MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by godot | 2025-08-17 17:53:08+00:00
I agree, there seems to be a level of criticism of marketing bordering on irrational among devs, it's almost like it's trendy to hate on marketing.

For devs who currently think this way, I suggest thinking about it more deeply from the perspective of a developer: Let's say you want to start a company/startup from a passionate idea you had. What do you think happens when you build it? In reality, do you truly expect "build it and they will come"? What happens when you bought a domain, put up your product on the web, or the app store? I can tell you what will happen: there will be zero people signing up to use it. Posting it on a Show HN or Product Hunt is an illusion of ease to publicize a product. A PH launch is a carefully planned and curated process involving hours and hours of marketing work to prepare for. A Show HN post will go unnoticed with no clicks 99.9% of the time.

And if you just work in a bigger company, as a non-founder, and say "this isn't my problem, I just build stuff for a job", what do you think the founders did to build their company so there are users who sign up and pay?
by pxc | 2025-08-17 17:53:29+00:00
IQ test questions have clear right and wrong answers that can be determined in advance of writing the test. But EQ tests just measure a (not necessarily unanimous) consensus of subjective intuitions by a handful of psychologists.

It's true that EQ tests have all the same problems as IQ tests. But they also have additional problems.

(I learned this when I chatted with a psychologist about an EQ test he administered to me, but I just reviewed it now. See the "Psychometric properties" section of the Wikipedia article: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathy_quotient )
by MrJohz | 2025-08-17 17:53:37+00:00
This is not my experience at all. In my experience, it's often quite useful being able to run code that doesn't fully type-check, as long as I do make sure everything's correct by the time I commit it. For example, I might be refactoring a module with some tests, and make a change that breaks the tests and some code in some other module. At this point, I often go in this order:

1. See that the tests aren't type checking correctly (usually for an obvious reason like adding an extra parameter or something). 2. Fix the tests using the type hints. 3. Run the tests to make sure my refactoring made sense and didn't break anything unexpected at runtime. 4. Fix all the uses in other modules.

Step 3 requires me to be able to run code that doesn't type-check correctly, and that's a useful feature.

There's also similar cases where I want to see how something looks in the UI even if it's not properly hooked up yet and causing type errors - I can check that part of the UI works and that it throws the correct runtime error (equivalent to whatever error typescript has). I've also had cases where I've cast things to `unknown` because I don't want to figure out the type just yet, and then written an implementation that is filled with typescript errors but will work at runtime as a mini proof of concept, only to later go back and get the types right.

I shall think you're underestimating how important fast cycle times are. When I'm developing, I normally have my linter, tsc, the dev server (tsx or vite), and the test runner all running simultaneously in watch mode. At any one point, I'm probably only interested in the output from one of these tools (the type checker until the types are all correct, then maybe the test runner until everything's green there). But if I run all of them at once, then they all run optimistically, and the tool I'm interested in is more likely to give me immediate feedback. That's really useful! Even with the new 10x typescript compiler, I'd still rather my tests start running immediately rather than waiting for another process to start and finish before they get going.
by daxfohl | 2025-08-17 17:53:39+00:00
Very cool. I've been thinking for a while that this is where things will end up. While custom AI integrations per service/product/whatever can be better and more efficient, there's always going to be stuff that doesn't have AI integrations but your workflow will need to use.

Without this, AI is going to be limited and kloodgy. Like if I wanted to have AI run a FEA simulation on some CAD model, I have to wait until the FEA software, the CAD software, the corporate models repo, etc., etc. all have AI integrations and then create some custom agent that glues them all together. Once AI can just control the computer effectively, then it can look up the instruction manuals for each of these pieces of software online, and then just have at it e2e like a human would. It can even ping you over slack if it gets stuck on something.

I think once stuff like this becomes possible, custom AI integrations will become less necessary. I'm sure they'll continue to exist for special cases, but the other nice thing about a generic computer-use agent is that you can record the stream and see exactly what it's doing, so a huge increase in observability. It can even demo to human workers how to do things because it works via the same interfaces.
by AlecSchueler | 2025-08-17 17:53:55+00:00
> This is in fact an extremely large, dare I say representative, demographic.

It might well be. I didn't suggest otherwise.

> You are in fact criticising it by accusing the author of "unconscious bias"

No, I'm not, that's why I took the time to explicitly say so. I made no "accusation," you've just taken it that way. We all have unconscious biases and we all act them out in various ways. I made absolutely no value judgement and I think I'm a healthy society we should be able to talk about these things without everything having to be taken as an accusation.

> population pyramid

I intentionally used an atypical demographic reality to demonstrate my point: that person is just as much "a 30 year old in the UK" as Nicolas. There are obviously many millions of other people who are not like Nicolas and it's reasonable that a conversation includes an eye to the diversity of experience around us for a host of different reasons.
by jkaplowitz | 2025-08-17 17:54:25+00:00
Your rhetorical question is more true than you may realize: The high levels of US military spending is indeed a major reason why so many countries in (for example) Europe have been able to afford their robust social welfare systems instead of having to spend more of their budget on defense than they traditionally have.

A lot of articles discussing the consequences of the Trump administration’s pressure on other NATO countries to spend more of their GDP on defense and its public hesitation to protect Europe militarily have discussed how some of European governments’ nonmilitary expenses may have to be reduced as a result.
by ComputerGuru | 2025-08-17 17:54:30+00:00
No, that is one thing you can do (in zfs this is just setting the recordsize property) but that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about reflashing to have the firmware present logical 4k sectors instead of logical 512b sectors. Theoretically this boosts throughput and while it would technically increase latency (you'd have to rewrite a bigger sector for any change) in practice these drives all have physical sectors actually larger than 4k so this isn't an issue. It isn't a full firmware flash but it's a low-level reconfiguration of the firmware (independent of filesystem sector size), and it seems there are bugs in this mode.

https://support-en.wd.com/app/answers/detailweb/a_id/20968/~...
by spankalee | 2025-08-17 17:54:55+00:00
This is the first time that I've heard of LLRT, so here's a link for anyone else interested: https://github.com/awslabs/llrt

I still like Proffor's approach because by compiling to WASM we could have latency-optimized WASM runtimes (though I'm unsure what that might entail) that would benefit other languages as well.
by fuzzfactor | 2025-08-17 17:56:08+00:00
Look closer at that Twin Reverb schematic.

When you plug your guitar into input 1, its arrow contact with ground is disconnected, leaving the 1 Megohm resistor as the only direct path.

That's a million ohms "isolating" or "connecting" your sensitive guitar signal with ground, whichever way you want to look at it.

So your high-impedance guitar signal will not be all lost by finding an "easy" path to ground, and a nice strong signal appears at the input grid of one of the triode structures found within the dual-triode 7025 tube.

The 7025 was simply a 12AX7 that had been built for lower noise & microphonics, or selected for it, and given the 4-digit military-industrial tube number instead of the 12AX7 nomenclature recognized by consumers. You need low noise in the input stage more than anywhere else.

Follow your signal carefully and you will see that it has to pass through some resistance before it hits the grid, from input 1 both 68K resistors are in parallel, resulting in a 34Kohm working connection between your guitar and the grid.

Well that 34K is almost nothing compared to the megohms of internal impedance of your magnetic pickup. Once some waveforms have made it out of that highly-coiled super-long thin-ass copper wire inside the pickup, which makes your pickup have orders of magnitude more impedance ohms than its measurable DC resistance ohms, 34K is not even a speed bump.

Might as well be zero ohms and it sounds about the same but tubes kind of like a little something on that pin for stability.

Pedals can be good for more than one reason, like simple boosters that are perfectly clean and put out no distortion of their own but overdrive that input triode to complete metal mayhem, or sophisticated pre-processors with no additional gain at all. However, your signal will usually have a lot lower impedance coming out of a pedal into the amp, and so the interaction with the grid will be quite dissimilar in some ways, for better or worse.

Plus that's usually adding many more components between your instrument and that grid, and some of these solid-state components can be so tasty you don't want to do without them completely, but when you think about it, sometimes a single pedal will have more components between your guitar and that sensitive grid, than there is between that grid and the speakers. This is a legendary top pro Twin Reverb, and look how simple the rest of the vintage circuit is, before your music goes through that monster high-voltage audio transformer and hits the speakers. The tubes are doing a lot of work here.

Remember the Twin Reverb became the choice of pros and stayed that way for years before pedals were even invented.

IOW when you plug straight in is the only time you are "magnetically coupled" with the first grid, aye to the vacuum of space.

There is no further contact with what most people call "matter".

And from that point on your music is being sprayed through space, directly from your fingertips like no other way ;)
by nine_k | 2025-08-17 17:56:42+00:00
Solar generation has little economies of scale: PV arrays scale linearly, unlike turbines and electromechanical generators. Batteries also scale basically linearly; maybe you can have a better deal if you buy a truly massive amount of batteries, but I'm not certain it's so dramatic.

Transmission costs seem to dominate the price structure; I currently pay a generating company about $0.1 / kWh, and pay Con Ed $0.25 / kWh for transmission of that energy. And this is in dense New York City; in suburbia or countryside the transmission lines have to be much longer.

Centralized generation makes sense when the efficiency scales wildly non-linearly with size, like it does with nuclear reactors.
by AlecSchueler | 2025-08-17 17:57:10+00:00
I didn't suggest our rivers were clean because we export it, but we should definitely consider the waste we export to still be our own regardless of where it ends up.

The rivers in less privileged states would be dirty in any case, yes, for the reasons I've listed above.

I didn't use the word "blame" except to say that we shouldn't be blaming others for issues we created (the wealth disparaties, the petro-chemical industry, global consumer culture etc). Blame is neither here nor there, it's a matter of responsibility.
by nwallin | 2025-08-17 17:57:43+00:00
When you look at, for instance, a bowl, or even one of those egg carton mattress things, and you want to find the global minimum, you are looking at a surface which is 2 dimensions in and 1 dimension out. It's easy enough for your brain to process several thousand points and say ok the bottom of the bowl is right here.

When a computer has a surface which is 2 dimensions in and 1 dimension out, you can actually just do the same thing. Check like 100 values in the x/y directions and you only have to check like 10000 values. A computer can do that easy peasy.

When a computer does ML with a deep neural network, you don't have 2 dimensions in and 1 dimension out. You have thousands to millions of dimensions in and thousands to millions of dimensions out. If you have 100000 inputs, and you check 1000 values for each input, the total number of combinations is 1000^100000. Then remember that you also have 100000 outputs. You ain't doin' that much math. You ain't.

So we need fancy stuff like Jacobians and backtracking.
by nickpsecurity | 2025-08-17 17:57:52+00:00
Labs have been doing that since Brooks' Subsumption Architecture decades ago. The problem with AI now is that the architectural design, unlike the brain, doesn't have grounded memory and hallucination mitigation. Letting those architectures walk around in the real world would show similar flaws.

Multiple teams already baked memory into designs, some like typical ML and some biologically inspired. Hallucination mitigation needs a ton more research. My proposal was studying the part of the brain that causes hallucinations when damaged in case it's designed to mitigate them. Then, imitate it until we have something better.
by ndriscoll | 2025-08-17 17:59:08+00:00
You can do ≈ by long holding = on Android/Gboard. The only way I know to get ∘ is to copy/paste it from a Unicode reference. Likewise with ⊸, which I was too lazy to look up and didn't know the name of, but now I know is MULTIMAP (U+22B8).
by grues-dinner | 2025-08-17 17:59:10+00:00
When was the last the techno-industrialist elite class said "what we have is enough"?

In this scenario, the marginal cost of taking everything else over is almost zero. Just tell the AI you want it taken over and it handles it. You'd take it over just for risk mitigation, even if you don't "need" it. Better to control it since it's free to do so.

Allowing a competing human economy is resources left on the table. And control of resources is the only lever of power left when labour is basically free.

> Maybe some ecological argument

There's a political angle too. 7 (or however many it will be) billion humans free to do their own thing is a risky free variable.
by ahmedhawas123 | 2025-08-17 17:59:20+00:00
I've approached this historically by committing persistent/reserved instances so you always have a few instances running. This is nice on paper but feels like you're omitting what a more production-appropriate solution is. "Cold starts" aren't just slow because of init, they're also slow because that's when lots of database connections, state starts, etc happen and managing init speed won't solve that.
by ivewonyoung | 2025-08-17 17:59:57+00:00
Not sure how it addresses the fact that Democrats want higher taxes on corporations regardless of what you stated, hence they didn't act to stop this on their watch. You're just arguing that Democrats were wrong to let the R&D exception expire, which I already agree with.

Even after this recent change by Republicans, increasing corporate taxes(say after the 2028 elections if Democrats are elected) means there is less money leftover to spend on R&D.
by Levitz | 2025-08-17 18:02:18+00:00
>Palestians are not innocent of this. The last time (twenty years ago) when they last had elections, they allowed and enabled this.

Three fourths of the current population couldn't have voted at all. The elections had a participation about about three fourths and Hamas got less than half of the popular vote.

Napkin math says for each 100 people in Palestine today, only 25 could have voted at all, of which 19 did, of which 9 voted for Hamas. This whole line of thinking is completely ridiculous.
by TheTaytay | 2025-08-17 18:02:35+00:00
I’ve been wanting the same thing. I am currently experimenting with a container that adds what I want. I keep wanting my sandboxed dev machine that is preconfigured with Claude (and almost nothing else)…but then I also want my customized Claude. I saw someone here on HN the other day who just spins up a Docker container and shares their home directory Claude files with it to facilitate the customized Claude container:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44549802
by Lerc | 2025-08-17 18:02:58+00:00
The pattern matching compares what was said against an example of what a correct response could say.

Checking a token at a time evaluates if it is going to produce a correct final answer. The intermediate text can be whatever it needs to arrive at that answer, but training at the per token level means training those very tokens that you want to allow the model the leeway to consider. It needs another model to adjudicate how well things are going from incomplete answers.

I'm not sure how much the adjudicator evaluates based upon knowing the final answer or based upon the quality of the reasoning of the model being trained. I'd be inclined to train two adjudicators, one that knows the answers and one that doesn't. I'm sure there would be interesting things to see in their differential signal.
by matheusmoreira | 2025-08-17 18:04:56+00:00
Makes sense to me, thank you. It's just something I tried to do once. I didn't think very hard about it so it felt like an arbitrary limitation.

What I tried to do was have two copies of the same branch checked out to a different directory: one pristine, another with uncommitted changes. The idea was to run make on both directories, profile the results and then decide whether to commit or discard the changes. Now I see the solution is to just make another branch.
by narrator | 2025-08-17 18:04:58+00:00
For my local abliterated LLM, my favorite is huihui_ai/gemma3-abliterated:12b. I take the last few months of diary entires and ask it to roast me, which is something your therapist probably wouldn't do:

"Please roast me brutally. Show me all the ways I have failed and the mistakes I keep making over and over again. I am not looking for kindness or euphemisms. Let me have it."

Helps keep me humble and self-aware.
by oidar | 2025-08-17 18:05:10+00:00
User can give example documents... have sbert test against dewey decimal classifications, or library of congress, also categories for home users (bills, manuals, bank documents, etc) and standard business categories (HR, production and so on). User verifies categories.

Onboarding would ask user about their work, research, hobby interests. LLM could generate word lists asking user if it matches their understanding. And so on.

Also open document format (CSV, TSV too).
by dspillett | 2025-08-17 18:05:57+00:00
If you are ignoring all of them. Filtering PRs to see which are worth having might take time in a large popular project. Even if it isn't much time, it is more than zero. You also have to deal with all the other comms associated: people submitting genuinely useful patches which accidentally get rejected querying (maybe politely, maybe not) and people who submitted less useful ones bitching about their rejection, both to the project and in public forums.
by samwillis | 2025-08-17 18:06:28+00:00
> I haven't kept track of what Oliver's doing here lately

Please do go and check up what the state of using types to inform the compiler is (I'm not incorrect)

On the area allocator, I wasn't clear enough, as stated elsewhere this was in relation to having something similar to isolates - each having a memory space that's cleaned up on exit.

Python has almost identical semantics to JS, and has threads - there is nothing in the EMCAScript standard that would prevent them.
by seadan83 | 2025-08-17 18:08:23+00:00
I quoted the article. The median age in gaza is estimated to be 18. Half of the population was not even born the last time there was an election. Consider hamas lost 3 of 5, it was neither a plurality. It's not about how liberals or conservatives lie, what was written is a lie.

A plurality of gazans did not vote for Hamas because half of them were not even yet born. They had no vote.
by pstuart | 2025-08-17 18:08:45+00:00
The last shutdown of a reactor in CA was 2013 -- https://www.eia.gov/nuclear/reactors/shutdown/ Diablo Canyon got a reprieve and has 5 more years to go.

Dam removals have multiple factors behind them, from pure economics (cheaper to remove than repair) to environmental -- restoring fisheries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dam_removals_in_Califo...

We need all the non-carbon power we can get, and it's a shame to remove existing power sources but as electric power is eminently fungible, that loss can be mitigated with other sources.

Meanwhile, efforts to modernize the US electric grid have been stalled by Red states that are ideologically opposed to renewable power. There's plenty of potential power to be generated that is hamstrung by that resistance (pun intended).
by tonmoy | 2025-08-17 18:09:11+00:00
> This cabinet is one of the most impressive on paper cabinet i've ever seen

How can I be on you side since said this without any source. I had to spend 15 minutes going through each of the cabinet members profile (and the ones in previous presidencies). While there are a few people with good experience in the present cabinet, majority of the members don't seemed to have any experience for the job they where hired for
Solution for Managing LLM Prompts
by opuslabs | 2025-08-17 18:09:17+00:00
For those of you working with LLMs, how do you manage the growing sprawl of prompts such as system prompts, templates, chains, and experiments across projects? I am looking for practical ways or tools to organize, version, and search prompts so they are easy to refine and reuse, instead of keeping them scattered in notes or GitHub gists.
by os2warpman | 2025-08-17 18:10:11+00:00
>Most people seem to blame price gouging from the electricity companies,

True or false: PSEG's annual profit every year for the last five years at a rate that greatly exceeds inflation while expenses are practically flat.

Their stock symbol is PEG, bee-tee-dubs.

There are very few theories of business and/or economics where profits increase while costs are steady where prices don't increase.

Are they (hold on a sec while I compose myself so I don't type a long string of obscenities) using that money to improve their service and keep rates steady or are they funneling everyone's money into the pockets of their investors and begging the state for free cash to maintain their infrastructure like they're some broke-ass bitches?