MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Tostino | 2025-08-05 17:48:36+00:00
I don't think you can get 1k tokens/sec on a single stream using any consumer grade GPUs with a 20b model. Maybe you could with H100 or better, but I somewhat doubt that.

My 2x 3090 setup will get me ~6-10 streams of ~20-40 tokens/sec (generation) ~700-1000 tokens/sec (input) with a 32b dense model.
by ashwinaj | 2025-08-05 17:48:41+00:00
> maybe nobody cares about watching Netflix if we can now have holodecks that become fully immersible experiences that allow for educational training and, to your chagrin, entertainment as well

I don't see why billions of dollars should be spent, for say, less than a low single digit percentage of the rural population who want to stick a machine to their head for educational training.

It's infinitely cheaper, a more sane and healthier decision to move to the location where they can sit in front of the instructor, if they value this education.
by gnulinux | 2025-08-05 17:48:52+00:00
No, unfortunately, I haven't used Qwen3-coder yet. I do like Claude 4 Sonnet, but my favorite programming LLM is Gemini 2.5 Pro at the moment, I think it's the smartest model (Claude and o3 do print better code though).

I have exprience using the base Qwen3-32B model and it's extremely good for its size, especially in solving undergrad/grad level math problems. So my guess would be that Qwen3-coder should be competitive, but this is just speculation.
by SECProto | 2025-08-05 17:48:59+00:00
I would say you described "one seven millionth" of a second (1/7,000,000 s)

"Seven millionths" would be 7/1,000,000 s (7μs). They take 20 to 40 images in that period using 7 cameras, so any given camera might be as low as 1.4μs per frame.
by NewJazz | 2025-08-05 17:49:11+00:00
In gitlab, yes (well, two lines, login then push). In forgejo, there is no cicd token that gives you scoped access to the built in container registry. You must create a long lived token and add it as a secret to the repo you want to push from.

See here: https://mteixeira.wordpress.com/2025/02/03/my-self-hosted-fo...
by hintklb | 2025-08-05 17:49:43+00:00
Generally you are right. VHCOL (Seattle, SF Bay Area), HCOL (California,...) and MCOL areas are better for renting and LCOL areas are better for buying.

There are two factors really:

- Rent to Buy ratio (or as you put it, rent compared to the mortgage)

- Speculation on house price growth.
by moritzwarhier | 2025-08-05 17:50:00+00:00
> Entertainment gives the viewer what they want, and art intends to challenge

This is a fruitless and snobby dichotomy that was attempted so many times in human history, and it makes no sense.

There will always be art made for success and/or money, but drawing a line is futile.

Händel used to be a bit like a pop musician.

And intellectual snobbishness or noble ideas do not make art more valuable.

A kid singing Wonderwall can be art, too. As can be a depressed person recording experimental field sounds.

Feel free to call art bad, but assuming an obvious and clear separation between art and entertainment is the exact opposite of the spirit that enables people to make or appreciate art, in whatever form, culture or shape.
by itissid | 2025-08-05 17:50:17+00:00
A few things need to happen very soon(if the signs are not here already):

1. Tech Company's should be able to accelerate and supplant the FAANGs of this world. Like even if 10x was discounted to 5x. It would mean that 10 human years of work would be shrunk down to 2 to make multi-billion dollar companies. This is not happening right now. If this does not start happening with the current series of model, murphy's law (e.g. interest rate spike at some point) or just damn show me the money brutal questions would tell people if it is "working".

2. I think Anthropic's honcho did a back of the envelope number of 600$ for every human in the US(I think just it was just the US) was necessary to justify Nvidia's market Cap. This should play out by the end of this year or in Q3 report.
by zX41ZdbW | 2025-08-05 17:50:21+00:00
Very reasonable.

I've recently experimented with the methods of serving bitmaps out of the database in my project[1]. One option was to generate PNG on the fly, but simply outputting an array of pixel color values over HTTP with Content-Encoding: zstd has won over PNG.

Combined with the 2D-delta-encoding as in PNG, it will be even better.

[1] https://adsb.exposed/
by db48x | 2025-08-05 17:50:41+00:00
No, they didn’t. They decided not to raise the definition of broadband from 100×20 Mbps up to 1Gps.

And that’s simply because 100Mbps is actually a lot of bandwidth. We just don’t have any killer applications that need more than 20Mbps. 4K streaming on Netflix, to pick one salient example, only requires 16Mbps. At 100Mbps you can download a 50GB game in just 80 minutes. Sure, it would be nice to have 1Gbps and download the game in 8 minutes, but the definition is about _minimum requirements_, not things that are _nice to have_.

As such the definition we have is actually a good one! If every American had broadband according to this definition we will have actually made real progress. Nobody would be stuck on DSL any more, let alone dialup.

The FCC is still giving grants to anyone who is installing actual broadband in unserved areas, which means anyone installing cable or fiber in areas that don’t have them. It’s just not requiring that every customer have 1Gbps service in order to qualify.
by gameman144 | 2025-08-05 17:50:45+00:00
> Your answer to this question determines whether you believe in ideology or data.

I mean, you're technically right, but that doesn't invalidate anything the parent commenter said.

I could equally ask "What if it turned out that turpentine was actually _healthier_ than water?".

Like, yeah, if that assertion turned out to be the case and you rejected the new data, you'd be following dogma rather than data. That doesn't mean that the assertion is likely to actually be true though.
by stillpointlab | 2025-08-05 17:50:49+00:00
I really hope we move on from these boil-the-ocean models. I want something more collaborative and even iterative.

I was having a conversation with a former bandmate. He was talking about a bunch of songs he is working on. He can play guitar, a bit of bass and can sing. That leaves drums. He wants a model where he can upload a demo and it either returns a stem for a drum track or just combines his demo with some drums.

Right now these models are more like slot machines than tools. If you have the money and the time/patience, perhaps you can do something with it. But I am looking forward to when we start getting collaborative, interactive and iterative models.
by jm4 | 2025-08-05 17:51:43+00:00
I use both. Sonnet is faster and more cost efficient. It's great for coding. Where Opus is noticeably better is in analysis. It surpasses Sonnet for debugging, finding patterns in data, creativity and analysis in general. It doesn't make a lot of sense to use Opus exclusively unless you're on a max20 plan and not hitting limits. Using Opus for design and troubleshooting and Sonnet for everything else is a good way to go.
by kingstnap | 2025-08-05 17:52:06+00:00
I draw a very sharp line: curating the outputs and crafting the sentence is enough to make it art. If neither of those happen, it's just slop.

It's actually a bit like photography. A bunch of randomly taken pictures piled together is not art. It needs to be done with purpose and refinement.

Basically, in my own opinion, art ≠ a function of technical difficulty.

Art = Curation, Refinement, and Taste
by connicpu | 2025-08-05 17:52:27+00:00
Starlink is now kind of a global baseline that ISPs have to compete against regardless of location. In rural areas it's very reasonable to expect 200-400mbps downloads and 20-40mbps uploads for $120/month. A bit pricey but it's a level of service that DSL and GEO sats can't even think about matching, so companies have to build cable, fiber, or 5G towers if they want to have a comparable offering.
by WaxProlix | 2025-08-05 17:52:31+00:00
I don't really agree - a dedicated populous with light arms in both cases was able to ward off a full victory on their home turf, and the US caved to losses and other pressures (60k dead americans in 'nam, hundreds of thousands wounded physically, notorious trauma uncounted etc).

I don't have any sort of civil war fantasy, but I think that holding out against a military deployment in-country until it became socially and politically untenable would be pretty reasonable.
by WarOnPrivacy | 2025-08-05 17:52:48+00:00
> Starlink might not be as fast as fiber, but it's more than good enough.

Users running up against oversubscription - this is a when not if condition. The capacity limits inherent to satellite tech are what they are.

ref: https://kagi.com/search?q=starlink+oversubscribed&dr=4&r=us&...

Between now and then, users' routine downloads run up against caps (eg:steam game packs).
by hintklb | 2025-08-05 17:52:48+00:00
Sure but almost never close to zero. And how much are you really going to save when they go from 6.5% to 4.5% in 10 years? While most of the interests will already be paid?

Hell, most people will not even want to live in the same place in 10 years.

Honestly this sounds like yet another argument from a realtor to push prices irrationally to all time high.
by sekai | 2025-08-05 17:53:01+00:00
> and art intends to challenge, none of what's created here is "art". It doesn't push boundaries, create new genres, or satisfy an uncomfortable curiosity.

Art is, above all, subjective.

> It's very dystopian to feel that the robots are making generic human-music with indescribably lifeless properties.

Painters said the same thing about the camera. Photographers said the same thing about Photoshop.
by SkyPuncher | 2025-08-05 17:53:23+00:00
I've basically come to the same 2x to 5x conclusion as you. Problem is that "5x productivity" is really only a small portion of my actual job.

The hardest part of my job is actually understanding the problem space and making sure we're applying the correct solution. Actual coding is probably about 30% of my job.

That means, I'm only looking at something like 30% productivity gain by being 5x as effective at coding.
by krapp | 2025-08-05 17:53:24+00:00
They said the same thing about automation when the Industrial Revolution began a century or so ago. That the common worker would be liberated from the drudgery of labor and be free for creative and intellectual pursuits. The people who protested were ridiculed as Luddites who simply feared technology and progress.

Of course, because automation serves the interests of capital (being created by, and invested in, by the capitalist class,) the end result was just that workers worked more, and more often, and got paid less, and the capitalist class captured the extra value. The Luddites were right about everything.

I don't know why people expect the automation of intellect and creativity to be any different. Working at a keyboard instead of on a factory floor doesn't exempt you from the incentives of capitalism.
by tekacs | 2025-08-05 17:53:24+00:00
I apologize for linking to Twitter, but I can't post a video here, so:

https://x.com/tekacs/status/1952788922666205615

Asking it about a marginally more complex tech topic and getting an excellent answer in ~4 seconds, reasoning for 1.1 seconds...

I am _very_ curious to see what GPT-5 turns out to be, because unless they're running on custom silicon / accelerators, even if it's very smart, it seems hard to justify not using these open models on Groq/Cerebras for a _huge_ fraction of use-cases.
by discardedrefuse | 2025-08-05 17:53:25+00:00
I'm afraid this is a case of "too little, too late". I've been a happy DDG user for many, many years. Sure, there's a learning curve when venturing out of google's cozy bubble. But once I figured it out, its been fantastic.

Except the last few months. And, I can't stress this enough, its not DDG's fault. The results are relevant to my search, and at first glance seem to be what I'm looking for. But take more than 2 seconds to read, and you'll notice the websites themselves are trash heaps of AI slop, serving errors and mistakes.

The human web is quickly shrinking out of existence. The last content silos of human expression have walled themselves in and are striking deals with the evil megacorps; pushing their shitty, error prone, planet killing, word prediction engines down everyone's throats.

Soon, there will be nothing of value left for Kagi to index. Maybe they should pivot to web autopsy tools, not unlike Internet Archive. I wish the Kagi team well. I hope they succeed. And I really hope I'm wrong about the open web's grim future. But I'm probably not. And the AI arms race suggests the megacorps agree.
by nobody9999 | 2025-08-05 17:53:49+00:00
>25G of constant acceleration would kill any human, especially if it were maintained for the time it would take to approach light speed

>Then again, if they could do 1G of constant acceleration that would only add like 2 years to the total trip. Long enough to be one-way for most people but short enough to be survivable under ideal circumstances.

It would take ~2 weeks to to approach light speed while continuously accelerating at 25G. It would only take ~1 year to do so at 1G continuous acceleration.

On cosmic time and distance scales, those are essentially the same, especially since once we approach the speed of light, there's no going faster.

As such, tolerance for G forces seems pretty irrelevant for interstellar travel.

Doing so within the confines of a solar system is another matter altogether, I'd expect.
by cco | 2025-08-05 17:53:51+00:00
Why are science communicators so consistently missing the mark?

Is it not obvious that if you're writing an article proclaiming to capture _explosions_ at 7mths of a second, people want to see some pictures of said explosions?

Clearly they're understanding that explosions are a hook to grab the reader's attention, but then they just don't include any of the resulting pictures?

C'mon y'all! We need to do better here!
Show HN: GPT-reviewer – Simple AI code reviewer for GH Actions
by justanotherunit | 2025-08-05 17:54:29+00:00
GPT-Reviewer: AI-Powered Code Review GitHub Action

I've built a GitHub Action that automatically reviews pull requests using GPT-4o or Claude, enforcing custom project rules through inline comments.

Key Features:

• Custom rule enforcement via .project-rules.md configuration • Support for both OpenAI GPT-4o and Anthropic Claude • Gitignore-style file filtering with .ignore files • Inline PR comments with specific line-level feedback • Zero-config setup beyond adding your API key, rules file and ignore file (optional)

How it works: The action fetches PR diffs, parses only added lines, and sends them to your chosen AI provider along with your project rules. The AI returns structured JSON feedback that gets posted as inline comments on the specific lines that need attention. It is a one-shot prompt.

Example project rules:

## Security - Never hardcode API keys or secrets - Validate all user inputs

## Code Style - Use descriptive variable names (whatever that means) - Mark typos as warnings

Setup is straightforward:

1. Add .project-rules.md with your coding standards 2. Create a GitHub workflow that runs on PR events 3. Add your AI provider API key to repository secrets

The action only reviews new code additions, keeping noise low while ensuring consistency across your codebase. It's particularly useful for teams wanting to automate enforcement of coding standards and security practices.

Built with Python, uses the GitHub API for PR integration and unidiff for parsing changes. The AI providers are abstracted, making it easy to switch between OpenAI and Anthropic or add new providers.

GitHub: https://github.com/vayqerlukashakkarainen/gpt-reviewer

Would love feedback from teams already using AI in their development workflows, or anything really. I personally like "one task" AI applications, which does only what it is told to do. I am really into researching AI uses at the moment.

Kinda funny note: I generated most of this post using OpenCode, which is an CLI agent to code and vibe with. But it seems it can be used to generate great summaries of the project as well :)
by FirmwareBurner | 2025-08-05 17:54:31+00:00
I don't see how it can't work at least short term, when the US is by a long margin the world leading military and economic power.

Why else has the US been overspending on military for decades and planting military bases and nuclear submarines all over the world, to become the world hegemony, if not to bully everyone in doing its bidding when push comes to shove?

I'm not defending the actions of the US, I'm just asking what are the other countries gonna do about it? Ally with Cuba, China, Iran and Russia to fight the US? Unlikely.

UK, Canada, Australia, New Zeeland are 5 eyes members and therefore lapdogs of the US, and the EU as much as they dislike the US due to Trump, has a laundry list of urgent domestic issues like Russia, no cheap energy, no high growth industry like tech, ageing population, economic stagnation or even decline, collapsing welfare and pension system, illegal immigration leading to a rise right wing extremism leading to crackdowns on freedom of speech and censorship leading to further social and political turmoil. So how is the EU gonna retaliate when they can't even keep themselves together?

What can they do now, when the US holds all the cards? Their only hope can be that the US collapses from internal issues, just like the Roman empire, but until then, they literally have no screws to turn on the US and just like the EU, Switzerland, etc, are forced to accept the terms of the US or have their already fragile economies suffer even more.
by marklar423 | 2025-08-05 17:54:54+00:00
I think Git was initially more popular and that had compounding effects that made it eclipse Mercurial.

In 2010 or so we tried to adopt Mercurial at the small company I worked at, but the support for Git was just so much better - even back then. Git's popularity meant that tooling, documentation, and general ease of finding people to ask questions was 100x easier with Git, so we switched. I'd imagine the same thing played out many times over.

A few FAANGs did and still use Mercurial, but they're on their own islands and don't really affect the wider tech ecosystem.
by mxuribe | 2025-08-05 17:54:58+00:00
Upon reading the latter portion of your comment, a potential story for XKCD comic immediately sprang to mind...something along the lines of a tech person or team invent faster-than-lightspeed technology, but abandon their work on a spacecraft warp-style engines to improve satellite internet....because its just so much easier to make tons of money doing barely the minimum within the ISP monopoly business. lol :-D
by arp242 | 2025-08-05 17:55:19+00:00
Comparison of "zpng" (PNG wth zstd) and WebP lossless, with current PNG. From https://github.com/WangXuan95/Image-Compression-Benchmark :

Compressed format Compressed size (bytes) Compress Time Decompress Time WEBP (lossless m5) 1,475,908,700 1,112 49 WEBP (lossless m1) 1,496,478,650 720 37 ZPNG (-19) 1,703,197,687 1,529 20 ZPNG 1,755,786,378 26 24 PNG (optipng -o5) 1,899,273,578 27,680 26 PNG (optipng -o2) 1,905,215,734 4,395 27 PNG (optimize=True) 1,935,713,540 1,120 29 PNG (optimize=False) 2,003,016,524 335 34

Doesn't really seem worth it? It doesn't compress better, and only slightly faster in decompression time.
by duxup | 2025-08-05 17:55:20+00:00
>If the system was configured to accept a fingerprint when logging on, it would also be possible to tamper with the firmware to that it would accept any input, including non-human ones such as vegetables; a video posted by Cisco shows a spring onion being used to unlock a vulnerable laptop.

So you have to tamper with the firmware and THEN you get to use the vegetable.
by tedivm | 2025-08-05 17:55:59+00:00
Qwen3 has multiple variants ranging from larger (230B) than these models to significantly smaller (0.6b), with a huge number of options in between. For each of those models they also release quantized versions (your "fewer bits per parameter).

I'm still withholding judgement until I see benchmarks, but every point you tried to make regarding model size and parameter size is wrong. Qwen has more variety on every level, and performs extremely well. That's before getting into the MoE variants of the models.
by 9rx | 2025-08-05 17:56:12+00:00
> focus on how they can "make OP wrong"

The focus is not really on making some nebulous "OP" wrong, as if anyone thinks about anything but themselves. The focus is compelling the software to give a result in response. The more obtuse a comment is, the more likely the algorithm will deliver.

> why we do it

Because there is no value in writing a comment that doesn't offer a result. You'd write in your private journal instead if that is what you were looking for. Different tools for different jobs.

> how we can be more balanced in our approach to what others say online.

No need to try and make your hammer a screwdriver when you can use an actual screwdriver just as easily instead. That experience is found in not being online and going outside to talk to people rather than software instead. Use the right tool for the job, as they say.
by shadowgovt | 2025-08-05 17:56:13+00:00
When Harmonix was in the concept phase for Guitar Hero, there were two slides in the presentation. The first was the "con" slide: novel game style risks not finding a market, technical challenges of the new style of gameplay, requiring peripherals for a game is a famous pathway to low-volume sales.

The next slide was labeled "pro," and it was just a picture of Jimi Hendrix on-stage mid-performance.

I'd submit to you the notion that even if the machine can create a billion billion iterations of music, it still cannot create what you will create, for the reasons you will create it, and that's reason enough to continue. Hendrix wasn't just "a guy who played guitar good." And a machine that could word-for-word and bar-for-bar synthesize "Foxy Lady" wouldn't be Hendrix.

Hendrix, also, can't be you. Nor you him.
by glzone1 | 2025-08-05 17:56:20+00:00
The billions spent on rural broadband excluded Starlink as not technically feasible.

Many other billions have the same issues - I think no one knows how to actually hoover this the way the big co's do?

We've had much faster broadband happening because of commercial competition from scrappy startups and WISPS and fiber folks (think sonic)

I think something like 94% of RDOF/BEAD locations in california were defaulted (ie, awarded but customer actually never got service)?

It's crazy given the 100+ billion or so spent on USF / RDOF / BEAD / etc that they couldn't do $5b - $10b for something like starlink which at least in rural areas is able to serve folks pretty quickly and push hard on that for a bit. The unsubsidized commercial starklink services is already outcompeting the insanely subsidized buildouts (that cost insane amounts per person). Starlink was awarded the funds but then they were revoked.