MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by alephnerd | 2025-08-30 01:53:56+00:00
The issue with "gifted only schools" is they end up eating the bulk of funds and legitimately don't have a strong predictive capacity on student success that couldn't already be explained the parental background and early childhood care.

In my case, I never placed in gifted academic programs in elementary and middle, but by HS was able to take 14 AP classes (and auto shop - always liked tinkering since elementary school; which was a major reason why I never placed well in gifted programs) and end up at HYS. Most of my peers there similarly didn't attended gifted programs or high schools - amongst the non-legacies the biggest predictor of success was SAT scores and GPA.

While giving and funding academic and gifted tracks within schools should be allowed, "gifted" students should not be segregated from "normal" students. There's no reason a high school can't both offer as many AP classes as possible ALONG with vocational classes.

Edit: can't reply

> Why should gifted schools need more money than normal schools

It's not that they need more funding. The issue is gifted programs tend to overlap with upper income families [0] - the same kinds of families that are overrepresented in School Boards and PTAs [1]

I'm not saying go all "San Francisco 2.0", but recognize that gifted only schools does lead to a moral perception that other students are not as deserving for funding or are "bad students".

[0] - https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2019/09/30/socioeconomic-status-...

[1] - https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/23328584188180...

> the highest-ability schools receive a decrement in funding

But are overrepresented in urban areas where human capital is significantly higher than rural areas within Romania [2]. Students in rural and small town schools are less liked to be as healthy or a affluent as students in cities or major urban centers, and this does have a tangible downstream effect on education as a whole.

[2] - https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/abs/2021/06...

> If you look at SF...

Note how I said << I'm not saying go all "San Francisco 2.0" >>

There is a happy middle ground between being an exclusionary system like Romania's or a delusional bussed system like San Francisco.

Giving the example of a city with a population the size of Cincinnati is clearly a facile argument, as it is obviously not representative of the rest of California, let alone the US.
by namibj | 2025-08-30 01:54:20+00:00
In practice you're actually hitting further problems because you don't have those synthetic top-k tasks but rather open-domain documents and queries to support. And if you hope to get better than "just" having the top-k correct and instead get some sort of inclusion/exclusion boundary between what should be matched and what should not be matched, you'll hit the same bounds as apply to context length limitations for kq dimenionality in a transformer's attention layers, as I mentioned about 6 weeks ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44570650
by xpe | 2025-08-30 01:55:01+00:00
> While this post doesn't directly demonstrate a victim mentality, it suggests internalizing the rejection ("My best wasn't good enough. I'm not good enough.")...

Well said. While it might have only been the recognition of that feeling, I do think it might reflect a deeper internalization. Though I'm no psychologist; I only have an intuitive, common-sense understanding of the concept of "internalization".

> ... in a way that is adjacent and something that would give me significant pause if I was a hiring manager evaluating for a role in a chaotic company.

Yes, I can see why some people would have this take. But there are other takes, such as "this person cares and feels things deeply, and as long as they process these emotions, they'll probably come back stronger."
by doesnotexist | 2025-08-30 01:55:52+00:00
Coding being the act of encoding/decoding information from one representation to another. The system itself is called a Code and these are designed to have specific properties like making transmission of information resistant to interference, corruption or interception, etc.

"Codes are used for data compression, cryptography, error detection and correction, data transmission and data storage." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coding_theory
by tw04 | 2025-08-30 01:55:58+00:00
Unfortunately the internet has broken the social contract for a large swath of the country. They can find any truth they want online. Facts are no longer important, just (fake) data points that confirm their existing beliefs. The Republican Party has figured out they no longer need to acknowledge facts to win elections, they just need to support whatever idea their constituency is currently consuming from Fox News.

This election cycle it’s that “liberal” cities are overrun with criminal migrants and the only way to save the children is sending in the military. Constitution be damned.
by stefantalpalaru | 2025-08-30 01:56:06+00:00
There are many factors - most of them economic and cultural - but it all starts with an intense maths syllabus in school, Soviet Union style. Here's the current one for 5th to 8th grade: https://www.scribd.com/document/184259748/The-Romanian-Maths...

Most kids are overwhelmed by the complexity and volume (homework is brutal) but those few with an aptitude for it thrive and are picked up quickly by teachers looking to mentor them further for local, national and international contests.
by sitkack | 2025-08-30 01:57:45+00:00
I have done about 75 coding interviews for big tech companies. I have told a fair number of people (around 10) that I would be submitting a no-hire, but then I went on to coach them for another 15 minutes on how they could improve. I never once heard from anyone on the subject and all the people I told were actually grateful 1) that they wouldn't be left wondering and 2) how they could pass the next one.

I'd want someone to do the same.
by akoboldfrying | 2025-08-30 01:58:46+00:00
I acknowledge that effect is present, but it's simply not strong enough to dominate natural variation in ability (for which high school entrance exam scores are a proxy) to the point where the results are completely flat -- in fact, students who achieved the highest scores on the entrance exam were slightly lower in exit scores on average than those with low or medium entrance scores!

What this tells me is that some kind of correction is being applied to those y values (we already know this because of negatives numbers on a "percentile" axis) -- but what?

A lot turns on this. (I suppose I could read the underlying paper, but I'm lazy.)
by huem0n | 2025-08-30 01:58:49+00:00
I believe part of the post is referring to that idea (self disclosure and weirdness) itself, and the idea that the author usually does try to limit it. Even without this specific post, the "weirdness" can come across in an in-person interview and other ways. Some people are normal, some can pretend to be, and others either can't manage to pretend or its too difficult/painful to do for long periods of time.

Its not always bad to expose it and not always bad to get rejected because of it. Personality mismatch can make any job miserable.

Regardless, it feels bad to get rejected and that, I think, is what the article is making a point about.
by weaksauce | 2025-08-30 01:59:00+00:00
beginning and end of a textbox is huge. cmd basically acts as a home end key in windows. opt acts like word wise. there is another big difference is that cmd+up/down goes to the beginning or end of a window. there’s also the emacs bindings built into every standard text input area too. there’s more and a lot of nuance that i’m surely not describing well but those functions are top notch.
by yaoke259 | 2025-08-30 01:59:41+00:00
Yes, to be completely honest this is a vibe coded project and I'm by no means a security expert. This was more of a fun, side project/experiment based on a shower thought. I admit it's not good/disingenuous to imply security knowledge, but for what it's worth, I just prompted Claude to research the latest papers on prompt injection and it made the claims on its own. Again this should not be an excuse for not reviewing the AI's output more carefully, so in the future I'll be more careful with LLM output and also present it as a vibe-coded project. Apologies, I'm just a noob in prompt injection security who doesn't know what he's doing :(
by npinsker | 2025-08-30 02:00:00+00:00
You have the right idea — it’s MUCH more complicated than it seems. There are more games than ever, but the market is growing (Steam in particular is exploding outside of the US), indie devs can do more with less and don’t need to use as many middlemen, and influencers regularly give games millions — or more — in free advertising. Whether the business is easier or harder is a very difficult question to answer.

This indie dev (who has made millions themselves) agrees with you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCzhyUsDHPE
by nullc | 2025-08-30 02:00:49+00:00
> I wish more people (especially judges) would recognize this

Do you want a few large corporations to have to have absolute and total control of all AI? Because that's how you get that-- under that reasoning google/etc. will just stick requirements in their terms of service that they can train on your data and they'll be the only parties that can effectively make useful models.

Copyright isn't some natural law, were it all your works would be preempted by their presence deep inside pi. Instead it's a pragmatic compromise intended to give creators a time limited monopoly for reproduction of their work to encourage more creation. In the US it has never covered highly transformative uses-- in fact it shouldn't even matter if embedded in the AI were a literal encoding of the whole work, though that generally isn't the case. All our creations are fundamentally derivative, and fortunately the judiciary does seem to have a better handle on what copyright is than a lot of public.

If anything the rise of generative AI tools is a greater sign that the copyright tradeoff should shift towards more permissive: We don't need as much restriction on people's actual natural rights as we used to in order to get valuable and important stuff created as it's never been less expensive, less risky, or easier to monetize through non-restrictive means than it is today.

We don't get to choose to live in a world with these tools or not-- the genie is out of the bottle. But we probably do get a lot of choice about their openness and everyone's level of access to create and use these tools. Lets not choose poorly.
by cyberax | 2025-08-30 02:02:38+00:00
Well, you set up a system that fosters competition, you get excellence as a result.

DUH.

Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus also have similar systems, and they punch way above their weight in math and CS: https://www.imo-official.org/country_team_r.aspx?code=RUS https://www.imo-official.org/country_team_r.aspx?code=UKR https://www.imo-official.org/country_team_r.aspx?code=BLR

Ironically, the US schools do have tracking. For athletics.

The US absolutely _needs_ to have a school system that challenges students. No more nonsense about racist algebra.
by jonjacky | 2025-08-30 02:03:04+00:00
This is quite a find! Thanks for posting this. Really a lot of work by the IBM people to produce just what, a half dozen actual computers?

The power of this computer seems roughly comparable to the Olivetti Programma desktop computer, which was produced at about the same time and was commercially available -- and of course the packaging was much slicker. It has been mentioned on HN many times:

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

This post links to the Programma 101's architecture and internals, which you can compare to the article linked in the original post.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38173224
by card_zero | 2025-08-30 02:03:07+00:00
It would be fair to compare it to selective breeding, rather than natural selection. The flip side of rejecting usage is promoting neologisms. We can do both things deliberately, I see no rule saying that language is only allowed to evolve naturally. A reasonable criticism would be that trying to change it on purpose makes for a lot of unnecessary fuss, but we can be moderate about it.
by hedgehog | 2025-08-30 02:03:12+00:00
I think the context is that foveated rendering ties sensor input (measuring gaze direction) to the rendering pipeline in a way that requires very low latency. Past a certain point reducing latency requires optimizations that break normal abstractions made by user land, so you end up with something more custom. I'm not sure why that would require a whole new OS, the obvious path would be to put the latency-sensitive code onto dedicated hardware and leave the rest managed by Linux. If a bunch of smart people thought XROS was a good idea there's probably something there though, even if it didn't pan out.
by cameronh90 | 2025-08-30 02:04:33+00:00
I care enormously about protecting the environment and stopping climate change, but I'm not an environmentalist.

Environmentalists usually care about the environment for its own sake, but my concern is our own survival. Similarly, I don't intrinsically care about plastic in the ocean, but our history of harming ourselves with waste we think is harmless would justify applying the precautionary principle there too.

As far as Musk goes, it's hard to track what he actually believes versus what he has said to troll, kowtow to Trump or "own the libs", but he definitely believes in anthropogenic climate change and he has been consistent on that. He seems to sometimes doubt the predictions of how quick it will occur and, most of all, how quickly it will impact us.

I think there probably is a popular tendency to overstate the predictive value of certain forecasts by simply grouping all climate science together. In reality, the forecasts have tended to be extremely accurate for the first order high level effects (i.e. X added carbon leads to Y temperature increase), but downstream of that the picture becomes more mixed. Particularly poor have been predictions of tipping points, or anything that depends on how humans will be affected by, or react to, changes in the environment.
by os2warpman | 2025-08-30 02:06:03+00:00
I don't understand why the Vatican is considered a country, besides as a quirk of history.

It is smaller than high school campus nearest my house, is not a UN member, and seems to exist solely as a tax haven.

It also has no native citizens. No person has been born in Vatican City in a century and even if you pop out a baby in Vatican City and are you yourself a Vatican City resident and citizen, the baby is not a citizen until made so by legal decree, citizenship which ends the second your employment ends, of course, because citizenship is tied to employment.

It doesn't make sense.

It isn't a country.

It is a tax dodge.

My perspective may be skewed. I value "quirky quirks of quirktastic history" very little.
by signal11 | 2025-08-30 02:06:23+00:00
“Limited access” is an older iOS feature from 2020, and different from the “private access” photo picker introduced with iOS 17[1].

[1] https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2023/10053/?time...

Limited access isn’t great UX because it’s not reasonable for users to have to manage a list of photos for every app. The new one is much better, but unfortunately app devs have to opt into it for now.
by cyberax | 2025-08-30 02:06:34+00:00
> Ik people tend to point to Russian, Chinese, and Indian Olympiad students as being examples of success, but most of them also attended top universities due to their Olympiad attendance, so I doubt the Olympiad itself had an impact compared to attending a Tsinghua, FyzTech (Citadel still hires from there for the London office at least circa 2023 despite the war in Ukraine and sanctions on Russia), or IIT Delhi.

First, if you remove the Olympiad-based admission, there's no guarantee that these students could _get_ into the top-level universities.

Second, people in the US _love_ to point out that athletics "builds the character" and sets people up for success later in life. Well, do you think that training for Olympiads and competing in high-stakes academic tournaments also does nothing?
by extraisland | 2025-08-30 02:06:43+00:00
> 10W constant over 10 years would cost me 275 euro.

€2.30 per month. Which is almost nothing.

> Over 20years it will cost me ~2800 euro in today's prices.

That is €11 a month over 20 years. So the extra 10 watts is still next to nothing even taking into account your exaggerated time frames, which I am dubious as to whether this is real.

I am certainly not going to worry about €11 a month.
by agalunar | 2025-08-30 02:06:51+00:00
I’d argue there’s a very big difference between “x: y” and “x : y”. I can only see the former as assignment and the latter as the has-type relation.

(I find it baffling in the extreme that in many mainstream languages the convention is to write type annotations as “x: T”, both prima facie and because in those languages the notation then collides with field assignment!)
by Fabricio20 | 2025-08-30 02:07:05+00:00
This has been my experience more recently as well, I've finally migrated from google to Brave Search since google was just slow for me.

I also appreciate the AI search results a bit when im looking for something very specific (like what the yaml definition for a docker swarm deployment constraint looks like) because the AI just gives me the snippet while the search results are 300 medium blog posts about how to use docker and none of them explain the variables/what each does. Even the official docker documentation website is a mess to navigate and find anything relevant!
by kazinator | 2025-08-30 02:07:12+00:00
The education system is stratified, keeping high-achieving students together, promoting them to schools with good teachers, etc.

OK, so then why don't the situations given in the elaborate description then show up in the statistics, like the "fat right tail" that isn't there?

It's because the students sent to olympiads are statistical outliers, too few in number to skew statistics. The system acts to identify and foster them, but to the detriment of national averages.
by Tadpole9181 | 2025-08-30 02:08:15+00:00
It will be retroactively illegal and the companies can claim damages from the US government... Kinda? Federal law is now an absolute nightmare with the latest "every district is its own thing" and "unitary executive" and "presidents are immune for official acts" kind of policies.

If SCOTUS does decide tariffs are illegal (which they are, objectively, irrefutably illegal for the POTUS to declare - Congress is explicitly the only branch with this power in the constitution), the US may owe hundreds of billions back to countless organizations and individuals.

But we live in a country without consistent law or a reason-based government, so SCOTUS may just declare that the executive has absolute authority instead.
by bob1029 | 2025-08-30 02:09:45+00:00
I worked for a studio for about half a year. You have to be willing to completely enslave yourself if you want to go down that path and succeed. Making an impact in a AAA studio (or one of their contractors) requires fairly extreme output on a constant basis.

The only alternative is to have enough runway to quit your day job and self-publish a game to steam. The biggest problem with this (beyond the money) is having a game concept that is marketable in 2025. If you have both the money and a good gameplay mechanic in mind, this would be the most sustainable path. Setting your own schedule makes all the difference if you can afford to.
by xpe | 2025-08-30 02:09:47+00:00
I would expect most of us here have faced many rejections, some of which were deeply painful. When you care about something, some say, losing it hurts. (But was there ever a guarantee? Or was it only an expectation?)

Some people find ways to focus on the process itself and don't couple their well-being to the "end result" (whether success or failure).* This is a practice. You can learn it from others and from experience.

It is one thing to be honest with oneself and say "Yes, this thought is coming into my mind". You don't have to deny that feeling. That is one thought in your head. Acknowledge it and move on. You don't have to repeat it. You don't have to try to 'analyze' it. You can think about something else, and changing your brain patterns is probably a good idea. If the same idea pops up again, fine. Remember to be patient with yourself.

Some ideas that might work for you include: Find emotional support where you can. / Learn cognitive techniques to remind yourself to not fall into ruts. / Put sticky notes on walls. / Do something totally different. / Sunshine and fresh air can do a lot of good.

If one of these things doesn't seem to help, thank yourself for trying it, don't worry, try something else. If you need more support (mental health for example), seek it out.

* And how do you define the end-result? How much you helped people you care about? Maybe a time-averaged well-being metric? Something else? This is deeply personal, and I think it is worth reflecting on.
by shistkye | 2025-08-30 02:09:52+00:00
> They also got me reported to HR by the manager of the XROS effort for supposedly making his team members feel bad

This is one of the reasons I’m sick of working pretty much anywhere anymore: I can’t be myself.

Appreciating people for their differences when they are humble and gifted is easy. I side with liberals, but I have a mix of liberal, moderate, and conservative friends.

But there are only so many years of pretending to appreciate all of the self-focused people that could be so much better at contributing to the world if they could quietly and selflessly work hard and respect people with different beliefs and backgrounds.

I’m happy for the opportunity I have to work, and I understand how millennials think and work. But working with boomers and/or gen X-ers would be so much less stressful. I could actually have real conversations with people.

I don’t think the problem is really with HR. I think the problem is a generation that was overly pandered to just doesn’t mix with the other generations, and maybe they shouldn’t.
by jhhh | 2025-08-30 02:13:04+00:00
It's not possible to do without violating one of the conditions I listed. Of the solutions people have posted on SO and on blogs they either will be pushed off the screen when there's too much content (violating #2), will be pulled up to under the last rendered element if there's not enough content (#1), or will occlude content if you use absolution positioning (#3). This forces you to use an empty element of the same size as the footer, which has absolution positioning, which ends up being the element which scrolls under the footer (#4). This is what google podcasts did iirc, but it's just a hack. You'd think there'd be a simple way without having to make sacrificial elements on your page.
by cyberax | 2025-08-30 02:14:37+00:00
> The issue with "gifted only schools" is they end up eating the bulk of funds

No, they don't. If you look at SF, the high-performing Lowell High gets a bit _less_ funding than the average for the district. Stuyvesant in NYC is right at the average spending.

I studied in a magnet school with other gifted kids, including a future Olympiad winner. Our school barely had heating in winter. It's really the _other_ kids that make all the difference.
by derbOac | 2025-08-30 02:14:37+00:00
IMHO there should be challenges but also opportunities for self correction and movement. The problem with test score stratification is that you start treating kids as unchanging objects being measured by an infallible yardstick, when neither assumption is true.

It's not racism it's essentialism and poor education. An ideal educational system would tailor material and projects to an individual student and adjust at the rate they improve.