MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by zahlman | 2025-08-07 22:51:31+00:00
Does NPM not use zip files?

(Search results for `npm package format` are entirely not useful for figuring out what an NPM package actually consists of, beyond containing a `package.json` file. `pypi package format` results look wildly different; the first result I get is https://packaging.python.org/en/latest/discussions/package-f... which is quite comprehensive about the exact information I want — disregarding for a moment the fact that I already know this stuff ;) The NPM search results, for me, start with a Geeks4Geeks tutorial on creating a package. Is there even anything analogous to the Python Packaging Authority — misunderstood and not-actually-authoritative as it is — for NPM?)
by simonw | 2025-08-07 22:51:37+00:00
When I'm using them for code these days it is usually in a tool that can execute code in a loop - so I don't tend to even spot the hallucinations because the model self corrects itself.

For factual information I only ever use search-enabled models like o3 or GPT-4.

Most of my other use cases involve pasting large volumes of text into the model and having it extract information or manipulates that text in some way.
by usr1106 | 2025-08-07 22:52:33+00:00
I don't know for sure. I am pretty sure I did not learn it in school. I read German press daily from the 1970s to the 1990s, less frequently thereafter. So I guess that's the origin. I have never been interested in linguistics as a science. I speak 4 foreign languages, so I have some experience in comparing languages.

A sibling comment says that indo-germanic remains a standard scientific term in German, there is no nationalist background. I cannot comment on the correctness of that claim, but it would explain why I used it. German press is not suspect of nationalism, quite the opposite. (There are of course exceptions, but I have never read those. I am part of the pre 1990 generation that feels uncomfortable when seeing German flags flown by individuals in public.)
by dylan604 | 2025-08-07 22:54:37+00:00
Proper security is a total pain in the ass, and makes things nigh impossible to use in the manner people want to use them. This naturally makes things more expensive to recover from oopsies.

This is why YubiKeys will only ever work for people technical enough to understand them. Normies will loose it at the first chance, and then be locked out of everything. At that point, YubiKeys will be banned by Congress from all of the people writing in demanding something be done about their own inabilities to not be an ID10T
by btown | 2025-08-07 22:54:44+00:00
B2B2C marketplaces - especially ones that don't charge the "B2B" users, but take a cut of each transaction, and empower users to encourage transactions through a customized instance of the platform - are a fascinating "final boss level" for this mindset.

Your user is not your buyer, but they can be a distributed salesforce. You need to growth-hack not only for your penetration at the B2B level, but to give them the tools they need to growth-hack their own B2C client bases, with your product at the forefront.

That's a lot to build as a founding team, and occasionally it can be like herding cats - but it can be incredibly lucrative, because you have an incredibly low barrier to entry at the B2B level, but every account naturally scales with value delivered to the end customer.
by p1necone | 2025-08-07 22:55:21+00:00
I think the stock market has just proven time and time again that a large proportion of investors (and VCs) do basically no due diligence or critical thinking about what they're throwing money at, and businesses actually making profit hasn't mattered for a long time - which was the only thing tethering their value to the actual concrete stuff they're building. If you can hype it well your share price goes up, and even the investors that do do due proper diligence can see that and so they're all in too.

By and large people do not have the integrity to even care that numbers are obviously being fudged, and they know that the market is going to respond positively to blustering and bald faced lies. It's a self reinforcing cycle.
by Terr_ | 2025-08-07 22:55:42+00:00
I sometimes imagine how much of this could be avoided if the communication signals weren't (a) broadcast or (b) a imperceptible to humans.

If it an electrical contact in the door handle, it would be very difficult for anyone to monitor or inject other signals.

If the signals were audible sound, you'd know when someone was jamming it.

In practice, my number one use of a fob from a remote distance is locking, rather than unlocking, and those two operations don't have the equivalent security risk.
by ogandreakiro | 2025-08-07 22:55:46+00:00
Oh thanks for pointing this out. Pricing is explained on our landing https://notte.cc.

It’s 500 free credits. Pro plan $79/mo for 10K credits/mo. You can do additional top up 1K credits for $10 when in Pro plan.

If you need more it’s a custom enterprise deal - we work a lot with volume discounts.
by Yizahi | 2025-08-07 22:56:43+00:00
Is Casio calculator intelligent? Because it can also be turned on, assigned an input, produce output, and turn off. Just like any existing LLM program. What is the big difference between them in regard of "intelligence", if the only criteria is a difficulty with which same task may be performed by a human? Maybe producing computationally intensive outputs is not a sole sign of intelligence?
by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 | 2025-08-07 22:57:53+00:00
But it is likely not the path it will take. While there is a certain tendency towards centralization ( 1 person owning everything ), the future, as described, both touches on something very important ( why are we doing what we are doing ) and completely misses the likely result of suboptimal behavior of others ( balkanization, war and other like human behavior, but with robots fighting for those resources ). In other words, it will be closer to the world of Hiro Protagonist, where individual local factions and actors are way more powerful as embodied by the 'Sovereign'.

FWIW, I find this like of thinking fascinating even if I disagree with conclusion.
by thimabi | 2025-08-07 22:58:03+00:00
> Did anyone yet hit the usage limits to report back how many messages are possible?

10 messages every 5 hours on GPT-5 for free users, then it uses GPT-5-mini.

80 messages every 3 hours on GPT-5 for Plus users, then it uses GPT-5-mini (In fact, I tested this and was not allowed to use the mini model until I’ve exhausted my GPT-5-Thinking quota. That seems to be a bug.)

200 messages per week on GPT-5-Thinking on Plus and Team.

Unlimited GPT-5 on Team and Pro, subject to abuse guardrails.
by dylan604 | 2025-08-07 22:58:17+00:00
I don't think the word "secure" was ever part of the discussion on keyless entry for cars. They would have used something like "convenience". Secure would maybe be considered in that the car doors are now locked from the keyless. But as far as "secure" being used in regards to the transmission/receiving of the wireless signal? I doubt if it was ever mentioned by anyone other than PR.
by Doxin | 2025-08-07 22:58:23+00:00
It can, using OOB. E.g. returning this as a response:

<div id="foo" hx-swap-oob="true">yes</div> <div id="bar" hx-swap-oob="true">possibly</div>

will make HTMX update both the #foo div and the #bar div already on the page.
by famouswaffles | 2025-08-07 22:58:32+00:00
>you'd expect GPT-5 to be a world-shattering release rather than incremental and stable improvement.

Compared to the GPT-4 release which was a little over 2 years ago (less than the gap between 3 and 4), it is. The only difference is we now have multiple organizations releasing state of the art models every few months. Even if models are improving at the same rate, those same big jumps after every handful of months was never realistic.

It's an incremental stable improvement over o3, which was released what? 4 months ago.
by parliament32 | 2025-08-07 22:58:47+00:00
I went hunting in the NIST documentation to see if this is even an approved authentication method and, technically, I can't find anything wrong with it (if we consider it to be a "Look-up Secret Authenticator", see NIST 800-63b section 5.1.2.1). They're technically abusing what is supposed to be a collection of pre-distributed authenticators (think recovery codes), but there's nothing prohibiting these look-up codes from being sent on-demand and there only being a single selection.

As for the method itself.. IMO they're certainly phishable, but I don't think they're any more phishable than a typical username/password prompt.

> An attacker can simply send your email address to a legitimate service, and prompt for a 6-digit code. You can't know for sure if the code is supposed to be entered in the right place.

An attacker can also simply present a login prompt, say a Google-looking one, and a user will just enter their credentials.

This is why phishing-resistant authentication is the one true path forward.
by puttycat | 2025-08-07 22:59:13+00:00
The videos are great:

https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs415...

https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs415...

https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs415...
by hathawsh | 2025-08-07 23:00:06+00:00
There are areas where we seem to be much closer to AGI than most people realize. AGI for software development, in particular, seems incredibly close. For example, Claude Code has bewildering capabilities that feel like magic. Mix it with a team of other capable development-oriented AIs and you might be able to build AI software that builds better AI software, all by itself.
by rapind | 2025-08-07 23:01:06+00:00
OpenAI wants AGI, or at least something they can argue is AGI because it changes their relationship with Microsoft. That's what I remember, although I don't really stay up to date (https://www.wired.com/story/microsoft-and-openais-agi-fight-...).

As long as this is the case though I would expect Altman will be hyping up AGI a lot, regardless of it's veracity.
by thehamkercat | 2025-08-07 23:01:10+00:00
I think most of them provide an option to change the default file, but it'll be really good if they all can switch to AGENT.md by default

Till then you can also use symlinks

there are issues opened in some repos for this

- Support "AGENT.md" spec + filename · Issue #4970 · google-gemini/gemini-cli

https://github.com/google-gemini/gemini-cli/issues/4970#issu...
by skeledrew | 2025-08-07 23:01:43+00:00
Why do you think they'll feel disrespected? They literally have no expectations; they're just putting content out there for others to do as they wish with. Several here have weighed in to say they don't care about LLMs accessing and morphing their content.

Of course they won't be nearly as many as those who publish with expectations, but also history has shown that whenever there's a gap, someone tends to fill it just because. I'm not worried about content gaps at all. What I see is an overall increase in quality as no-expectation sources float to the top of search results.
by vdupras | 2025-08-07 23:02:46+00:00
> Brazil also imagines a hyper-efficient future ...

I don't think that's how I'd call it. The future in Brazil looks deeply dysfunctional to me. About as efficient as a car with no wheel revving up to its maximum capacity. It's just that everyone is extremely busy.

Maybe that a better way to say this would be that the society as a whole has a fixation on a certain idea of efficiency?
by kelnos | 2025-08-07 23:03:31+00:00
> The fix is to detect invalid calls to value(), log/print to stderr, and call abort().

That is what the code does:

> > Now, had that code ever run, it would have CHECKed and blown up right there, since calling .value() after it's returned false on the pass-fail check is not allowed.

Sure, it also makes sure that the check has been done before calling either .value() or .error(), but that isn't really relevant to the issue at hand: the program aborts if you call the wrong one of those two based on what the object holds.

> With a suitable test suite these logic errors will reveal themselves before a release build.

This is why I prefer Rust's approach with Result: the normal way of using it[0] means that I can't use it incorrectly. If I try to, it will be caught at compile time, and I don't need to write and maintain a test for something so stupidly trivial.

[0] Yes, I can use unwrap() and kill those guarantees. I make a habit of very rarely using unwrap(), and when I do, I write a comment above the line that details why I believe it's safe and will never panic.
by andrewshi98 | 2025-08-07 23:03:52+00:00
I think enforcing test coverage monitoring and metrics like existing code change will make sure those change doesn't get to PR stage. The goal should be constructing a sophisticated signal pipeline which runs on every PR which, and the goal is as long as the signal passes, it is safe to claim that landing the PR will cause no issue and will not structurally damage the system.
by sp527 | 2025-08-07 23:04:00+00:00
Oh trust me I know. I worked at Palantir well before it was public and had firsthand experience of Alex Karp. He would draw incomprehensible stick figure box diagrams on a whiteboard for F100 CEOs, ramble some nonsensical jargon, and somehow close a multimillion dollar pilot. The guy is better at faking it than high-end escorts. It doesn't surprise me that this has fooled degens around the world, from Wall Street to r/wallstreetbets. Incredibly, even Damadoran has thrown in the towel and opened a position, while still admitting he has no idea what they do.
by Hobadee | 2025-08-07 23:04:57+00:00
Progress bars are very hard. I implemented a PowerShell progress bar in a script I wrote, and even that was hard. The script did a nested iteration, deleting objects and re-starting the iteration. I updated the progress bar based on completion of the outermost iteration, but because of how things processed, the progress bar would move more or less logarithmicly; super fast at the start, but slowing down significantly at the end.

I'm sure I could have made the progress bar move more smoothly, but it would have required restructuring my entire program. (It probably needed it, but for a simple script I ran occasionally, not worth it.)
by LegionMammal978 | 2025-08-07 23:04:58+00:00
Lots of things get weird in edge cases with SVGs. E.g., one thing that keeps biting me is that Firefox always snaps x="X" y="Y" coordinates on <use> elements to the nearest CSS pixel (even if the pixel size is very large), but allows transform="translate(X,Y)" to keep its full subpixel precision. I've taken to double-checking all my SVGs at 3000% zoom just to spot all the seams that implementations can create.
by kasey_junk | 2025-08-07 23:05:12+00:00
I’m not making a claim about the usefulness. You made a claim about access not changing. That’s simply untrue. Access has gone up.

As for the feature bans those are clearly municipalities attempts to get around either constitutional or political impediments to the bans people actually want. Magazines fed semi automatic rifles are what people want to ban, banning rifles with muzzle shrouds is how they get there.

Studies on this topic are fraught because the gun industry has long prevented the normal research funding issues on this topic and have fought tooth and nail any data collection efforts.
by mzk_pi | 2025-08-07 23:06:11+00:00
Thanks！ A locally-rooted value system that is not based on a public blockchain can become a gentle value-creation mechanism, tailored to the climate and culture of the region. In one community, such a system is currently being operated using analog methods, though certain management challenges have begun to surface. However, even without smart contracts, we believe the same concept can be implemented relatively simply within the community by utilizing a database.

Please also see the discussion^^ https://github.com/contribution-protocol/contribution-protoc...
by pingakshya2008 | 2025-08-07 23:06:26+00:00
Hi HN!

I built Vidya AI (vidyaai.co) to solve a problem I personally faced: watching long YouTube educational videos and still having unanswered questions. With Vidya, you can load a video, ask your question, and get an instant, contextual answer — all within the browser.

Just pushed an update that now includes longer, more detailed answers with emoji-enhanced responses and further reading recommendations.

Would love your feedback on how to make it better! Happy to answer questions about the tech stack or implementation.
by fsckboy | 2025-08-07 23:06:32+00:00
europeans are not purists about cheese, europe has the same "supermarket brands" of cheese that the US does. It's a marketing move for the quality producers of regional cheese varieties to protect their market by proclaiming that their cheese is the authentic one, and others (with no regard to quality) are not. it's wanting to own the name. The Sardinians are proud of their cheese that they eat with the maggots in it, it's not about purity.
by ricardorivaldo | 2025-08-07 23:06:55+00:00
there is no "average worker", this is a statistical concept, life in europe is way better them in US for low income people, they have healthcare, they have weekends , they have public tranportation, they have schools and pre-schools , they lack some space since europe is full populated but overall, no low income (and maybe not so low) will change europe for USA anytime.
Ask HN: How much would it cost to build a new commercially viable OS?
by quacked | 2025-08-07 23:07:41+00:00
Assume you’re an eccentric centi-billionaire that wants to create a new desktop/server-class OS that can match Windows, macOS, and Linux in performance, compatibility, and security, and be sold commercially as a competitor.

What would it cost to develop from scratch? How many engineers do you need? How many lawyers?
by simonw | 2025-08-07 23:09:35+00:00
Yup, I have a different definition of expert. I'm not an expert in training models - I'm an expert in applications of those models, and how to explain those applications to other people.

AI engineering, not ML engineering, is one way of framing that.

I don't write papers (I don't have the patience for that), but my work does get cited in papers from time to time. One of my blog posts was the foundation of the work described in the CaMeL paper from DeepMind for example: https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.18813
by michaelt | 2025-08-07 23:09:36+00:00
The pro-porn side has zero PR because respectable public figures don't see pro-porn advocacy as a good career move. At most, you'll get some oblique references to it.

Meanwhile, the anti-porn side has a formidable alliance:

Right-wing, religiously-motivated anti-porn activists. Left-wing, feminism-motivated anti-porn activists. Big corporate types with lots of $$$$ to spend who want their customer support chatbot to be completely SFW at all times. AI safety folk who think keeping the model on a tight leash is an ethical obligation, lest future iterations take over the world. AI vendors who are keen on the yes-it-might-take-over-the-world narrative. AI vendors who just don't want their developers having to handle NSFW stuff in work. Politicians who don't know a transformer from a diffusion model, but who've heard a chorus of worries about lost jobs and AI bias and deepfakes and revenge porn.

These people will speak up in public at the drop of a hat.
by ColonelPhantom | 2025-08-07 23:10:06+00:00
Is 86box period-accurate for Windows XP? It seems to go up to Socket 370 (Pentium III) which is very early for XP. Additionally, from my experience using PCem (which 86box is based on), you need pretty beefy hardware to emulate a Pentium II or K6, let alone to go beyond them. And those are period-accurate for Windows 98, not XP.
by gherkinnn | 2025-08-07 23:10:39+00:00
With some further development the concept of crow and koalas could become the next "what colour is your function", where people talk about coloured function without knowing of the original blog.

https://journal.stuffwithstuff.com/2015/02/01/what-color-is-...

As it stands, this post falls short of delivering that. Maybe the point shouldn't be made on FE tech (a worn out and too concrete topic) but something slightly more abstract. Alas it is almost midnight and I am tired.
by sigbottle | 2025-08-07 23:12:59+00:00
I'm a codeforces guy, and I've benchmarked o3 on several of my favorite problems of various difficulty and concluded that o3 really isn't suitable for true reasoning still. Mostly because it's unable to think from first principles, so if you throw a non-standard problem it will brick. I think this will be a fundamental issue with any LLM.

I will say I would far more appreciate an AI that when it faces these ambiguous problems, either provides sources for further reading, or just admits it doesn't know and is, you know, actually trying to work together to find a solution instead of being trained to 1 shot everything.

When generalizing these skills to say, debugging, I will often just straight up ignore the AI slop output it concluded and instead explore the sources it found. o3 is surprisingly good at this. But for hard niche debugging, the conclusions it comes to are not only wrong, but it phrases it in an arrogant way and when you push back it's actually like talking to a narcissist (phrasing objections as "you feel", being excessively stubborn, word dumping a bunch of phrases that sound correct but don't hold up to scrutiny, etc).
by BizarroLand | 2025-08-07 23:13:07+00:00
This crap tier article was the first and easiest response to your question:

https://sciencesensei.com/24-animals-with-memory-abilities-t...

3 primate species where very concise tests showed that they were close to or occasionally slightly better than humans in specifically rigged short term memory tests (after being trained and put up against humans going in blind).

I've never heard of any test showing an animal to be significantly more intelligent than humans in any measure that we have come up with to measure intelligence by.

That being said, I believe it is possible that some animals are either close enough to us that they deserve to be called sentient, and I believe it is possible that other creatures on this planet have levels of intelligence in specialized areas that humans can never hope to approach unaided by tools, but as far as broad range intelligence, I think we're this planets' possibly undeserved leaders.

Can you find anything that I didn't consider?
by hengheng | 2025-08-07 23:14:37+00:00
The recent qwen3 models run fine on CPU + GPU, and so does gpt-oss. LM Studio and Ollama are turnkey solutions where the user has to know nothing about memory management. But finding benchmarks for these hybrid setups is astonishingly difficult.

I keep thinking that the bottleneck has to be CPU RAM, and for a large model the difference would be minor. For example with an 100 GByte model such as quantised gpt-oss-120B, I imagine that going from 10G to 24G would scale up my tk/s like 1/90 -> 1/76, so 20% advantage? But I can't find much on the high-level scaling math. People seem to either create calculators that oversimplify, or they seem too deep into the weeds.

I'd like a new anandtech please.
by int_19h | 2025-08-07 23:14:45+00:00
The inherent reason why feudal lords existed is because, if you're a leader of a warband, you can use your soldiers to extract taxes from population of a certain area, and then use that revenue to train more soldiers and increase the area.

Today, instead of soldiers, it's capital, and instead of direct taxes, it's indirect economic rent, but the principle is the same - accumulation of power.
by bigyabai | 2025-08-07 23:14:47+00:00
Commercially-viable? Windows and MacOS are both basically given away for free these days. It's been this way on the server for decades; commercial viability means the user pays nothing.

You could probably spend a trillion dollars reinventing the kernel and still lose out to Linux in a world where the internet still exists. If you insist on a commercialized outcome then no amount will really be enough.