MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by baruag | 2025-09-30 07:03:39+00:00
You know how most YouTube viewers just watch and move on without clicking on any links in the description, etc. Especially when watching on on TVs is 53%. So they literally can’t click anything. Even the ones who want to buy or join? They hear “go to my site” and forget it two seconds later. Sponsors get no proof of conversions, so you lose leverage. It’s basically all passive.

Vuemagnet fixes that. It throws up a QR code at the exact moment attention peaks. Viewers can just scan, act, and you can see which videos are actually driving fans, sign-ups, or revenue. Sponsors get their proof, you get your leverage.
by t-writescode | 2025-09-30 07:04:31+00:00
Then operate as a manager, leader or company that people don't want to quit.

If people are happy, paid well, with regular cost-of-living raises at minimum, with upward mobility, helpful and useful managers and interesting problems (doesn't have to be an interesting domain. The problems themselves just need a bit to chew on) and the latitude to solve them and grow

They're not as likely to leave.
by pavlov | 2025-09-30 07:04:36+00:00
When a language model fumbles, its mistakes are still wrapped in convincing writing, so the error is only apparent if the user already knows what the answer should be.

When a humanoid robot fumbles, its mistakes are obvious because the physical world offers immediate feedback.

It's the difference between lying on your résumé that you're a world-class gymnast, and having to actually perform.
by withinboredom | 2025-09-30 07:04:36+00:00
This is where 'knowing the domain' lets you put a ton of stuff in all at once. If you have no clue what you're doing, you have to learn the lesson your talking about. As long as you can avoid joining teams that haven't learned this lesson (and others like it), you'll be fine.

I once joined a team where they knew they were going to do translations at some point ... and the way they decided to "prepare" for it was absolutely nonsensical. It was clear none of them had ever done translations before, so when it came time to actually do the work, it was a disaster. They had told product/sales "it was ready" but it didn't actually work -- and couldn't ever actually work. It required redesigning half the architecture and months of effort across a whole team to get it working. Even then, some aspects were completely untranslatable that took an additional 6-8 months of refactoring.

So, another lesson is to not try to engineer something unless your goal is to "get it working". If you don't need it, it is probably still better to actually wait until you need it.
by greggman65 | 2025-09-30 07:06:22+00:00
If you just want it to work, stick this script on your page

https://github.com/greggman/virtual-webgl

If you want to make your own solution there's one listed here about 1/2 way down the page

https://webglfundamentals.org/webgl/lessons/webgl-multiple-v...

As an aside, WebGPU doesn't have this issue or at least has it less. For one, WebGPU can use a single device to render to multiple canvases, something WebGL can't. Another is that WebGPU is mostly stateless making it easier for both the user and the browser.
by masklinn | 2025-09-30 07:06:50+00:00
I strongly recommend watching Dave’s entire video, it’s really extensive and interesting.

Notably while the N/S bifacial have an amazing showing in sunny winter day with ground snow (as well a significantly higher resilience against snowfalls), the year round testing he did shows that the performance crater in spring, with half the performance of standard inclined panels, and none of the morning / evening advantages of E/W bifacials.

In the end, the N/S verticals have a worse year round production than every other setup, and significantly worse than standard, but if you live in a location with a fair amount of winter snow and can swing (heh) it a tilting mount could be an interesting configuration for winter.
by pravj | 2025-09-30 07:06:51+00:00
Tinkering with a tiny macOS app that gives me proactive reminders about the low battery and imminent shutdown.

Standard system notification comes at about 10%, and most of the time, in my case at least, whenever I miss that, the result is "laptop shutdown amidst an ongoing video meeting" or something like that. (Basically, too late before I act)

Just so that I don't miss the reminders, the app will show an overlay window with some text, following my cursor, and a custom sound.

I built a version this weekend, and am current doing a dogfooding exercise.
by Doxin | 2025-09-30 07:06:54+00:00
I think the core difference there is that the holodeck character feels like a character that is playing a person (because it is of course) whereas the LLM feels more like someone lying to you about who they are.

When watching a play the actor pretends to be a specific character, and crucially the audience pretends to believe them. If a LLM plays a character it's very tempting for the audience to actually believe them. That turns it from a play into a lie.
by vbezhenar | 2025-09-30 07:07:04+00:00
CPU starts executing instructions from firmware (BIOS or UEFI). It performs some complicated computer-specific initialisation, discovers RAM, somewhat initialises PCI-E, USB, other peripherals and finally transfers control to the user-specified code. It's either instructions located at specific address of configured disk (old BIOS computers with MBR) or just a file in FAT32 partition (UEFI).
by neciudan | 2025-09-30 07:07:17+00:00
Just released a new episode of Señors @ Scale, this time with Adrian Marin — founder of AVO (a Ruby on Rails toolkit for admin panels) and organizer of FriendlyRB.

We covered a lot of ground, including:

How Adrian went from a non-technical background to 15+ years building software

Why Rails is still one of the fastest frameworks for getting products out (he built an entire app on a 10h flight with no internet)

What makes Ruby unique — from metaprogramming to the fact that even nil is an object

The rise of Tailwind CSS and how it pairs with Rails

Hotwire as Rails’ answer to frontend complexity (shipping HTML instead of JSON)

Building community through FriendlyRB, and even inventing a “Ruby Passport” for conference-goers

▶ Full episode on YouTube: https://youtu.be/tcefTICVgXQ

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/6n8qmwfajyAJqrKEaZataK

Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/rails-at-scale-with-ad...

If you’re into Ruby, Rails, or developer community stories, I think you’ll enjoy this one. Would love to hear how you’re using Rails at scale today.
by Al-Khwarizmi | 2025-09-30 07:07:22+00:00
Yes, the issue you mention is also typical in many countries with subpar systems. In Spain it used to be exactly the same. Lately, top conferences are getting recognition in some contexts, but there are still some calls where they don't count and it's better to have a crappy journal paper. I mostly publish in conferences but always have to make sure to have enough indexed journal papers per 6-year period to feed the system.
by globular-toast | 2025-09-30 07:08:16+00:00
What's funny is people use make as just an imperative task runner. For some reason people prefer to write a makefile with 10 commands rather than write 10 short shell scripts.

The real point of make is it's a declarative build system. You just tell it to make and it will do what needs to be done by figuring out dependencies and rebuilds.
by csoham | 2025-09-30 07:08:29+00:00
I'm working on ScaleDown [1], a context pruning API.

So over the past few years, I have seen how contexts have been steadily growing in AI apps. And while the context lengths of LLMs have also been increasing, they are still effectively about 200k tokens. The performance drops off a cliff after that (you might have noticed it as well with long AI chats).

It is a simple API that prunes away irrelevant parts of a context for a given prompt, a.k.a. context-aware pruning. Integration is super simple: just an extra API call before the final LLM API call. You can get an API from the website.

I would love to chat if this is something that is relevant to you and if you have any feedback on what we are building!

[1] https://scaledown.ai
by csallen | 2025-09-30 07:09:02+00:00
Eh, businesses die and starve all the time. Most businesses fail, and competition to hire is brutal.

Big tech are among the top tier businesses. So I don't think it's fair to compare them to average employees. Rule #1 if you want to do well in the market is not to commoditize yourself, and average employees are commodities: people who slot into job titles with almost no differentiation between others competing for the same job title.

It's more accurate to big tech to top tier employees. Your execs, your staff engineers, your top sales talent, your startup founders who get acquired. Just like big tech, these people have a lot of negotiating power, tons of options, sometimes multiple clients, and often a nest egg so they can take time off work and be picky.
by pjmlp | 2025-09-30 07:09:19+00:00
> I can live inside termux but there are things termux struggles to do,

Because that isn't part of the set of allowed NDK APIs.

https://developer.android.com/ndk/guides/stable_apis

Anything that termux manages to do outside of that list is more out of sheer luck that Android team hasn't closed down that specific Linux syscall.

Initially Android only got the NDK back in Android 2.0, due to pressure from game developers, and Dalvik having such a lame performance, it was never for writing full applications.
by intermerda | 2025-09-30 07:10:33+00:00
> And I'm at work right now but you can search for "biden admin ban word women/female/mother/etc". You may not be able to use google because they remove a lot of links to conservative outlets (I like yandex for this kind of search, although I haven't searched enough to know whether they're the best).

You have been brainwashed by the conservative propaganda machine.
by dododge | 2025-09-30 07:10:36+00:00
Yeah, I have 11.1 with sound treatments and a receiver that does room correction, and some movies are just annoyingly mixed. Dune (2021) has the voices mumbled and so low that when I turned it up enough to hear them it caused the explosions to be so loud that my cat jumped off my lap and ran out of the room, which I don't think he's ever done before.

Christopher Nolan is probably the most infamous offender; he's said even other filmmakers contact him and complain about his mixes. It's apparently how he wants it to sound, and he's said things like he sometimes treats dialogue as a sound effect and mixes it low on purpose, despite the many many articles and such about how much audiences hate it. I could swear at one point he even countered with something like "you shouldn't need to hear all the dialogue to understand what's going on". Ugh.
by imtringued | 2025-09-30 07:10:51+00:00
I don't know why people keep saying "the world" when they talk about extremely small subsets of human civilization. Most roads weren't designed for humans. Flat surfaces in buildings were not designed for humans. Packages were designed to be handled by suction cups. Containers were designed to be intermodal transport, not to be carried by humans.

Space is practically inaccessible to most people.

It's crazy how many people purposefully become ignorant of the things they see every day with their own eyes.
by M95D | 2025-09-30 07:11:34+00:00
> It can be done by enforcing that the company must establish and document the processes to ensure quality

You have no ideea.

It's sooo extremely easy to fake everything! I'm working with ISO15189 right now. I could just fill paperwork saying I did things that I didn't really do. Nobody could tell the difference. Sometimes there's an audit. It's announced months in advance and they only just look at the paperwork. I'm the only one here that knows the analysers have trace logs and how do get/print them. Some of those logs are just CSV text files. I could fake those too.

According to ISO, the company should do an audit every year. Last one was 3 years ago, but I'm certain that someone wrote down every year that they did it.
by FranzFerdiNaN | 2025-09-30 07:11:46+00:00
> A lot of them also go on to internalize a message of "man is the problem."

The thing is, for young women men really are a problem. And no, most arent. But a relatively small number is, and they are a massive danger to their lives and wellbeing. And its really hard to figure out which ones are OK and which ones arent.
by jillesvangurp | 2025-09-30 07:12:41+00:00
I did my Ph. D. between 1998 and 2003. I did not regret doing that but after one year as a post doc I left the academic world for one simple reason:

I realized the career paths were limited to two options I did not like: option 1) try to shoot for a tenure position somewhere via a long series of post doc positions. Expect to be mostly busy managing postdocs and researchers and lobbying for funding by the time you get there. Tenured professors delegate all the fun bits (i.e. research). 2) Become a lecturer. That's what happens to all the post docs that don't make it all the way.

It sounds harsh and it's unfair to the great teachers I had in university. But that roughly is the pecking order at many universities. If you're not cut out for securing lots of funding, you get to do the chore of teaching. Those are the two main things universities need to get done. The pesky business of actually doing the research is something that gets delegated to young phd students and post docs. Tenure positions are for those with a proven track record of securing funding. Typically via getting others to do great research.

That's the reason I left. Because I liked the research part, didn't mind the teaching part but absolutely hated the dreary university politics and the endless stupid infighting for power, funding, etc.

So I moved into industry, worked at an industrial research center for a bit (Nokia Research) and then found my way into startups. Building startups is a lot like doing research. You are solving fascinating problems that haven't been solved before. It requires the same sort of skills, you are running experiments, theorizing solutions, learning about new problems to solve, etc. You don't get to write a lot of papers and articles. Which isn't something I miss that much. While doing my Ph. D. the pressure to publish was so high it barely left any time for the actual research. With a startup it's the other way around.
by alooui | 2025-09-30 07:13:20+00:00
AloOui – The Best eSIM for Travelers Stay connected wherever your journey takes you with AloOui eSIM. Say goodbye to expensive roaming charges and hello to seamless internet access in over 200+ countries. With instant digital delivery and easy activation, AloOui makes sure you’re online the moment you land—whether for maps, messaging, or sharing your adventures.
by gigatexal | 2025-09-30 07:13:56+00:00
Oh don’t get me wrong. I’m daily buying and dollar cost averaging in the S&P500 but … I’m hoping for a huge correction, a market melting, recession level one that will cull all these companies with shaky business prospects and revenues. So I can maybe buy Apple and Amazon and Google at close to half what they’re at now which is probably closer to fair.
by azalemeth | 2025-09-30 07:14:42+00:00
Also a scientist here. The part of this article I disagree with is "Science is a profession, not a religious vocation, and does not justify an oath of poverty or celibacy".

I really think it is the closest thing I have to a religion. It alters how I see the world, defines the way I think about how to approach problems, and consumes every waking moment of my life.

Of course, I've had many failed relationships either directly or indirectly for my career, and it has taken my health (I sustained a spinal injury at work) and best years of my life. I feel deeply uncomfortable when I am _not_ working and it is difficult for me to relax. Intellectually I recognise that it is deeply unhealthy but every time I write a grant everyone else in the world who applies is ranked and objectively compared to me -- and I can't shake this feeling that _they don't sleep_, so why should I? It's an absolute obsession and I go into this hyper-focussed mode when I _actually_ get things done and, when an experiment reveals something for the first time in the world, the feeling is amazing.

I've just won an academic prize and have a tenured post. I'm deeply, deeply insecure and have a very unhealthy relationship with work. Many academics I know – especially in medicine – are likely diagnosable with very real conditions...
by adrian_b | 2025-09-30 07:15:39+00:00
That looks more like the effect of a bad compiler.

On most modern CPUs, including Intel/AMD & ARM-based, memory accesses with relative-addressing to the stack have at least the same performance if not much better performance than memory accesses through pointers to the heap. The stack is also normally cached automatically by the memory prefetcher.

So whichever was the cause of your performance increase was not an inefficiency of the stack accesses, but some other difference in the code generated by the compiler. Such an unexpected and big performance difference could normally be caused only by a compiler bug.

A special case when variables allocated in the stack can lead to low performance is when a huge amount of variables are allocated or many arrays are allocated, and then they are only sparsely used and the initial stack is much smaller. Then any new allocation of an array or big bunch of variables may exceed the stack size, which will cause a page fault, so that the operating system will grow the stack by one memory page.

This kind of transparent memory allocation by page faults can be much slower than the explicit memory allocation done by malloc or new. This is why big arrays should normally be allocated either statically or in the heap.
by scotty79 | 2025-09-30 07:15:59+00:00
Do other apes want to kill themselves when their photos with no clothes on are taken? If not then it's some kind of sick culture that makes humans think in this manner. Fix that. It will need to get fixed eventually because technology won't go back. It will go forward faster and faster.

Even the richest man on earth's (one of them) solution to related problems is a tall hedge around his property that he gets fined for. There ain't no going back.
by felixyz | 2025-09-30 07:16:48+00:00
The way I do this is I task the agent with writing a script which in turn does the updates. I can inspect that script, and I can run it on a subset of files/folders, and I can git revert changes if something went wrong and ask the agent to fix the script or fine-tune it myself. And I don't burn through tokens :)

Also, another important factor (as in everything) is to do things in many small steps, instead of giving one big complicated prompt.
by lancebeet | 2025-09-30 07:17:04+00:00
This is really striking, isn't it? We've all certainly seen demos of things on this list or very similar things, and there are startups that have spent years and billions of dollars attempting to exploit existing LLMs to develop useful products. Yet most of the products don't seem to exist. The ones that you see in everyday life never seem to work nearly as well as the demos suggest.

So what's going on here? Do the products exist but nobody (or very few) uses them? Is it too expensive to use the models that work sufficiently well to produce a useful product? Is it much easier to create a convincing demo than it is to develop a useful product?
by djhn | 2025-09-30 07:17:28+00:00
The brand reputation gets milked while cost cutting measures result in subpar products and services. Growth targets are gone, now you optimise for cutting costs faster than you lose market share.

It’s not a Ponzi scheme, it just feels like a scam when consumer brands cash out at your expense (the loyal consumer) and slowly bleed the company dry.

You do have to note that this is not a universal feature of PE-backed business.

Take for example power tools, where most of the big players are privately held and owned by PE firms. Reputation and customer loyalty are profitable in this line of business, so QA and product development are alive and well.
by TeMPOraL | 2025-09-30 07:18:22+00:00
> So in effect it becomes an exercise of "can you fool the human into thinking this is a plausible thing Hemingway would've said".

That's useful in itself, though. Assume the human knows they're "being fooled", we call this make-believe, or suspending disbelief. It's a tool we use each time we act something out, pretend to be someone else, try to put ourselves in their position; we do that when we try to learn from recorded experience of other people, real or fictional.

> The reason why you would care to hear Hemingway's thought on your writing, or Steve Jobs' thoughts on your UI design, is precisely because they are the flesh-and-bone, embodied versions of themselves. Anything else is like trying to eat a picture of a sandwich to satisfy your hunger.

Not at all! It's exactly the other way around.

No one wants to talk to the actual human. We're not discussing creepy dating apps here. The reason you'd care for a virtual Hemingway or Jobs is because you want to access specific, opinionated expertise, wrapped in fitting and expected personality, to engage fully with the process, to learn tacitly and not just through instructions.

The Hemingway and Shakespeare and Jobs people want are not real anyway. Who knows how much of "Hemingway" is actually Hemingway, and how much it was written or edited by his wife, butler, or some publisher? How much real Jobs actually is in the stories, how much were they cleaned or edited to reinforce the myth? It doesn't matter, because no one cares about the real person, they care about the celebrity that's in public consciousness. The fake person is more useful and interesting anyway.

Like 'massing, I agree TNG was prescient about it. But I actually see the examples working as intended. Einstein, Hawking, Freud were all useful simulations. Ironically, it's Barclay who actually related to them in reasonable fashion, and it's Geordie who got confused about reality.
by uecker | 2025-09-30 07:18:55+00:00
I do not understand this comment. A stack access should never be more expensive than access to malloced data. This is easy to see: Malloc gives you a pointer. An address computation to find a variable on the stack also gives you a pointer but is much cheaper than malloc. If the compiler recomputes the address to a stack variable then this must be because it is deemed cheaper than wasting a register to cache the pointer. Nowadays compilers can transform malloc to stack allocations variables in certain cases.
by goldenCeasar | 2025-09-30 07:20:01+00:00
I still am not sure exactly how to define it, but it's a ruby library, that is mix of a rules engine+spreadsheet feelings+array language+static validation+compiled/codegen... that last part is mostly not merged yet but yeah, ruby DSL codegenerating ruby, it's ruby all the way.

https://github.com/amuta/kumi/tree/codegen-v5 (see ./golden for more context on the compilation/codegen. I barely knew what a compiler was before doing this so I might have just created some nonsense )
by kiru_io | 2025-09-30 07:20:44+00:00
TrailerSpoiler.com [0]

It annoys me how much a bad trailer can spoil the movie, so I made this platform to rate trailers how "spoily" they are and how good they are. To my surprise, you find some great trailers without many spoilers, but then you will have trailers which are basically a 3-min summary of the movie.

[0] https://trailerspoiler.com/