the rose.

How many people call Siri AI? It used to be but people have had time to feel around the edges where it fails to meet their expectations of AI.

You can tell what people think of AI by the kind of click bait surrounding LLMs. I read an article not too long ago with the headline about an LLM lying to try and not be turned off. Turns out it was intentionally prompted to do that but the point is that that kind of self preservation is what people expect of AI. Implicitly, they expect that AI has a "self".

ChatGPT doesn't have a self.
by qball | 2025-08-15 18:05:03+00:00
Not in this case. There are many different kinds of safeties, and they aren't magic off switches.

Consider a computer program (with a UI mated to underlying mechanics) that talks to a database.

In this case, just because the frontend (the trigger) has a "safety" on it such that it guards against initiating a chain of events that results in something being written to the database, the backend generally remains capable of it anyway.

So, if you have some other logic or condition that can start that API call (let's assume the program fires off a bunch of random inputs to various APIs if you physically drop the computer it's running on, and then you drop it), the DB write may still happen even though it was never triggered from the frontend.

Now, you can do various things to guard against that known behavior- from ensuring the activity chain started on the frontend to physically disconnecting the computer from the database until you're ready to write- but at the end of the day the machine has to be capable of performing the write immediately when commanded, and the sacrifices you're going to make to enable that will be controlled by your engineering and testing.

In this case, the trigger (and other associated safeties) are the "frontend", the mechanical workings are the "backend", and "the gun fires" is "a DB operation".
by holowoodman | 2025-08-15 18:05:04+00:00
No. Coding is mathematics. The internet exists because of engineering. The web was invented because of physics.

Humanities came late to the game and try to claim the honor without actually having done anything. Except whine and complain about the demise of X because of this new fangled internet thingy. For X you may insert "reading", "writing", "critical thinking", "books", "education", "manners", "discussions" and another 50 things at least. I'd say the humanities hindered the progress of humanity more than they promoted it over the last 50 years.
by cleandreams | 2025-08-15 18:05:17+00:00
I think the universities made a mistake in becoming too culturally left wing. The faculty (and students) in the humanities in particular are far to the left of the political mainstream. (I am on the left though more focused on labor rights and good jobs than identity politics.)

The attack on the universities is fueled by this divergence, now that the right is firmly in power. This will just hurt the country in the long run. There was so much group think and silencing happening on the left over the last decade. It seems now to have been self-destructive.
by PaulHoule | 2025-08-15 18:05:52+00:00
My take on it as a small landlord (have two houses on my farm, one has two rental units) is:

I don’t think a lot about the pricing of my rental units and I’m not quick to raise them but when some new development comes into town and puts up billboards with their eye-popping prices and runs ads in the paper and on web sites and on the radio I think “Gee…. I must be leaving money on the table because I could raise my rates 50% and it would still undercut what they’re advertising a lot”

Of course the money they are spending on advertising indicates that their pricing is aspirational and they may very well next year be telling the city that they can’t afford their property taxes because they can’t fill the units and might be telling their lenders the same in a few years.

In Ithaca we got “luxury housing for seniors” that was nuclear reactor late and they can’t fill

https://ithacavoice.org/2025/03/library-place-to-sell-at-a-l...

(Don’t seniors with money go to Florida?)

A few market rate projects had an affordable component which has been part of a surge which has taken a bite out of our homeless colony but it is now like that talking heads song where they’re “burning down the house”

https://ithacavoice.org/2025/08/inside-asteri/

My understanding is many “luxury” developments are shoddily built and not a good place to live

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/15/realestate/condo-defects-...
by kevinventullo | 2025-08-15 18:05:54+00:00
Caveat: I am not an expert, so this is a semi-educated guess.

I imagine it would depend on whether DINOv3 captures the information of whether a given person is in the image, which I think is really a question about training data. So naively, I would guess the answer is yes for celebrities and no for non-celebrities. Partially for data/technical reasons, but also maybe due to the murkier legal expectation of privacy for famous people.
by lotsofpulp | 2025-08-15 18:05:55+00:00
The reason for the federal guarantees was because voters wanted lower taxes, or otherwise did not want to redistribute wealth to students.

It’s a common way to scam today’s young and future taxpayers. See also underfunded pensions and other post employment benefits for government employees and taxpayer guaranteed 30 year fixed rate mortgages with no prepayment penalty.

Instead of helping someone, society lends them money and lets future taxpayers deal with the mess. That is how you win elections in aging societies.
by Retr0id | 2025-08-15 18:05:57+00:00
They might not be using GPUs but their servers definitely have finite RAM. Memory-hard PoW reduces the number of concurrent sessions you can maintain per fixed amount of RAM.

The more sites get protected by Anubis, the stronger the incentives are for scrapers to actually switch to GPUs etc. It wouldn't take all that much engineering work to hook the webcrypto apis up to a GPU impl (although it would still be fairly inefficient like that). If you're scraping a billion pages then the costs add up.
by Daniel-Gara | 2025-08-15 18:06:07+00:00
Good diagnosis of the loop. But “LLMs can’t build software” is mostly a statement about interface, not capability. If we ask a stochastic parrot to behave like a staff engineer in its head, it fails. If we reshape the work so the mental model lives outside the model—executable specs, tight tests, ADRs as shared state, small DSLs, and an orchestrator that forces evidence before code—agents can move through the same loop on bounded problems. In other words, they don’t need an internal model if the environment gives them one.

The better question isn’t “can an LLM maintain two mental models?” but “how much of this problem can we make machine-checkable?” Where we can’t (socio-technical trade-offs, ambiguous requirements), a human owns the decisions. Where we can (migrations, glue, refactors guarded by tests), the agent owns the keystrokes.

Today’s failure modes (omission, recency bias, hallucination) are real, but mitigated by durable memory, runbooks, and mandated check-ins the tool can’t skip. So: not “can’t build software”, but “can’t be the tech lead”. Yet.
by ajross | 2025-08-15 18:06:25+00:00
Clearly neither of those readings is a correct interpretation of the cited research.

Look folks, I know it offends your 2A inclinations, but this is a step in a legal action. One of the arguments made by any defendant in a case like this is "This was not a foreseeable risk". And that is directly and correctly refuted by the cited report. Period. And it's right that the media report on it.

Sig guns have a failure mode that is serious and impactful, and was aware of it when it sold the hardware.
by codedokode | 2025-08-15 18:06:42+00:00
Actually English spelling is pretty complicated and completely different from pronunciation. Why on Earth you Englishmen write "a" (as in skate) but pronounce it as "ei". And why you have so many versions for each vowel and why you have 3 letters for "k" sound and 2 letters (i, y) for the same sound.
by ajmurmann | 2025-08-15 18:07:11+00:00
"I know its a very boomerish thing to say, but its like companies in the USA really don't want to work. My thing would have been small"

This rings truer than it should. We had a locksmith out to give us an estimate to install several high-security locks that I can only assume would have been fairly good business. Never heard back from them. We didn't bother following up with them either because if they can't even bother writing up the estimate, how can I trust their work?

I wonder if it's a lack of competition in part based on a labor shortage and tight occupational licensing
by freedomben | 2025-08-15 18:07:23+00:00
Same (excepting GOG, where I buy the game if they have it, but they usually don't). I'm so grateful to Steam for working on Linux that I actually feel good about buying games knowing it's a vote for Linux.

It definitely helps that it works (almost) flawlessly. If it stopped working well, I would stop using them, but with the current status quo it's a rare example of a company I transact with that I actually feel good about
by kiba | 2025-08-15 18:07:45+00:00
Patents just aren't necessary. When something is in the "air", sooner or later it will be invented because it will be obvious in the state of the art.

There's no need to grant monopoly privileges. Rather, I favor market governed subsidies and grants for innovators to recoup the cost of their effort. The government will play a role in setting up the market and running it. This will be more democratic as people will have a voice to reward inventors for their efforts.

I expect this to be complimentary to innovations that will already arise.
by MetaWhirledPeas | 2025-08-15 18:07:57+00:00
> the US (especially) needs justice system reform with an eye toward making actions take 100x less time and 100x less money, approaching free for consumer and IP actions

While not addressing the situation in the same way, here's my knee-jerk idea for defense against patent trolls:

"If you want to sue a person or an organization, you must pay the legal fees for the defendant, in an amount equal or greater to the amount of money being spent by the plaintiff on legal matters pertaining to the case."

So a small business would get full funding for defense, but it would cost them double to sue someone else. I'd say that's an excellent trade-off. This would dissuade not just patent trolls but any lawsuit where money would be the determining factor for victory.

The Achilles' heel would be enforcement, leading to a new subcategory of legal efforts to ensure compliance. But there's an opportunity for a net reduction in legal action.
by bitpush | 2025-08-15 18:08:12+00:00
Again, not knocking on the business plan, but how you square that with your stated position?

> But over the past ~30 years, the internet has become much more commercial.

You work for a company doing podcasts, distributed over internet, which lets creators make money. It is the definition of commercial.

> Every page is optimized for engagement, so your attention can be resold to ad companies.

You can rewrite that "page" with "content", and then how different is your podcast? "Every content (podcast) is optimized for engagement, so your attention can be resold to ad companies".

> We can tell you which podcasts accepted the ads

How do you know which podcasts accepted ads? Yes, by tracking. To be honest, it isnt a bad word at all - but you made it to be a bad word, and I'm pointing that out.

EDIT: Your company uses GTM, which I'm sure you look at as the Head of Marketing.
by ta1243 | 2025-08-15 18:08:14+00:00
My team self hosts multiple internal services, including vaultwarden.

For most of these we use our standard corporate OIDC provider to provide autentication and accounting, either onto a proxy or direct on the service, that passes the user through, the hosted service is either fine (just logs the user in its local access logs for the accounting part) because it's allowed for all our corporate users, or the service uses its own authorisation logic to allow or reject the users.

Some devices are just generic user/password on the device itself -- the authorisation there is that the group responsible for that device has to keep the credential secure. Any authenticated Corp user can access the login page, and that gets logged, but the authorisation is a simple user/password.

If the credential isn't secure (because people are terrible with security) then at least the attacker is logged, and has had to authorise access.

Some authentication is better. Our guacamole hosts for example are authenticated on proxy with OIDC, then passed through to the guacamole server which does its own authorisation based on its internal database (which itself is managed via a github approach - to add joe.bloggs@corp.com to the "Washington Servers" group you add his identity to the right part of the "groups.conf" file and when the PR is merged it applies across the estate within a minute or two). Then they can access all connections in "Washington", but "davey.jones@corp.com" isn't in that group, so can't.

Likewise our IPAM will create a user in the "readonly" group automatically (our policy is ip records are available to everyone in the company), but they then need moving into an elevated rights using IPAM tooling to allocate IP addresses.

Vaultwarden though we maintain separate user and password, we still have the OIDC front end, but it's completely ignored for another layer of authorisation. I'm about to go on leave so I won't be thinking too much about if this will help, but its good to have the option.