MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mattmanser | 2025-09-17 19:23:06+00:00
There's a lot of people complaining about degradation for weeks on /r/claude.

I do wonder if it's more that it's just lost the wow factor and they're seeing the cracks as I generally still feel it's at the same capability as I'm used to. But I've always viewed LLM code with skepticism and rewrite a lot of it.

As someone who's mainly .Net/Typescript I'm not seeing it be terrible with libraries, but it's generally bad when libraries constantly change their API. React Router for example. So depends what libraries you're using. We use MaterialUI and trying to get it to consitently use the new Grid definition is an exercise in futility.

Do you know about the context 7 MCP, that can help apparently though I've not really bothered with it myself. Not sure how many .Net libraries they have.
by bdangubic | 2025-09-17 19:23:29+00:00
there is a 4 and 5 and 6… :)

here’s 4 - there are senior-level SWEs who spent their entire career automating every thing they had to do more than once. it is one of core traits that differentiates “10x” SWE from “others”

LLMs have taken the automation part to another level and best SWEs I know use them every hour of every day to automate shit that we never had tools to automate before
by BeetleB | 2025-09-17 19:23:52+00:00
I think time based is the way to go, with an exponential curve, such that one can only post 5 comments reasonably per day.

The first comment in a given day has no wait. The second requires waiting 10 minutes. The 3rd requires an hour. The 4th requires 3 hours, and the 5th another 12 hours or so.

Obviously: No edits (or let the edit count as the comment).

Lots of variables to play with. The nice thing about time is that it is egalitarian. Richer people don't get more access.

> If you have to wait a minute to be allowed to post, can you still be bothered?

At work, I often log out of HN. The need to log back in often does act as a deterrent. I also occasionally use LeechBlock, with a 60s delay. That too acts as a deterrent.
by colah3 | 2025-09-17 19:24:23+00:00
Hi! I'm the research lead for Anthropic's interpretability team, and was the decision maker for us publishing our papers web first and not doing traditional publications.

A few thoughts:

(1) As others have commented, I think peer review in ML is pretty widely accepted to be dysfunctional right now. I think most people who have published in ML conferences would agree. It's not unusual for early PhD students and sometimes even undergrads to review, and reviewers are overburdened to the point where they can carefully consider all their papers. Everything I've said so far is just anecdote and opinion though. A more objective test was the NeurIPS 2021 Consistency Experiment ( https://blog.neurips.cc/2021/12/08/the-neurips-2021-consiste... ) which found that if a paper was accepted by the conference, there was only a ~50% chance that a parallel review process would come to the same conclusion.

(2) Modern peer review is a relatively modern invention, arising in post-WW2 science as the scientific community grew dramatically, and there was a need for more systematized ways to make decisions about publication, funding, jobs, etc. Famously, Einstein was offended by one of his papers being sent for review. I don't think it's at all obvious that this transition has been good for science! I see lots of people writing papers for reviewers, rather than with the goal of doing the most impactful science they can.

(3) As background, I spent 5 years of my life running a scientific journal ( https://distill.pub/ ), trying to have excellent review processes and enable non-traditional papers to be peer reviewed. I honestly just burnt out on this. Now I just want to do good research.

(4) We do circulate draft papers to researchers working on similar topics at other industry groups, and in academia. As other comments have noted, this sometimes leads to public comments on our papers. In many cases, these are a much deeper review than you'd see in typical peer review processes, such as independent reproduction of experiments.
by pessimizer | 2025-09-17 19:24:32+00:00
The Washington Post was always bad. Movement liberals just fell in love with it because they hated Trump. Always a awful, militaristic, working-class hating neocon propaganda rag that gleefully mixed editorial and news, the only thing that got worse with the Bezos acquisition were the headlines (and, of course, the coverage of Amazon.) The Wall Street Journal was more truthful, and actually cared about not dipping their opinions in their reporting. I could swear there's a Chomsky quote about that.

People put their names on it because it got them better jobs as propagandists elsewhere and they could sell their stupid books. It's a lot easier to tell the truth than to lie well; that's where the money and talent is at.
by flohofwoe | 2025-09-17 19:25:21+00:00
That old thing again ;)

Direct DOM access doesn't make any sense as a WASM feature.

It would be at best a web-browser feature which browser vendors need to implement outside of WASM (by defining a standardized C-API which maps to the DOM JS API and exposing that C API directly to WASM via the function import table - but that idea is exactly as horrible in practice as it sounds in theory).

If you need to manipulate the DOM - just do that in JS, calling from WASM into JS is cheap, and JS is surprisingly fast too. Just make sure that the JS code has enough 'meat', e.g. don't call accross the WASM/JS boundary for every single DOM method call or property change. While the call itself is fast, the string conversion from the source language specific string representation on the WASM heap into JS strings and back is not free (getting rid of this string marshalling would be the only theoretical advantage of a 'native' WASM DOM API).
by Rover222 | 2025-09-17 19:25:23+00:00
New SOTA on ARC-AGI

- V1: 79.6%, $8.42/task - V2: 29.4%, $30.40/task

Custom submissions by @jerber888 and @_eric_pang_ are now the best known solutions to ARC-AGI

Both: * Are open source * Use Grok 4 * Implement program-synthesis outer loops with test-time adaptation
by gjsman-1000 | 2025-09-17 19:25:50+00:00
Who is to say they were mentally ill? Major left wing streamers openly were calling for violence before it happened. TechDirt's position conveniently ignores this. Kirk being a charlatan, even if that were true, is small potatoes.

https://x.com/Rightanglenews/status/1966264506486853810

Edit: Downvoters, if that wasn't calls to violence, especially at the end, post it on HN on a reply. I dare you to be consistent on your vote.
by nomel | 2025-09-17 19:25:51+00:00
It's a 20 year streaming service, and it's Google. There's a certain expectation I have from that. The fact that it's just an endpoint being hit by the client is...baffling. I don't think it's in the realm of expected possibilities for most of us, being the most naive, and fragile, implementation possible.

The fact that ad revenue didn't change means they do have robust ad tracking, but the view numbers are +/- some unexpected level of fiction.
by bborud | 2025-09-17 19:25:52+00:00
I'm a simple man who has simple needs. I want a better and faster way to pass Go structs in and out of the runtime that doesn't mean I have to do a sword dance on a parquet floor wearing thick knit wool socks and use some fragile grafted on solution.

If there can be a solution that works for more languages: great. I mostly want this for Go. If it means there will be some _reasonable_ limitations, that's also fine.
by object-a | 2025-09-17 19:26:06+00:00
If we define truth as "Whatever a majority happens to agree with" and the marketplace of ideas as a contest to create truth by building a majority consensus, then you're correct.

If we define truth as something real, and something that we determine based on evidence and correspondence with reality, then you absolutely need some shared epistemological standards for what constitutes evidence and correspondence. I'm not sure if you need peer review for everything, but building expertise in those epistemological standards and approaches _is_ a requirement for well functioning marketplace of ideas, especially if our goal is to develop and understand the truth.

This is distinct from free speech -- I wouldn't want to impose restrictions on one's ability to speak, but that's not the same as saying all speech is equally valid in the pursuit of truth.
by JohnKemeny | 2025-09-17 19:26:20+00:00
What makes you say that they are easier? Are there more people who manages to solve a problem from ICPC than from IOI?

How do you compare those?

There were at least 2 very simple problems in IOI this year.

I haven't read the ICPC problem set, and perhaps there are some low-hanging fruits, but I highly doubt it.
by fidotron | 2025-09-17 19:26:26+00:00
Those did involve ex-Apple people, and there isn't proof that they are quite as good either, but they are the closest that anyone has publicly come.

Qualcomm have never actually caught up with Apple performance wise since the introduction of Arm64. They had a very nice 32 bit implementation and were completely caught off guard. Prior to their NuVia acquisition their 64 bit efforts were barely improvements on what you can just license from Arm directly, to the point for a while that is all they were.
by tcoff91 | 2025-09-17 19:26:28+00:00
Publishing a package involves 2 phases: uploading the package to npmjs, and making it availble to users. Right now these 2 phases are bundled together into 1 operation.

I think the right way to approach this is to unbundle uploading the packages & publishing packages so that they're available to end-users.

CI systems should be able to build & upload packages in a fully automated manner.

Publishing the uploaded packages should require a human to log into npmjs's website & manually publish the package and go through MFA.
Show HN: Annotate any document and train extraction by example, not prompts
by avloss11 | 2025-09-17 19:26:37+00:00
Hi HN, I built a tool for teaching LLMs how to extract structured data from documents by annotating, not prompt engineering. I’d love your feedback.

How it works: - Upload a document (DOCX, PDF, image, etc.) - Select and tag parts of it (supports nesting, arrays, custom tag structures) - Upload another document → click "predict" → see editable annotations - Amend them and save as a new example - Call the API with a third document → get JSON back

Use cases: - Identify "important clauses" in contracts - Extract "total value" from invoices - Anything subjective, like "healthy ingredients" on a label - Anything objective, like "postcode" or "phone number" You could even tag things like "good rhymes" in a poem — basically anything an LLM can understand.

The key idea: instead of iterating endlessly on prompts (and sometimes regressing), you just iterate on examples. Each example improves accuracy in a concrete way, and you often need far fewer than traditional ML approaches.

We’re also on Product Hunt today (currently #5), but feedback from HN is very appreciated.
by tgma | 2025-09-17 19:27:13+00:00
Why the AI hate? How is it different from sharing your knowledge with another individual or writing a book to share it?

> AI companies are not paying anyone for that piece of information

So? For the vast majority of human existence, paying for content was not a thing, just like paying for air isn't. The copyright model you are used to may just be too forced. Many countries have no moral qualms about "pirating" Windows and other pieces of software or games (they won't afford to purchase anyway.) There's no inherent morality or entitlement for author receiving payment for everything they "create" (to wit, Bill Gates had to write a letter to Homebrew Computer Club to make a case for this, showing that it was hardly the default and natural viewpoint.) It's just a legal/social contract to achieve specific goals for the society. Frankly the wheels of copyright have been falling off since the dawn of the Internet, not LLM.
by AlexandrB | 2025-09-17 19:27:23+00:00
Still better than "educate yourself", or "do better", which is what you often get when you start to ask questions of someone proclaiming extreme left wing ideas.

Edit: Also, what's the deal with calling everyone a "grifter"? I see no evidence that Charlie Kirk was insincere about what he believed, where's the "grifting"? Isn't any kind of political activity for pay "grifting" by this standard?
by Rover222 | 2025-09-17 19:28:12+00:00
The level 2 vs 4 thing is a technicality and fairly misleading, Teslas can already operate in a much wider range of roads and conditions. Waymo is still on guardrails. Mercedes touted "level 4" but you had to be following another car, going slow, etc etc. General autonomy is what matters.

I trust Karpathy when it comes to lidar vs vision. Do you shoot lasers out of your head to drive?
by usefulcat | 2025-09-17 19:28:33+00:00
Actually it's the opposite. Pre-internet, there were a handful of news sources in any given city (mostly newspapers and TV), so they couldn't afford to alienate half of their potential viewers/readers by leaning hard left or right.

Today, there are many, many sources of 'news' online. So many that the net effect is that most of those sources lean one way or the other, and by and large people choose to listen mostly or only to those sources they agree with.

No wonder political opinions are so highly divided today. Almost no one ever hears anything from the other side.
by Animats | 2025-09-17 19:28:40+00:00
> Waymo has published videos about how their remote operator system works.

Although not, as far as I've been able to find, videos that actually show the control center. Just semi-animated videos of the advising process. The number of customer support people per vehicle is not disclosed.

Employee stats are available.[1] Unclear how accurate they are. According to Unify, Waymo has 2,406 employees. Headcount is up only 6.6% since last year, even though the number of vehicles deployed has reportedly tripled. So they seem to have a big fixed labor cost in engineering, and but a low variable cost per car. Which means this scales well and becomes profitable.

[1] https://www.unifygtm.com/insights-headcount/waymo
by epistasis | 2025-09-17 19:28:46+00:00
This is my favorite type of HN post, and definitely going to be a classic in the genre for me.

> Memory optimization on ultra-high core count systems differs a lot from single-threaded memory management. Memory allocators themselves become contention points, memory bandwidth is divided across more cores, and allocation patterns that work fine on small systems can create cascading performance problems at scale. It is crucial to be mindful of how much memory is allocated and how memory is used.

In bioinformatics, one of the most popular alignment algorithms is roughly bottlenecked on random RAM access (the FM-index on the BWT of the genome), so I always wonder how these algorithms are going to perform on these beasts. It's been a decade since I spent any time optimizing large system performance for it though. NUMA was already challenging enough! I wonder how many memory channels these new chips have access to.
by immibis | 2025-09-17 19:28:51+00:00
This is an active choice of such marketplaces. They could choose to be more strict if they wanted to. Yes they'd probably have a moderately hard time getting rid of all the existing spam, but once they start banning vendors and raising verification requirements, the volume decreases.

I'm permanently banned from publishing on the Google Play Store because the name of my app was too similar to another. So they do have the ability to enforce things strictly when they want to.
by bawolff | 2025-09-17 19:28:58+00:00
I think its fine to be unconvinced by something without necessarily having a better argument.

Usually when people say "both siding", its more refering to an ad hominem falacy where someone tries to counter an argument by pointing to something bad the other side does that is separate (and hence irrelavent) to the original argument. I dont think that is what the person who you are responding to is doing because what they are saying is directly applicable to the issue at hand.
by breppp | 2025-09-17 19:29:21+00:00
> 80% of the victims were civilians

That's incorrect, at best you may have been quoting an organization that had abducted babies for political advantage and you assume won't lie for a political advantage, even though it was caught lying before. However, I don't believe even they are claiming that, as they are intentionally not publishing militant death statistics to inflate the notion of civilian deaths
by hinkley | 2025-09-17 19:29:22+00:00
One bright point here is that the WASM changes may force v8 to improve its IPC by having a feature that Bun gets from JSC, which is passing strings across isolate boundaries.

IPC overhead is so bad in NodeJS that most people don’t talk about it because the workarounds are just impossibly high maintenance. We reach straight for RPC instead, and downplay the stupidity of the entire situation. Kind of reminiscent of the Ruby community, which is perhaps not surprising given the pedigree of so many important node modules (written by ex Rails devs).
by AnimalMuppet | 2025-09-17 19:29:47+00:00
I think that closed-mindedness is the issue. I think bad-faith weaponization of discourse is closed-mindedness that wears a disguise. "No, really, I'm a reasonable person!" The unapologetically closed-minded at least is honest.

So I see the axis between the two as one of honesty, not one of closed-mindedness. The actual problem is to move both of them to a more open-minded position, not to balance honest vs. dishonest.
by Cyph0n | 2025-09-17 19:29:50+00:00
Okay, so you have rationalized to yourself why there was “no alternative” by essentially saying that Democrats were absolutely helpless to do anything - an act of God was in their way, so to speak.

Now, you ask what could Democrats have done differently? How about holding a Democratic primary? Or maybe acknowledging the Gaza genocide instead of ignoring it even exists (no need to even use the g-word since it angers some of their base)? Perhaps offering a fig leaf to internal dissenters within the party? Maybe inviting Palestinians and pro-Palestinian voices to speak at rallies? Heck, maybe not explicitly vetting and banning any suspected pro-Palestine attendees at said rallies? Or how about making a strong, unambiguous campaign promise to do something (however vague) about a ceasefire in Gaza?

This is all the bare fucking minimum, mind you, but it may have likely pushed the needle.

I also don’t see how any of this would have significantly alienated their pro-Israel base enough to shift votes away. But if it did, I think siding ever so slightly with those calling for a ceasefire over warmongers might be the moral thing to do, don’t you think?

Next time around, when the Democrats ignore your issue, I would love to hear how you “objectively” rationalize your vote then.
by jsnell | 2025-09-17 19:30:11+00:00
A terse prompt and expecting a one-shot answer is really not how you'd get an LLM to solve complex problems.

I don't know what Deepmind and OpenAI did in this case, but to get an idea of the kind of scaffolding and prompting strategy that one might want, have a look at this paper where some floks used the normal generally available Gemini Pro 2.5 to solve 5/6 of the 2025 IMO problems: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2507.15855
by softfalcon | 2025-09-17 19:30:16+00:00
The extremely accurate and high end terrain generation tools do exactly this. They model different terrain densities, erode-ability, and permeability to then apply rain, snow, tectonic shifts, river erosion, thaw-melt, etc over virtualized eons.

The result is incredibly detailed terrain that is completely unique based on the initial parameters and the randomness of the time-elapsed process that is non-deterministic.

The only downside is that it takes hours to simulate and that's more than most folks are interested in investing in.

Here are some examples of this kind of software:

World machine: https://www.world-machine.com/

Terragen: https://planetside.co.uk/

Vue: https://www.bentley.com/software/e-on-software-free-download...

Gaia: https://www.procedural-worlds.com/products/indie/gaia/
by PaulHoule | 2025-09-17 19:30:21+00:00
More than once I've had a chance to interview (brief) somebody who was about to take a job at a "big tech" company and interview them again (debrief) after they left.

Frequently they were excited to start work at a place where they could "make a difference" and within a year they came to the conclusion that there's wasn't any possibility they could make a difference.

Organizations of that sort have no interest at all in hiring people who aren't going to cooperate on their process.
by Mogzol | 2025-09-17 19:30:51+00:00
All of these printers can be run completely offline, although then you obviously lose any network-related features such as sending prints over the network. I know that at least the Bambu printers (and I assume most others) can also be run in LAN-only mode, where they only work with devices on the same network. In this mode you could definitely firewall them without causing issues. The main features you lose by being in LAN-only mode are the phone app and being able to access the printer from off your network.
by drnick1 | 2025-09-17 19:30:51+00:00
No, I won't turn my ad blocker off. In fact, I go further and use uMatrix to block ALL third party content by default on ALL websites (uBlock in advanced mode can also do this). That's on top of an aggressive DNS-level blacklists targeting ads and trackers.

Some manual adjustment to allow CDN on some websites is needed, but 95% of the cruft is left out. That cruft is usually malware in a broad sense: ads, trackers, embedded Youtube videos that seem benign but allow Google to follow users across the Internet, etc.
by anthk | 2025-09-17 19:30:57+00:00
Install Telescope from GIT

https://github.com/ThomasAdam/telescope

My ~/.config/telescope/config:

# Break long lines at max at 92 columns set fill-column = 92

# Enable colors regardless of the NO_COLOR environment variable set enable-colors = 1

# Downloads set download-path = "/home/anthk/Downloads"

# No tabs set tab-bar-show = -1 # set max-killed-tabs = 0

# Hide the closing line of preformatted blocks set hide-pre-closing-line = 1

# If you have the duckling-proxy installed, decomment the following # lines to use it for HTTP and HTTPS links. #proxy "http" via "gemini://localhost:1965" #proxy "https" via "gemini://localhost:1965"

proxy "http" via "gemini://stargate.gemi.dev:1994" proxy "https" via "gemini://stargate.gemi.dev:1994"

bind global-map C-s link-select bind global-map "C-x b" tab-select

# Some opinionated graphical improvements:

style line.fringe fg color239

style line.quote attr dim normal style line.pre.start bg color239 style line.pre bg color239 style line.pre.end bg color239

style line.link { fg color81 attr normal }

style line.compl.current { bg black fg yellow attr normal }

style tabline { bg color233 fg color50 attr normal }

style tabline.tab { bg color233 attr normal }

style tabline.current { bg color241 fg white }

style modeline { bg color237 attr normal }

style line.download.ongoing bg color238 style line.download.done bg color238 style line.download.info bg color238 style download bg color238

Then run Telescope, press Esc-x (or Alt-X), enter "open",

and head to any of these urls:

gopher://magical.fish

gemini://gemi.dev

https://arstechnica.com (as a test, or http://wiby.me).

Enjoy an uber fast browsing on an VT terminal.

PD: ESC can be inputted as Ctrl-[
by impossiblefork | 2025-09-17 19:31:04+00:00
Here in Sweden contracts are a specific thing, otherwise it's not a contract, so agreeing to conditions that can be changed by the other party simply isn't a contract and therefore is just a bullshit paper of very dubious legal validity.

I know that some things like this are accepted in America, and I can't judge how it would be dealt with. I assume that contracts between companies and other sophisticated entities are actual contracts with unchangeable terms.