MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jonahx | 2025-08-15 17:54:14+00:00
I'm of two minds here. I agree there is something petty and unwholesome in the fixations of cancel culture, and by and large they don't spring from a virtuous place.

Otoh, it's more nuanced than just "did not affect them". Multiple things are happening here, and some have validity:

1. Such discussions are often serving (or people feel they are) as proxies for discussions about what the current rules should be. In that context, an insistence of calling Jobs or anyone else out serves as an insistence that such behavior not be allowed now. To me, it's silly that people can't separate these two things, but alas many can't.

2. There is a genuine issue of incentives. If people observe that success buys you a free pass for being a raging asshole, many of them will take note. Indeed, being able to get away with being an asshole can even become a special marker of success.
by hnbad | 2025-08-15 17:54:31+00:00
Same legal basis of the argument, but much flimsier logic. Unless you're specifically talking about "Nazi symbols" when you say "Nazi stuff" because those are covered by a specific law originally intended to suppress the former NSDAP.

A more relevant legal context if you want to horseshoe this is that Germany banned the German Communist Party as the second party right after banning the literal successor party of the NSDAP. But it only did so due to what we would nowadays call illegal interfering by the government in the proceedings of the constitutional court (though of course it was mostly legal at the time). This literally led to the ban of the Communist Party being reversed later (which wouldn't have been possible if the arguments had been valid). The Nazi party on the other hand remains being banned.
by cosmic_cheese | 2025-08-15 17:54:40+00:00
I might have to play with writing alongside vocab reviews.

Back in the earlier days of the online Japanese learning sphere (when AJATT was still the big new thing), I tried learning by starting with writing by studying kanji independently, but that went nowhere even after several months in.

More recently I’ve been making a point of audibly speaking the sentences associated with vocab cards and that’s helped a lot with being able to fluidly speak the various long trains of sounds that are common in Japanese but rare in English as well for improving recall and improving reading speed. It would follow that writing might enhance that effect.

My foremost goal is to become conversational too. The rest should follow more naturally if I can achieve that.
by sumtechguy | 2025-08-15 17:55:08+00:00
For someone doing spamming that low level would work well. As their cost is determinatively low to make it work. For someone doing scraping to get data and feeding it to an AI not so much. The AI groups usually have some pretty heavy hitting hardware sitting behind it. They could even break off some hardware that is to be retired and have it munch away on it. To make it non cost effective the calculations would need to be much bigger.
by aydyn | 2025-08-15 17:55:50+00:00
I agree with your axioms but not your conclusion.

People do value human creativity, but why do you think that comes from the degree mills and monocultures of the humanities departments? I don't agree that these departments foster creativity, rather the opposite, they foster conformity. There are lots of concrete real life examples of this.

I think that creativity doesn't come from humanities departments, but more likely, organically from counter culture. Who doesn't know what a rick roll is? This did not come from a humanities department.

Edit:

Forgot to add my second point: AI is going to let people outside the mainstream produce genuinely credible, professional-level work without a massive budget.

That means further devaluing of establishment institutions like humanities departments. It strips away the gatekeeping power, deciding who gets to count as legit. AI blows that up.
by orochimaaru | 2025-08-15 17:56:02+00:00
I agree. FMEA has separate fields for likelihood of occurrence and severity of occurrence. I agree with this in that the severity of occurrence is high/critical. The likelihood, I don't think it described that well.

To put an analogy, I've participated in FMEA's for software systems and the underlying physical installation. The severity of losing your class A data center due to flooding or complete power loss for over 48 hours is critical. The likelihood is low depending on the data centers location.

Question is how likely were the unintentional discharge scenarios in this FMEA study?
by thisisit | 2025-08-15 17:56:07+00:00
As bad as this is it will only lead to more brigading about how billionaires like Zuckerberg were talking about being repressed under the Dems/Biden. It just seems the party condemning others regarding first amendment rights isn't that first amendment. And for others yet this is going to be only a "rating" or a list. Nothing bad is going to happen just because the list or rating exists. Right?

To them I ask to explain how many points Tim ̶A̶p̶p̶l̶e̶ Cook and Apple got for his gold bar:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/08/07/tim-...
by vidarh | 2025-08-15 17:56:09+00:00
A lot of people also has the misconception that Marx "hated" capitalism. But half the first chapter of the Communist Manifesto is Marx being a total capitalism fanboy, arguing that capitalism has brought about advances never previously seen, and championing capitalism as eroding xenophobia because it interferes with the need for trade.

He first then goes on, as you say, from a "this is how this system operates" to "here's an alternative system".

To Marx, capitalism was both a necessary stage and a positive step, just in his view not some final utopia.

Arguably, one of Marx' biggest failing was that he severely over-estimated how quickly capitalism would saturate the world markets and get to a stage where growth is only possible through the reduction of labour costs, as his prediction of capitalism failing was predicated on that.
by intalentive | 2025-08-15 17:56:34+00:00
Good point about the Turing Test:

>The original Turing Test was designed to compare two participants chatting through a text-only interface: one AI and one human. The goal was to spot the imposter. Today, the test is simplified from three participants to just two: a human and an LLM.

By the original meaning of the test it's easy to tell an LLM from a human.
by exoverito | 2025-08-15 17:56:43+00:00
It seems the selected examples in your tendentious anaphora are entirely about justifying censorship and centralization. Strikes me as ironic, since the hacker ethos has been stridently libertarian, information wants to be free and all that. Now I hear more people like yourself, practically begging for restrictions and top down control. Reminds me of the covid hysteria over 'misinformation' around the lab leak theory and gain of function research. Many reasonable criticisms were censored by the big tech platforms. For example, lockdowns were immensely destructive and have never been recommended policy in response to epidemics, school closures caused significant harm to children who were at no real risk of the virus, Fauci admitted 6 feet of social distancing was arbitrary and not based on any science, and policies requiring cloth masks were not found to have any significant effect in preventing transmission, etc..
by vinhatson | 2025-08-15 17:57:16+00:00
A no-man’s land, where extremism has pushed each person to a place of only themselves, the past, and loneliness. The past is multifaceted—who dares to betray it? Hardly anyone. We arrived here through the past, and we’re too late to surpass it without proper self-awareness. Regrettably, that awareness is another no-man’s land unique to each person—no universal formula, nothing. We call it nirvana, but we know it’s not nirvana; we are not that. We are just people with dreams, stepping into the world with something to create from the materials we already have, and inadvertently, this aligns with what the world lacks. We are certainly not saints, at least not with that initial preparation—no one thinks that. It’s just a dive into it, sacrificing youth with passion to find answers for ourselves and revel in them. Unfortunately, the inertia is too great—who is brave enough to step beyond it?
by HolyLampshade | 2025-08-15 17:57:31+00:00
I completely agree with you. 21 years ago when it was released it was simply “yet another competitor” to the sort of overlay systems that gamespy and the like were trying to implement. You installed it because Half-Life 2 (and the litany of mods that became empires into themselves) required it, but it took years for it to develop in a direction that pointed to where we are now.

The first time I did a rebuild and now no longer needed the installation media for games, or the license keys in the manual/game jacket, and I was fully sold.

I don’t fully grasp the hatred, because almost every aspect of it is a vast improvement over what existed 20 years ago. But fortunately there are alternatives.
by aDyslecticCrow | 2025-08-15 17:57:44+00:00
> it is my interpretation of the show "Jeopardy!" based on the Wiki article

You are spot on though. I mostly wanted to argue that no decent distinction can be made here.

> I did find this really quite disappointing and disillusioning when I first learned about it

ye... same here.

---

I'm personally in the camp that "intelligence" is a human concept. A metric to compare humans. Applying it to computers makes us anthropomorphism computers and think of them as people. Thinking of LLMs as people makes us trust them with bad things.

So we should call them impressive, fluent, fast, useful, good at tasks. Computers already beat us at most math, statistics, searching for information, spacial visualization, information recollection, lossless communication. LLMs just adds to that list, but does nothing new to make the word "intelligent" applicable. Even if we reach the AGI singularity; thinking of them as humans or using human terminology to describe them is a fatal error.

(Destroying earth to make paperclips is arguably the least intelligent thing you could ever do.)
by godelski | 2025-08-15 17:57:59+00:00
Interestingly Valve makes the most money per head compared to any other company. At $19m/head it's magnitudes above Meta and the average salary is $1.4m[0]!

I'm not trying to disparage steam, I actually really like them[1]. I'm pointing it out because it's a business strategy we don't see that often: loyalty. I mean what other billionaire do you know where there's tons of memes of but is also overwhelmingly seen in a positive light? Sure, he doesn't have Elon money but dude has $10bn, I don't think another $290bn is really going to make a big difference in his life[2]. He has way less controversy than Elon had even before all the political stuff. Steam is like Costco, except Gabe is a billionaire.

What I'm trying to say is that you can become a billionaire by building a quality product and through customer loyalty. These things don't have to be mutually exclusive. You can be fucking rich, your employees can be fucking rich, you can build a useful, AND a beloved product. In a time where we live in a Lemon Economy, where it is all about making the s̶h̶i̶t̶t̶i̶e̶s̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶u̶s̶e̶r̶s̶ ̶w̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶b̶u̶y̶ minimum viable product, where we rush for the newest feature and loudest bells and whistles (regardless of if they actually work), Steam stands out.

I want more companies like Valve/Steam.

[0] https://upptic.com/valve-structure-employment-numbers-revenu...

[1] Like another user pointed out, they won be over with Linux gaming. I've had a great experience with them, even from the early days. You could tell through github issues they cared. They wouldn't just dismiss things like "oh, we don't support that distro" and actually just figure out what's going on (because your distro doesn't actually matter). They were clearly nerds themselves and nerds that cared.

[2] You just can't spend that kind of money. Fucking MacKenzie Scott is trying to give her wealth away as fast as possible, has already given away half her wealth, but she has the same net worth as when she divorced Bezos. Compound interest is a crazy thing.

[3] P.S. Fuck Visa and Mastercard. Unless my transaction is illegal, you better fucking process it. Anything short of that is holding my own money hostage. That is fucking theft. You created the duopoly. Don't get greedy or you'll lose it.
by yabones | 2025-08-15 17:58:29+00:00
My understanding is that it just increases the "expense" of mass crawling just enough to put it out of reach. If it costs fractional pennies per page scrape with just a python or go bot, it costs nickels and dimes to run a headless chromium instance to do the same thing. The purpose is economical - make it too expensive to scrape the "open web". Whether it achieves that goal is another thing.
by gottorf | 2025-08-15 17:58:50+00:00
Not captured in numbers or the article, but I've noticed service becoming a lot poorer, though perhaps the downward trend has stopped for now. Between 2021-2024 or so, I encountered a lot of people working for airlines (gate agents, flight attendants, etc.) who really went out of their way to make me feel like they're doing me a favor by letting me fly on their plane.

That's not to say that the average airline worker is like that; it just seemed like the bottom fell out, so that the floor on what my worst experience could be while flying became substantially worse compared to times before.
by xena | 2025-08-15 17:59:04+00:00
I just found out about this when it came to the front page of Hacker News. I really wish I was given advanced notice. I haven't been able to put as much energy into Anubis as I've wanted because I've been incredibly overwhelmed by life and need to be able to afford to make this my full time job. Support contracts are being roadblocked, and I just wish I had the time and energy to focus on this without having to worry about being the single income for the household.
by spandrew | 2025-08-15 17:59:07+00:00
Let me push back and say that is not the point of university.

If you take the stance that education's function is to act like a feeder for business institutions; I guess? But that's only one byproduct of a strong education. Another is research; the other is critical thinking and civil productivity as a whole.

I'm as pro-capital as any private industry-focused tech worker is; but lets not pretend that's all the value we get out of the humanities.

Ever watch Netflix these days? Woof.
by hombre_fatal | 2025-08-15 17:59:36+00:00
Lots.

1. The heart rate line graph during my sleep made me realize just how bad exercise within 6 hours of bed is. My resting heart rate is 43bpm, yet if I exercise, I'll try to sleep at 60bpm that slowly decreases to 45bpm over 4-6 hours. And it always coincides with worse sleep.

2. I realized how often my HR jumps during sleep. Turns out I have a deviated septum that got bad enough in my 30s to regularly block breathing. I thought I had sleep apnea that would require a CPAP but it turns out I just need nasal strips. No more problems.

3. If you see you have bad sleep, you can now ask the question "how do I improve my sleep?" If you don't know you have bad sleep because you think you're sleeping 8 hours, then you don't realize you have levers to pull.
by majormajor | 2025-08-15 17:59:39+00:00
Well I'm saying that in practice adding supply hasn't lowered practice it has merely slowed the increase in prices. And that's mathematically essentially the same thing, but it's importantly different in two big ways:

1) If people see their costs going up while they also see new construction, the correlation machine's gonna jump to the wrong conclusions

2) If costs are still going up people are still going to be unhappy and worse off

Supply can increase AND price can still go up, and so for people to be won over and convinced you need to crack the second part, not just the first part. In a libertarian "just reduce regulation" approach that's often pitched, the natural equilibrium will be closer to "supply increase and price go up slowly", and people skeptical of "just reduce regulation" as a solution are more accurate than they're given credit for. Gotta actively intervene to make supply increase enough for any sustained period of time - we only see it in cases of macro shocks. Like the 2008 recession, or the post-Covid-bullwhip.
by margalabargala | 2025-08-15 17:59:48+00:00
All that means is, that building one unit of housing and selling it means that the pool of available housing is increased by less than one unit. It does not mean that the available housing supply did not change, or decreased.

So if building one unit of housing increases the housing supply by 0.7 units on average or whatever, then the same logic applies, just overbuild by 30%.
by mikekij | 2025-08-15 17:59:57+00:00
This post was either written entirely by chatGPT, or mostly. Multiple instances of "...this isn't just X - it's Y."

"The contrast isn't just economic — it's philosophical."

"family wealth isn't just an advantage in entrepreneurship — it's often a prerequisite"

"entrepreneurial success isn't just about fairness — it's about creating more pathways for the next generation of innovators"

This fact doesn't undermine the value of the article - but it is frustrating for the level of LLM authorship to get to the point where I can spot this in a number of HN posts.
by bArray | 2025-08-15 17:59:59+00:00
I think there is space for images, but they should be carefully considered. They should add to the overall text.

I provide additional features for users, one is TTS so that they can listen to the article. Another feature is a little icon that appears for links that are external to the website.

I have recently come around to the idea of adding a banner image, as a way of tone setting for the text to come.
by Fwirt | 2025-08-15 18:00:10+00:00
This is exactly my experience. I got diagnosed as some variant of bipolar 9 years ago and put on a mood stabilizer, but the symptoms never really fit. I’m in general high functioning and got great grades up through postsecondary, didn’t start really having a problem until I started experiencing burnout after having kids during the pandemic. Got evaluated for ADHD, psychiatrist focused on childhood symptoms. Refused to prescribe anything for ADHD because ADHD meds can cause manic episode in bipolar patients, they put me on Wellbutrin instead. Wellbutrin (which affects different people very differently) caused me to have a crisis and spent a week in inpatient care at a non-Kaiser facility.

It was the best thing that has happened to me in years. Inpatient psychiatrist disagreed with the bipolar diagnosis and said that inpatient care was a safe space so we could try Adderall and a different antidepressant (Lexapro). On Adderall I feel calmer, less anxious, and if I’m tired it actually puts me to sleep, which is all in line with ADHD patients. I can focus at work again and have my life back.

I don’t feel like I’ve “lost” anything on Adderall, I would describe my experience with ADHD as having a buggy thread scheduler that would overallocate CPU time to background threads. On Adderall I feel like I have control again. I can still daydream, but all 5 trains of thought are not trying to enter the station at the same time.

I’ve had 3 different Kaiser psychiatrists and all have been sub-par, refusing to re-visit prior diagnoses, being aggressive and overly rigid in their own opinions, and sometimes just being plain incompetent. My recommendation is to seek mental health care from somewhere outside Kaiser that accepts Kaiser insurance. Kaiser’s mental health division is oversubscribed and probably underpaid. Overall our experience with Kaiser has been that no matter which division you’re dealing with, you have to be pushy and advocate for yourself or they’ll just slap the easy label on you and throw medications at the problem that may or may not actually address the root cause.

I’m very open about my experience because mental health issues are highly stigmatized in this country and there are a lot of people who don’t get the care they need. Accepting that I needed inpatient care was one of the most difficult things I’ve ever done, but coming out the other side it was nothing but a positive experience and I feel like I have my life back.
by dathinab | 2025-08-15 18:00:14+00:00
it's indeed not a "bot/crawler protection"

it's a "I don't want my server to be _overrun_ by crawlers" protection which works by

- taking advantage that many crawlers are made very badly/cheaply

- increasing the cost of crawling

thats it, simple but good enough to shake of the dumbest crawlers and to make it worth it for AI agents to e.g. cache site crawling so that they don't craws your site a 1000 times a day but instead just once
by ai_critic | 2025-08-15 18:00:17+00:00
I'm incredibly not a fan of loyalty tests and picking winners and losers. At the same time, it doesn't seem surprising that the pendulum pulled over by companies earlier (for example, Twitter deplatforming) and the previous administration's actions (for example, what amounts to harassment of SpaceX as a matter of principle) wouldn't now swing back the other way. This is the problem with normalizing that sort of politicization of commercial spaces--your guy ain't always gonna be in power.

(Now, Trump's enough of an asshole to perhaps have done this anyway, but this certainly made it easier to sell.)
by potato-peeler | 2025-08-15 18:00:28+00:00
This may not be directly related to llm but I am curious about two things -

1. How do llm/rag generate an answer given a list of documents and a question? I can do bm25 to get a list of documents, but post that what is logic/algorithm which generates answers given those list?

2. For small models like this, how much data you need to fine tune for a specific use case? For eg, if I need this model to be knowledgable about html/css, then I have access to lot of documentation online that I can feed it. But if it is very specific topic, like types of banana, then it may be only a couple of wikipedia pages. So is fine tuning directly dependant on the quantity of data alone?
by martin-t | 2025-08-15 18:00:46+00:00
Copyright/patents/laws are just tools. They can be used for both good and evil.

The early US had pro-social goals such as democracy or freedom. And yes, they used slaves because there are no good guys in history or politics, there's various shades of bad.

Current China has anti-social goals such as total control of the population through technological means and expansion by conquest - see them harassing the legitimate government of all of Chine in Taiwan constantly with the military or trying to sink Philipino fishing boats with their warships (two crashed into each other recently). It is also currently committing genocide through both murder and sterilization.

So yeah, I am totally for considering them a parasite and treating them as such.
by sjsdaiuasgdia | 2025-08-15 18:01:01+00:00
The commonality of the term is the result of intentional usage over a long span of time by right wing politicians, media, and personalities.

If you've ever disregarded or downplayed the power and reach of right wing media and propaganda, think on this conversation and how a derogatory term for members of the Democratic party entered common usage.

You don't have to actually watch or like right wing propaganda to be influenced by it because it is pervasive in the United States and has been for decades.
by eterm | 2025-08-15 18:01:12+00:00
Dungeon keeper is a game that I was perhaps slightly too young or slightly too impatient to really enjoy the gameplay of.

I loved the concept, and spent many hours playing it, but actually progressing properly never really clicked with me, I generally resorted to either playing early easy levels or cheats to experience more of the game.

Unfortunately it's also a game that's slightly too flawed to enjoy as a "remastered" game.

But the aesthetic and the general vibes of the game were great.