MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by fcpk | 2025-09-12 14:46:01+00:00
The author is not wrong in the sense that many things X11 did for a long time and people were used to are not possible in wayland.

My personal anecdotal experience is that wayland is a lot better than X11 performance wise. It feels snappier, and it has been rockstable. Please note I'm using a KDE based distro(neon) and on both nvidia and intel gpu it has been great.

If you are looking for raw performance based on simple frameworks, I do believe X11 will probably better, but for most people wayland will bring improvements. Yes I could get insane terms performance in an urxvt with FB under X11. Do I need it? Not really when my the system still behaves.

As a devil's advocate argument, it is true that wayland has come from being a lot worse O(years) ago.

some complaints from OP: * "A crash in the window manager takes down all running applications" - this was true, but it has started to change, see https://www.phoronix.com/news/Qt-Wayland-Compositor-Restart#... * "You cannot do a lot of things that you can do in Xorg by design" - I do not see this as an issue, other than having emotional attachement to Xorg. * "It offloads a lot of work to each and every window manager. As a result, the same basic features get implemented differently in different window managers, with different behaviors and bugs - so what works on desktop environment A does not necessarily work in desktop environment B (e.g., often you hear that something "works in Wayland", even though it only really works on Gnome and KDE, not in all Wayland implementations)." - this is true, but again, it means that instead of complaining to a monolithic project you complain to a specific implementation. And I disagree this would be wasteful as there are clear design decisions done differently by different wayland implementation. * "Wayland breaks screen recording applications" - Google Meet, Zoom, OBS Studio all work fine here. I guess if you mean X11 recording, then yeah it's broken. * "Wayland breaks automation software" - yeah, again, changed of display protocol will break existing automation. That's called change, and is not inherent to wayland * "Wayland is biased toward Linux and breaks BSD" - that one's valid. * "Wayland requires JWM, TWM, XDM, IceWM,... to reimplement Xorg-like functionality" - Well duh, it's not X11, it does require a lot of new implementation. X11 was made as a kitchensync that can do everything. That's not necessarily a good thing in the modern world.

I think there is a pattern there, the OP is mostly complaining that things are changing and some new things don't yet work. But he forgets that wayland appeared out of very good reason: - inefficient indirect rendering - security flaws(too easy to actually do a keylogger) - kitchensync approach(where it did everything) making it large and monolithic.
by LudwigNagasena | 2025-09-12 14:46:03+00:00
In the real world you usually want to extend datatypes and provide new implementations without recompiling let alone rewriting old code (The so called expression problem). This is the raison d'être of complex DI and IoC enterprise patterns and various monkey patching techniques.

I am not sure how flexible the effect approach is. It took decades before static typing became painless enough for rapid agile development. Properly typed DI with safeguards sounds wonderful, but can algebraic effects actually deliver that?
by komali2 | 2025-09-12 14:46:05+00:00
Anyone with experience teaching children could tell you that racism is taught. It's just not baked in for kids.

However it's also not a very interesting question imo. You will never "reset" a generation from any aspect of culture, and now that we're in the global information age it's triply impossible. We don't need to fool around with naturalist fallacy - it's enough to say that racism is bad and we should get rid of it.
by phoronixrly | 2025-09-12 14:46:22+00:00
I've been fully on Wayland for around 10 years now. I do not see literally any issues in my day-to-day use. Of course I don't use nvidia, why would I use the most linux-hostile GPU vendor out there?

In fact I shudder when I remember the endless hacks I had to go through to have xorg stop tearing and/or get my C-states low enough so that I have more battery life. Things that are all way more important than literally anything on this list.
by HarHarVeryFunny | 2025-09-12 14:46:54+00:00
I'd say that whether to expect more brain-like capabilities out of Transformers is more an objective matter of architecture - what's missing - and learning algorithms, not "collective arguments". If a Transformer simply can't do something - has no mechanism to support it (e.g. learn at run time), then it can't do it, regardless of whether Sam Altman tells you it can, or tries to spin it as unimportant!

A Transformer is just a fixed size stack of transformer layers, with one-way data flow through this stack. It has no internal looping, no internal memory, no way to incrementally learn at runtime, no autonomy/curiosity/etc to cause it to explore and actively expose itself to learning situations (assuming it could learn, which it anyways can't), etc!

These are just some of the most obvious major gaps between the Transformer architecture and even the most stripped down cognitive architecture (vs language model) one might design, let alone an actual human brain which has a lot more moving parts and complexity to it.

The whole Transformer journey has been fascinating to watch, and highly informative as to how far language and auto-regressive prediction can take you, but without things like incremental learning and the drive to learn, all you have is a huge, but fixed, repository of "knowledge" (language stats), so you are in effect building a giant expert system. It may be highly capable and sufficient for some tasks, but this is not AGI - it's not something that could replace an intern and learn on the job, or make independent discoveries outside of what is already deducible from what is in the training data.

One of the really major gaps between an LLM and something capable of learning about the world isn't even the architecture with all it's limitations, but just the way they are trained. A human (and other intelligent animals) also learns by prediction, but the feedback loop when the prediction is wrong is essential - this is how you learn, and WHAT you can learn from incorrect predictions is limited by the feedback you receive. In the case of a human/animal the feedback comes from the real world, so what you are able to learn critically includes things like how your own actions affect the world - you learn how to be able to DO things.

An LLM also learns by prediction, but what it is predicting isn't real world responses to it's own actions, but instead just input continuations. It is being trained to be a passive observer of other people's "actions" (limited to the word sequences they generate) - to predict what they will do (say) next, as opposed to being an active entity that learns not to predict someone else's actions, but to predict it's own actions and real-world responses - how to DO things itself (learn on the job, etc, etc).
by AfterHIA | 2025-09-12 14:47:41+00:00
I agree pretty wholeheartedly but as someone who was, "trained as an artist first and a computer guy second" the ability for the LLM to provide functional boilerplate and, "hunt down" those weird problems that can only usually be resolved by reading sometimes hundreds of pages of documentation. I love the comparison-- "just as compilers replace programmers and spreadsheets replaced accountants..."

The one use case where I'm really excited for though is when we (perhaps we have) to where my nieces and nephews can tell the machine-- "I have an idea for a video game could you help me make it?" That to me is the natural extension of the movement to things like Roblox and Minecraft. Ultimately though the, "goal" is to get them to, "real understanding."
by furyofantares | 2025-09-12 14:47:48+00:00
Their cheapest tier is free, they lose money on that of course. And spend a lot of money training new models.

Anthropic has said they have made money on every model so far, just not enough to train the next model, which so far has been much more costly to train every generation. At some point they will probably train an unprofitable model if training costs keep rising dramatically.

OpenAI burns more money on their free tier and might be spending more money building out for future training (I don't know if they do or not) but they both make money on their $20 subscriptions for sure. Inference is very cheap.
by dahart | 2025-09-12 14:47:57+00:00
Human breath isn’t counted as fossil fuel emissions because the natural carbon cycle is a closed loop (all carbon we exhale came from our food and goes back to growing more food [1]), and also because humans don’t eat fossil fuels, of course. It’s the additional emissions from our fossil fuel burning machines that are causing climate change; we wouldn’t have CO2 driven climate change without the fossil fuel emissions, even if everyone was exercising. The fossil fuel emissions produce around 20x more CO2 than all humans breathing.

Taking the 6000km flight produces an additional ~1 ton of CO2 per passenger. A 777 emits around 10000kg per hour, or something like 70,000 kg of CO2 for one flight from Portugal to French Guiana. That doesn’t count the people breathing on the flight, and it doesn’t make any sense to compare a 7 hour flight to a few people taking several months to plan and execute an extreme paddle board trip. It’s the rate of additional CO2 emissions that matter, not the total number.

[1] https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/environment-quirky-science...
by flohofwoe | 2025-09-12 14:47:57+00:00
Out of the modern non-console 3D APIs (Metal, D3D12, Vulkan), Vulkan is arguably the worst because it simply continued the Khronos tradition of letting GPU vendors contribute random extensions which then may or may not be promoted to the core API, lacking any sort of design vision or focus beyond the Mantle starting point.

Competition for 3D APIs is more important than ever (e.g. Vulkan has already started 'borrowing' a couple of ideas from other APIs - for instance VK_KHR_dynamic_rendering (e.g. the 'render-pass-object-removal') looks a lot like Metal's transient render pass system, just adapter to a non-OOP C API).
by eimrine | 2025-09-12 14:48:07+00:00
Google loves to search the result with a real URL but since I make any click on that result Google replaces it with some referral link. For example, if I want to open the result not from my connection but from Tor I need to clean each link by hand or even type it from scratch. I am sure this ban was made for poisoning UX for console guys too. What a pity I didn't know I could search from console browser and having more easy life.
by gruez | 2025-09-12 14:48:19+00:00
>He said nothing about it then never being possible to propose a law. A reasonable cool-down period to ensure politicians can't simply exploit the fatigue of the public would be reasonable - perhaps 10 or 12 years.

So if gay marriage or weed legalization was defeated in 2015 you shouldn't be able to have a go at it until 2025? Or if YIMBY zoning reforms or AI regulation were defeated in 2025 you shouldn't be able try again until 2035?
by barnabee | 2025-09-12 14:48:29+00:00
Many of these features are more IDE than editor to me and that perhaps explains our different points of view.

Personally I’d be quite sad if the core Helix editor ends up like a VS Code style IDE, or even like some of the more heavyweight vim/emacs configs I’ve seen. I prefer simple, lightweight tools with relatively narrow focus and for me there’s not a lot in that bucket missing from Helix.

I use panes in my terminal for e.g. quickly running commands and file management, and terminal tabs for e.g. quickly switching to gitui/lazygit or longer terminal and command sessions.

I prefer this because all the pane and tab management, file management tools, etc. are therefore the same whether I’m editing code or doing something else in the terminal.

Of course, once there are plugins, hopefully people who want those things from their editor can be catered for too.
by bluGill | 2025-09-12 14:48:45+00:00
> Wayland designers didn't seem to think that'd be worthwhile.

The Wayland designers are the people who maintained X11 for years. They have no problem with X11 coexisting so long as they don't have to work on it. However everyone demanding X11 is really demanding Wayland designers stop their work and go back to X11 - and none of them are paying for that.

There are people paid to work on Wayland - some used to be paid to work on X11 (and sometimes still are), but they convinced their boss to pay them to work on wayland instead. Since you are not their boss you don't have any input into that.
by darkwater | 2025-09-12 14:49:29+00:00
> Poland voted for the wrong government... EU suspended funds until they voted for the right government at the next election.

On the other end there is the "don't interfere with anything" and you get totalitarianism as a side effect, eventually. If a democratically elected government passes a law that makes killing some category of people lawful, should they be allowed to do it?
by crawfordcomeaux | 2025-09-12 14:49:46+00:00
This is a great argument for a dietary regimen of feasting before a sprint, intermittent fasting during the middle of it, and fasting fully for crunch weeks! I bet it could be so successful, I could start an AI company copying what others do, not changing a thing, and I'll just be so much more productive I'll wind up on top!
by amradio1989 | 2025-09-12 14:49:49+00:00
Congratulations!! That’s a big achievement.

Maybe you know this, but trading signals are a dubious avenue to investment returns. They are, universally, all garbage.

Idk who your customer is, but this is useful for “traders” who sell e-courses and trade picks to the naive. I imagine they’d like it quite a lot. You could even run an affiliate program to get to their customers.

Now I wouldn’t recommend that personally. We have enough unscrupulous behavior going around. Instead I’d apply those statistical analysis capabilities to things that actually work.
by lanfeust6 | 2025-09-12 14:50:22+00:00
Adding to this, I never understood why it's considered so addictive. Smartphones are banal and frustrating to me. However, I'm often on my personal laptop.

I suspect there is something to the refrain that phones are a crutch in those cases where our range of actions is constrained. Through habit they then reflexively take over in other contexts.
by jerf | 2025-09-12 14:50:25+00:00
A GZIP "member" is whatever the creating program wants it to be. I have not carefully verified this but I see no reason for the command line program "gzip" to ever generate more than one member (at least for smaller inputs), after a quick scan through the command line options. I'm sure it's the modal case by far. Since this is specifically about reading .tar.gz files as hosted on npm, this is probably reasonably safe.

However, because of the scale of what bun deals with it's on the edge of what I would consider safe and I hope in the real code there's a fallback for what happens if the file has multiple members in it, because sooner or later it'll happen.

It's not necessarily terribly well known that you can just slam gzip members (or files) together and it's still a legal gzip stream, but it's something I've made use of in real code, so I know it's happened. You can do some simple things with having indices into a compressed file so you can skip over portions of the compressed stream safely, without other programs having to "know" that's a feature of the file format.

Although the whole thing is weird in general because you can stream gzip'd tars without every having to allocate space for the whole thing anyhow. gzip can be streamed without having seen the footer yet and the tar format can be streamed out pretty easily. I've written code for this in Go a couple of times, where I can be quite sure there's no stream rewinding occuring by the nature of the io.Reader system. Reading the whole file into memory to unpack it was never necessary in the first place, not sure if they've got some other reason to do that.
by CharlesW | 2025-09-12 14:50:51+00:00
I'm a huge fan too, but my understanding is that traditional intra-frame anti-aliasing (SSAA, MSAA, FXAA/SMAA, etc.) does not increase the information capacity of the final image, even though it may appear to do that. For more information per frame, you need one or more of: Higher resolution, higher dynamic range, sampling across time, or multi-sampled shading (i.e. MSAA, but you also run the shader per subsample).
by DrScientist | 2025-09-12 14:50:54+00:00
Groups don't follow rules as such, group behaviours emerge from the interaction of individual behaviours.

As to whether all groups display those rules - I suspect not - though it rather does depend on how you define a group - the definition of group probably has some sort of colloboration built in ( as oppose to a bunch of indviduals that happen to live in the same geographic area ).
by magnice | 2025-09-12 14:52:25+00:00
got my interest on hierarchical display of information driven by today's attention mechanism for the actual brain's attention mechanism (also known a Saliency). then I'am developing an interface to create a blurring interface that blurs out of the screen the regions that doesn't matter for the user. Meaning the internet is full of information overload, narratives, and marketing, guiding the user away towards true interpretration and fullfilment of informational needs. In order to create this system we will first answer the question how can we blur non-relevant regions in the screen with LLMs? after that how can the process of it be sufficiently cheap to implement on a continual level (i.e for 2 hours straight without consuming enormous amounts of tokens/compute).

Some references I could find to explain more what I mean:

https://sci-hub.se/https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2636240.26...

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2109.01980v1

https://github.com/paco1127/Pure-Blur (uses advanced content analysis algorithms and machine learning models to identify sensitive areas or objects and apply real-time blur effects)

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2507.14769 system that dynamically filters web content based on user- specified goals using large language models to identify and prioritize relevant elements while minimizing distraction - Repo is empty tho just a readme

https://github.com/nanobrowser/nanobrowser/tree/master/chrom... chrome extension like Manus'AI that automates web interaction, might need to look at how to locate elments in DOM
by NickC25 | 2025-09-12 14:52:54+00:00
> but you're clearly celebrating the death of the man in a thread about his assassination.

I'm not celebrating anything. I'm pointing out irony. You call for gun violence, thinking you're untouchable (because of your skin color and political ties), but you're not.

>you're criticizing the way a dead man expressed his religious beliefs to the audience

Hang on here. Let's unpack this. This is actually pretty humorous.

Let's take the story of Jesus of Nazareth. A poor, brown skinned Jewish guy from Israel born out of wedlock who worked as a carpenter and preached love, compassion, and understanding, whose supposed miracles included healing the sick and disfigured. He worked to feed the needy, clothe the naked, advocated for paying taxes, and treating one's enemies with compassion as if they were their own kin. This person was executed by being nailed to a cross and in his final moments, still asked his followers to forgive his executioners.

We have a rich white dude, raised in a wealthy first world major city suburb using the above gentleman's message to preach hate, racial superiority, phobia, and outright bigotry, all under the guise of "asking tough questions". This dude would go around and "debate" young adults (and children) half his age and use "gotcha" tactics and quick speaking to overwhelm and gish gallop his opposition into giving up. He would then selectively edit the "debates" and post them online to create a strawman for his political allies to punch.

Religious beliefs, eh? Come on.
by abeppu | 2025-09-12 14:53:01+00:00
> Laqua, whose father is a lawyer for an insurance company, said he hires only people willing to work seven days a week. Of his 40-plus employees, around 30 are ex-founders. His welcome gift to new hires is a mattress to keep at work. > “I live at the office,” said Laqua, who considers himself the most hardcore of his peers. Employees share similar feelings. Though not a work requirement, Laqua said, “two-thirds of our early employees got Corgi tattoos.”

How do you get former founders to put in that kind of dedication to _someone else's company_?

Also, are these actually AI companies? By what definition? Corgi's home page appears to be _only_ a list of open positions presently, none of which are ML/AI engineers.
by timr | 2025-09-12 14:53:09+00:00
Don't misunderstand me: I enjoy a drink now and again, but it's obviously silly to be obsessing about PFAS in beer when the alcohol is the definitive risk to your health, with a double underscore.

That said, as long as you aren't consuming regularly in excess, even the alcohol isn't going to affect your lifespan. It just goes to illustrate the relative levels of absurdity involved here.
by flohofwoe | 2025-09-12 14:54:26+00:00
MSAA does indeed have a higher information capacity, since the MSAA output surface has a 2x, 4x or 8x higher resolution than the rendering resolution, it's not a 'software post-processing filter' like FXAA or SMAA.

The output of a single pixel shader invocation is duplicated 2, 4 or 8 times and written to the MSAA surface through a triangle-edge coverage mask, and once rendering to the MSAA surface has finished, a 'resolve operation' happens which downscale-filters the MSAA surface to the rendering resolution.

SSAA (super-sampling AA) is simply rendering to a higher resolution image which is then downscaled to the display resolution, e.g. MSAA invokes the pixel shader once per 'pixel' (yielding multiple coverage-masked samples) and SSAA once per 'sample'.
by doctoboggan | 2025-09-12 14:54:27+00:00
I've been using LLMs for a long time, and I've thus far avoided memory features due to a fear of context rot.

So many times my solution when stuck with an LLM is to wipe the context and start fresh. I would be afraid the hallucinations, dead-ends, and rabbit holes would be stored in memory and not easy to dislodge.

Is this an actual problem? Does the usefulness of the memory feature outweigh this risk?
by soupbowl | 2025-09-12 14:54:34+00:00
People that don't like Charlie don't need to have sympathy for him, but not having sympathy and being douche bags in mass is something totally different.

"I can't stand the word empathy, actually," he continued. "I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that — it does a lot of damage. But, it is very effective when it comes to politics. Sympathy, I prefer more than empathy. That's a separate topic for a different time."
by nonethewiser | 2025-09-12 14:54:40+00:00
EDIT: nevermind, this is not correct.

It appears as though all spreadsheets are grouped together in the same window under tabs. Perhaps its fetching the data for all of them. I noticed they all took a long time to load and then after one loaded, the others had loaded.

I imagine that could be sorted out to load per tab. Im more concerned about the idea of grouping all spreadsheets together. As opposed to a normal website which could embed a datatable in whatever page layout you want.

In general it bothers me to encapsulate what are essentially just page layouts as apps.