MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by rayiner | 2025-08-07 17:30:53+00:00
> The idea that the sovereign should be limited to follow law, due process

Due process protects rights and entitlements. Nobody has a right to receive discretionary government contracts or grants. To the extent we’re taking about preexisting contracts, the universities can sue to enforce whatever contractual rights they have. We have a robust system for recovering from the government for breaches of contract.

> and the advice of experts in the administration of grants

The “expert” stuff is the legacy of a scientific racist who didn’t trust democracy. It’s antithetical to democracy to suggest that the public should be forced to give discretionary grants and contracts to particular entities based on what “experts” think. Those experts are often themselves closely intertwined with the entities receiving the funding! They’re alums of Harvard, they met their spouse during grad school at Columbia, etc. They’ve got deep conflicts of interest.
by motoxpro | 2025-08-07 17:31:01+00:00
They are researchers, not professional presenters. I promise you if I told you to do a live demo, on stage, for 20 minutes, going back and forth between scripted and unscripted content, to an audience of at least 50 million people, that unless you do this a lot, you would do the same or worse. I know this because this is what I do for a living. I have seen 1000s of "normal" people be extremely awkward on stage. Much more so than this.

It's super unfortunate that, becasue we live in the social media/youtube era, that everyone is expected to be this perfect person on camera, because why wouldn't they be? That's all they see.

I am glad that they use normal people who act like themselves rather than them hiring actors or taking researchers away from what they love to do and tell them they need to become professional in-front-of-camera people because "we have the gpt-5 launch" That would be a nightmare.

It's a group of scientists sharings their work with the world, but people just want "better marketing" :\
by zingababba | 2025-08-07 17:31:26+00:00
I've played with it on and off for years from 1mg up to 10mg a day. It's a drug I definitely 'feel' when I'm not saturated. I initially became interested in it due to this -> "Since vitamin B12 and folate also affect mood-associated parameters, the stimulation of the transport of these vitamins into brain cells by lithium may be cited as yet another mechanism of the anti-depressive, mood-elevating and anti-aggressive actions of lithium at nutritional dosage levels.” (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11838882/)

It does reach a point of diminishing returns for me and I become too sedated. I now take it irregularly.
by onlyrealcuzzo | 2025-08-07 17:31:32+00:00
https://epoch.ai/data-insights/llm-apis-accuracy-runtime-tra...

It is easier to get from 0% accurate to 99% accurate, than it is to get from 99% accurate to 99.9% accurate.

This is like the classic 9s problem in SRE. Each nine is exponentially more difficult.

How easy do we really think it will be for an LLM to get 100% accurate at physics, when we don't even know what 100% right is, and it's theoretically possible it's not even physically possible?
by jandrese | 2025-08-07 17:32:08+00:00
We don't have anywhere near the engine technology to make it anywhere worth going to in 400 years. That's orders of magnitude more difficult.

Anywhere that might sustain life is no closer than a couple thousand years away if we develop ultra-efficient almost magical engines that only bend the laws of physics instead of breaking them outright. Stuff like accelerating the propellent so hard that it picks up enormous amounts of relativistic mass, like every gram of propellant weighs effectively a ton because you've accelerated it so close to the speed of light, which requires some kind of ultra-dense power source that makes mere matter-antimatter annihilation look like burning a match.
by Based-A | 2025-08-07 17:32:53+00:00
> The LVT argument holds that we should ignore everything else: Their business ownership, their 401k, their stocks, bonds, cash, and even the house itself. Ignore all of that, tax people based on land.

Land Value Tax is specifically concerned with how property taxes are calculated. You're conflating implementing LVT with the concept of a Single Tax, which aims at replacing all taxes in a nation with LVT and is really only advocated for by pure Georgists. The LVT is a viable tax policy on it's own, and shouldn't be dismissed because of grander aims by a very small group of people.

> The 10 story apartment complex and the single family house both might occupy the same land, so they’re taxed the same.

Yes? They're both in the same area, which means they have access to the same utilities, same services, same amenities, etc. The presence of the apartment building doesn't inherently increase or decrease the value of the land, it's the other way around; higher land values see denser housing to better offset the cost of owning and operating the land. Neighborhoods are not static, unchanging islands immune to the developments that surround them. If a neighborhood solely made up of single family homes was 20+ blocks away from downtown 40 years ago, but is now directly bordering downtown because they city has grown and expanded, there is no reason for that neighborhood to still solely consist of single family homes (unless those homeowners want to pay to have a house right next to downtown).

> Sorry typical homeowner, we need to price you out of affording the home you bought and lived in. Our policy needs to force you to sell to this developer who will construct apartment complexes, reap the profits (tax-free now, because it’s not land!) but they’d be happy to rent an apartment to you for a monthly fee.

This is pure FUD. The "typical" homeowner in an urban-sprawled city would probably see their taxes decrease with LVT, depending on how close they are to high value areas. If your home is on the edge of downtown, you might be priced out because that land is a hell of a lot more valuable than what a single family home can capture. If you live in the "typical" suburban community that is 20+ minutes away from downtown? Negligible change, if not a decrease as most suburban lands have very little value compared to more urban communities. It's been shown time and time again that downtown business districts and other centralized urban communities overwhelmingly subsidize suburban communities.

> Finally, your “ask any economist” appeal to authority does not hold any water. Much has been written about the severe flaws with a Georgist style 100% LVT.

Again, LVT is not entrenched in it's Georgist implementation. No one worth listening too says that LVT solves everything and gives us Utopia. It's simply the least worst way to go about land taxation, and absolutely has its hurdles and flaws that will present themselves.
by doesnotexist | 2025-08-07 17:33:52+00:00
Situations like this are instances of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E2%80%93agent_proble...

In this case, corporate management holding the purse strings but their workers (devs) using the actual tools. The solution they offer to founders is to make the user your champion and have them sell your product for you.

"The meta point here is that you're not going to talk to the credit card holder; the user/dev is going to do that for you.

Give them the best possible chance at convincing the leadership. Make them look awesome for even bothering the leadership with a choice like this. Make it obviously awesome for them to decide “yes”. These users/devs are your sales people."

Maybe that works for dev tools with freemium models, but in many industries where this problem arises its just not possible to even get your product in front of the users. Take hospital systems and EHR purchasing where Doctors and Nurses are the users of the EHR day in and day out but it is the hospital administration that ultimately gets to decide which EHR is deployed. How do you get users to be champions of your product if you can't even get it in front of them?
by HaZeust | 2025-08-07 17:34:17+00:00
One woman who went through her calendar with GPT had good acting that the GPT reply helped her find impromptu information (an email she needed to answer), and someone staged GPT-5 to make a French-learning website lander - which butchered its own design in the second run; but that's all the good acting for a "candid presentation" that I could find.
by SoftTalker | 2025-08-07 17:35:04+00:00
There's a point where what you say is true but I would not view using 'jq' to tease a list out of some JSON data to be it. Isn't that what your python or go code is going to do? All jq is is a packaged set of calls to stdlib stuff.

Systems admins are generally not Python or Go experts. And those are two dependencies which may not be available anyway (or will require installation, and maintenancee, may introduce new vulns, etc.). You could say the same about 'jq' though.
by throw432189 | 2025-08-07 17:35:21+00:00
Two points I liked:

1. I like that the first bit of advice is to take it off. It's very interesting that in this story very few people take its advice.

2. It recommends whatever would make you happiest in that moment, but not what would make the best version of yourself happiest, or what would maximize happiness in the long term.

Solving mazes requires some backtracking, I guess. Doing whatever will make you happiest in the moment won't make you happiest in the long run.
by AlecSchueler | 2025-08-07 17:35:52+00:00
> I wasn't trying to imply that "idle time" is a bad thing

I you, I just mean what they're talking about is also not idle time as it's active time. If they were replacing work with sitting around at home, watching TV or whatever, then it would be idle time and drive them crazy no doubt. But spending time actively with their family is quite different, and would give satisfaction in a way that work does.

> I expect that varies a lot by person and situation.

Indeed. Spending isn't an inherent part of leisure. But it can be a part of it, and important part for some people. Telling them they could have more free time if they just gave up their passions or hobbies which cost money isn't likely to lead anywhere.
by simoncion | 2025-08-07 17:36:09+00:00
No?

URLs with the characters ' ' and '>' in them are not valid URLs. Perhaps your web browser does things differently than my Firefox and Chrome instances, but when I copy out that pretty-printed URL from the address bar and paste it, I get the following string:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44826199%3Ehello%20there

Though -oddly-, while Chrome's pretty-printer does pretty-print %3E, it fails to pretty-print %20 . Go figure.
by jonbiggums22 | 2025-08-07 17:36:19+00:00
This is why I think people ending up locked into vendor implementations of passkeys will be a thing. We had a totally open standard, TOTP, and there were still (somewhat successful) efforts make it non-standard like the Symantec VIP Access you mentioned. How many authenticator apps do I have to install? I was hoping for one!

FWIW when I was researching this for my own accounts I believe I saw in passing that someone had figured out a way to extricate the TOTP secret from VIP Access to use in a standard TOTP app. I didn't look into it much though since none of my current accounts require it and it just seemed something to avoid.
by evilDagmar | 2025-08-07 17:36:28+00:00
Actually, I think the problem here is that he's reducing it to a cost-benefit analysis that applies to a single corporation alone. Corporations are notoriously short-sighted and generally unable to plan for or see into the future more than 1-3 financial quarters.

Facilitating investment in long-term things that benefit the country or humanity as a whole is literally one of the reasons we have governments. Putting men on the moon didn't make any profit, but a whole slew of discoveries and inventions that happened before that could happen definitely made improvements to everyone's lot.
by RivieraKid | 2025-08-07 17:37:03+00:00
If AI fails to continue to improve, the worst-case economic outcome is a short and mild recession and probably not even that.

Once sector of the economy would cut down on investment spending, which can be easily offset by decreasing the interest rate.

But this is a short-term effect. What I'm worried is a structural change of the labor market, which would be positive for most people, but probably negative for people like me.
by impossiblefork | 2025-08-07 17:37:06+00:00
Before last year we didn't have reasoning. It came with QuietSTaR, then we got it in the form of O1 and then it became practical with DeepSeek's paper in January.

So we're only about a year since the last big breakthrough.

I think we got a second big breakthrough with Google's results on the IMO problems.

For this reason I think we're very far from hitting a wall. Maybe 'LLM parameter scaling is hitting a wall'. That might be true.
OCR that preserves document structure
by vectify_AI | 2025-08-07 17:37:20+00:00
OCR tools often lose document structure or output wrong heading levels, since they only see one page at a time — losing context, structure, and continuity across pages.

PageIndex OCR is a long-context OCR model designed to preserve the global structure of documents. It recognizes true hierarchy and semantic relationships across document pages, aiming to address issues common in traditional OCR. In our internal benchmarks, it outperforms other solutions such as Mistral and Contextual AI.

- Blog: https://pageindex.ai/blog/ocr

- API: https://docs.pageindex.ai/quickstart

- Dashboard: https://dash.pageindex.ai

Feedback is welcome.
by lotsofpulp | 2025-08-07 17:37:34+00:00
Nominal stock price going up does not mean anything (nor does Fortune 100), it could just be a function of the decreasing purchasing power of the currency.

5/10/15/20 year annual Honeywell returns are 9.74/10.29/14.03/11.78%.

SP500 is 14.69/13.80/14.42/10.57%.

I would characterize Honeywell as treading water until 2011, and since then they have been losing.

https://dqydj.com/stock-return-calculator/?ticker=HON

https://dqydj.com/sp-500-return-calculator/
by sunscream89 | 2025-08-07 17:38:50+00:00
This is very fine.

I have long dreamed of how exactly all this could be of useful utility to real people and real places and real [community of] things.

I don’t know everything you have going on here, though I like what I see so far.

I have wished for similar ideas around functional communities who actually still have brick and mortar terminal interests. It’s a big leap these communities going digital, however the economies they generate within themselves could have long term “share cooperative” value.

It could be like a currency with a running exchange (cash and carry) however what it is in one part (token) a value share, and in another (non fungible) like a voting right (contributor.)

Anyways, yes, local value systems that aren’t public blockchain have a place in the world.
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 | 2025-08-07 17:39:08+00:00
Alternatively

Wikipedia as search engine, no Javascript, no "AI"

Query string "wrench tight spaces"

Basin_wrench is the #1 result

usage: sh 1.sh wrench tight spaces > 1.htm;firefox ./1.htm

#!/bin/sh ns=$( for x in \ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 \ 100 101 \ 118 119 \ 710 711 \ 828 829 \ 2300 2301 2302 2303 do printf \&ns$x=1 done ) export x=https://en.wikipedia.org echo "url=$x/w/index.php?search=$@$ns&fulltext=1&offset=0" \ |(echo user-agent=\"\" ; echo header Accept:; tr \\40 +) \ |curl -K/dev/stdin \ |(echo "<base href=$x />";cat)
by AnimalMuppet | 2025-08-07 17:39:18+00:00
Presenting where you have to be exactly on the content with no deviation is hard. To do that without sounding like a robot is very hard.

Presenting isn't that hard if you know your content thoroughly, and care about it. You just get up and talk about something that you care about, within a somewhat-structured outline.

Presenting where customers and the financial press are watching and parsing every word, and any slip of the tongue can have real consequences? Yeah, um... find somebody else.
by 0xFEE1DEAD | 2025-08-07 17:39:29+00:00
> on internal, legacy codebases, enterprisey stuff

Or anything that breaks the norm really.

I recently wrote something where I updated a variable using atomic primitives. Because it was inside a hot path I read the value without using atomics as it was okay for the value to be stale. I handed it the code because I had a question about something unrelated and it wouldn't stop changing this piece of code to use atomic reads. Even when I prompted it not to change the code or explained why this was fine it wouldn't stop.
by 9rx | 2025-08-07 17:40:04+00:00
> Except one is recoverable from, just as we eventually recovered from dotcom.

"Dotcom" was never recovered. It, however, did pave the way for web browsers to gain rich APIs that allowed us to deliver what was historically installed desktop software on an on-demand delivery platform, which created new work. As that was starting to die out, the so-called smartphone just so happened to come along. That offered us the opportunity to do it all over again, except this time we were taking those on-demand applications and turning them back into installable software just like in the desktop era. And as that was starting to die out COVID hit and we started moving those installable mobile apps, which became less important when people we no longer on the go all the time, back to the web again. As that was starting to die out, then came ChatGPT and it offered work porting all those applications to AI platforms.

But if AI fails to deliver, there isn't an obvious next venue for us to rebuild the same programs all over yet again. Meta thought maybe VR was it, but we know how that turned out. More likely in that scenario we will continue using the web/mobile/AI apps that are already written henceforth. We don't really need the same applications running in other places anymore.

There is still room for niche applications here and there. The profession isn't apt to die a complete death. But without the massive effort to continually port everything from one platform to another, you don't need that many people.
by saulpw | 2025-08-07 17:40:04+00:00
I disagree with the toplevel statement. In high-school science terms, productivity is like accuracy whereas efficiency is like precision. You can be very "productive" at a high-level without being efficient. Similarly you can be quite efficient at your tasks while not managing to achieve the toplevel goal.

You may argue that "analyzing your tasks holistically" will make you more efficient at achieving your goals. But min-maxing is for tactics, and is antithetical to strategy. Very often, taking a nap or a bath or walk will yield an insight that changes the entire game, obviating weeks or months of efficient and diligent work. We've all experienced this, so why do we insist on "maximizing efficiency"?
by Alupis | 2025-08-07 17:40:14+00:00
I don't believe even a little bit the success of the community has anything to do with this sentence on the website. The success of the community belongs to the relentless hard work of Louis et al.

The sentence is a source of continuous friction between the language, community, and public. It just seems so... unnecessary.

Half of this thread was consumed with people discussing politics and virtues instead of the v1.12 release - that is a pretty large problem for the language, objectively.

When people google Gleam, they'll find pages/discussions like this instead of people discussing the merits of certain syntax or libraries, new features and the like.

There's a reason most businesses/organizations don't engage in politics... even if the founders have very strong political views.
by barrell | 2025-08-07 17:40:17+00:00
I don’t think that’s a valid excuse. Yes marketing speak has always existed, but it’s not like companies have always been completely unreliable.

I found it strange that, despite my excitement for such an event being roughly equivalent to WWDC these days, I had 0 desire to watch the live stream for exactly this reason: it’s not like they’re going to give anything to us straight.

Even this years WWDC I at least skipped through video afterwards. Before I used to have watch parties. Yes they’re overly positive and paint everything in a good light, but they never felt… idk whatever the vibe is I get from these (applicable to OpenAI, Grok, Meta, etc)

It’s been just a few years of a revolutionary technology and already the livestreams are less appealing than the biggest corporations yearly events. Personally I find that sad
by richliss | 2025-08-07 17:40:28+00:00
I have a friend who works in the civil service. He's a devout socialist.

His bosses boss, who runs a huge department gathered all his staff into a room and said "You can't be fired" to the staff.

My friend has said it's almost impossible to motivate people because there's zero repercussions. They're supposed to come into the office a few times a month, some of them never do and nothing can be done about it.

My friend has targets to meet and he won't be able to because of his reports not caring. He's getting anxious and even me saying "they did say you can't be fired" doesn't help.

Oh and they're spending nearly £1m with a supplier who the boss knows to build a component you can buy off the shelf for around £7500, and the supplier hasn't even built anything for nearly £1m in 18 months. It will probably be mothballed.

My friend is massively disappointed that the bureaucracy is failing at-risk members of society.

Cummings is right. He may not be a nice person, but he's right.
by ModernMech | 2025-08-07 17:40:33+00:00
I don't agree, the only thing thing that would shock me about this model is if it didn't hallucinate.

I think the actual effect of releasing more models every month has been to confuse people that progress is actually happening. Despite claims of exponentially improved performance and the ability to replace PhDs, doctors, and lawyers, it still routinely can't be trusted the same as the original ChatGPT, despite years of effort.
by ath3nd | 2025-08-07 17:40:42+00:00
Wow, what a breakthrough! A couple of % of benchmark improvements at a couple of % decrease of price per token!

With a couple of more trillions from investors in his company, Sama can really keep launching successful, groundbreaking and innovative products like:

- Study Mode (a pre-prompt that you can craft yourself): https://openai.com/index/chatgpt-study-mode/

- Office Suite (because nothing screams AGI like an office suite: https://www.computerworld.com/article/4021949/openai-goes-fo...)

- ChatGPT5 (ChatGPT4 with tweaks) https://openai.com/gpt-5/

I can almost smell the singularity behind the corner, just a couple of trillion more! Please investors!
by j_timberlake | 2025-08-07 17:40:43+00:00
I like how this sounds exactly like a selectable videogame hero:

Undeterred by even the most dangerous and threatening of obstacles, Teemo scouts the world with boundless enthusiasm and a cheerful spirit. A yordle with an unwavering sense of morality, he takes pride in following the Bandle Scout's Code, sometimes with such eagerness that he is unaware of the broader consequences of his actions. Though some say the existence of the Scouts is questionable, one thing is for certain: Teemo's conviction is nothing to be trifled with.