MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by komali2 | 2025-09-04 09:14:36+00:00
Not really. It didn't happen in syndicalized Spain. It didn't happen for millennia in ancient cities.

Scale being necessary seems to be unique to capitalism and state capitalism (Marxist industrialization requirements).

Maybe it was necessary before, I don't know but it's moot. We certainly have achieved post scarcity now and there should be no issues leveraging the tools our ancestors have given us to ensure it's distributed well.
by somenameforme | 2025-09-04 09:14:38+00:00
Argument is a great way of forming relationships. The problem in modern times is that one person, typically the person such as yourself - endlessly confident in their flawless knowledge and determined to impose it on everybody, becomes belligerent when somebody doesn't simply graciously accept their impeccably perfect argument. That doesn't typically lead to good outcomes.

More generally, I think people have forgotten that two people - no less intelligent than the other - can see the exact same thing, evidence, or whatever else, and simply come to different conclusions.
by saberience | 2025-09-04 09:14:55+00:00
I know it's supposed to be fancy and cool looking but this sort of website design where you have to scroll and then the whole screen animates really bothers me. It actually gives me a headache to try and follow it versus normal scrolling behaviour and text.

As soon as I start scrolling down and I can't scroll normally and images and text start flying around I feel a disturbing feeling in my head and lose concentration and almost get brain-fog from the distracting content moving around.

Please provide more accessible versions of websites if you're going to override the default behavior. I couldn't make it 10 seconds before having to close the tab.
by bflesch | 2025-09-04 09:15:56+00:00
The problem is not the robot loading the diswasher, it is the dishwasher. The dishwasher (and general kitchen electronics) industry has not innovated in a long time.

My prediction is a new player will come in who vertically integrates these currently disjoint industries and product. The tableware used should be compatible with the dishwasher, the packaging of my groceries should be compatible with the cooking system. Like a mini-factory.

But current vendors have no financial incentive to do so, because if you take a step back the whole notion of putting one room of your apartment full with random electronics just to cook a meal once in a blue moon is deeply inefficient. End-to-end food automation is coming to the restaurant business, and I hope it pushes prices of meals so far down that having a dedicated room for a kitchen in the apartment is simply not worth it.

That's the "utopia" version of things.

In reality, we see prices for fast food (the most automated food business) going up while quality is going down. Does it make the established players more vulnerable to disruption? I think so.
by weweersdfsd | 2025-09-04 09:16:01+00:00
The problem with current GenAI is the same as in outsourcing to lowest bidder in India or whatever. For any non-trivial project you'll get something that may appear to work out of it, but for anything production-ready you'll most likely you'll spend lots of time testing, verifying, cleaning up the code and making changes to things AI didn't catch. Then there's requirement gathering, discussing with stakeholders, gathering more feedback and so on, debugging when things fail in production...

I believe it's a productivity boost, but only to a small part of my job. The boost would be larger if only had to build proof-of-concepts or hobby projects that don't need to be reliable in prod, and don't require feedback and requirements from many other people.
by quitit | 2025-09-04 09:16:06+00:00
I had a similar feeling, I think a little magic was lost by the author trying to be as concise as possible, which is no real fault of their own as it can go down the rabbit hole very quickly.

Instead I believe this might work better as a guided exercise where a person can work on it over a few hours rather than being spoon-fed it over the 10 minute reading time. Or breaking up the steps into "interactive" sections that more clearly demarcate the stages.

Regardless I'm very supportive of people making efforts to simplify this topic, each attempt always gives me something that I either forgot or neglect.
Show HN: Vapor – A notepad that fades away as you type
by dduplex | 2025-09-04 09:16:28+00:00
Hello HN,

I made this simple notepad for writing down whatever comes to mind. The goal is to force you to not get hung up on what you’ve already written. There’s no formatting, you can’t edit what you’ve typed, you can’t select text or move your caret around. There’s no backspace, delete, undo/redo, or paste. You can’t even see any words except the one you’re currently typing, and when you’re done with it, it fades away.

The text is all still there, just invisible. You can save everything you’ve written as a .txt if you want, or just empty your thoughts and let them disappear forever.

The idea was to encourage myself to do more stream-of-consciousness writing. I tend to edit while I write. This forces me to just keep moving forward, and I’ve found it very helpful so far. I was going to build this into my other writing tool, Drift, but I didn’t think it fit with the idea of the project, so I just made it its own thing. I’m calling it Vapor for now.

Enjoy, and let me know what you think!
by saberience | 2025-09-04 09:16:31+00:00
It's interesting but I hated this design * 1000. I would prefer a white page with purely black text than this horrible override of the scrolling behavior and images and text flying around, this sort of design makes me feel literally nauseous and I had to click away not even 5% through this page.

It's so much harder to concentrate on content like this, it's distracting, confusing, gives me brain fog etc.
by Syzygies | 2025-09-04 09:18:42+00:00
This interests me but they don't address practical Claude Code Opus 4.1 use at scale.

I have a $200/month Anthropic Max subscription that I use for help in exploring and coding my math research. As of now no AI model can compete with Opus 4.1 for helping me with my most challenging tasks. I try every one I can. Gemini 2.5 Pro is great for code review and a second opinion, but drives off the road when it takes the wheel.

I tried a $100/monthly plan and spent $20 in an hour the first time I went over; an API key is not a practical way to use Opus 4.1.

There are plenty of concerns using Clause Code in a terminal, that Zed could address. Mainly, I can't "see over AI's shoulder" so I need to also test. The most careful extension I coded was terminal sessions we could share as equal participants. Nevertheless, as a rule I'd attribute my relative success to just living with shortcomings, as if a "partner that snores". AI loses track of the current directory all the time, or forgets my variable naming and comment conventions? Just keep going, fix it later.

How can I get equivalent value to my Max plan, using Claude Code Opus 4.1 with Zed?
Show HN: An OpenAI-compatible API gateway with free DeepSeek access until 2026
by LeoWood42 | 2025-09-04 09:18:44+00:00
I built this because I was tired of juggling multiple API keys, dealing with different pricing models, and rewriting code just to test or use various AI models from different providers.

What is it? Wisdom Gate is a simple, OpenAI-compatible API gateway. You use one API key and just change the model parameter in your existing code to switch between models like GPT-5, Claude Sonnet 4, Gemini 2.5 flash, Nano Banana, and more.

The Hook: To get people to try it and gather feedback, I'm offering completely free and unlimited access to the DeepSeek models (V3 & R1) until January 1, 2026.

How it works (e.g., with n8n): Because it's OpenAI-compatible, you can use it directly with your existing libraries or tools like n8n just by changing the API key and setting the Base URL to https://wisdom-gate.juheapi.com/v1. It's a very straightforward setup.

Business Model: My goal is to offer the premium models (GPT, Claude, etc.) at competitive, simple pay-as-you-go rates, while keeping a free tier and powerful community models like DeepSeek free for as long as possible.

I'd love to get your feedback on the platform, the developer experience, and any other models you'd like to see integrated.

Thanks for checking it out!
by sevensor | 2025-09-04 09:19:42+00:00
You joke, but a colleague tried to get me using nvim a few months ago, and after installing all the stuff he recommended, my first impression was that I was running emacs. It was busy, there were extra buffers all over the place, things kept popping up as I typed, and I wasn’t clear on how to get to normal mode. In sure this has as much to do with his config, which I copied without understanding it, as it does with nvim itself, but it felt very unfamiliar.
by koliber | 2025-09-04 09:20:53+00:00
I agree with 99.9% of what you wrote. It’s presented very clearly. We are social animals even if we don’t like to admit it.

A while ago I would say I agree 100%, but more recently I learned that ads have value. Therefore i can’t agree with the final sentence in this post. It’s not easy to recognize but I’d like to try to share how I see it now.

Any time you think or say one of these things, it means that someone did not do a good job advertising:

- I would have gone to that concert but did not know about it

- It was that cheap on sale? Too bad I did not hear about it a week ago.

- DeVaughn’s closed!? I completely forgot about that restaurant. They had great food.

- Why didn’t anyone tell me earlier that there is a tool for easily finding a time for a meeting.

Advertising can be valuable. When done right, it does not have to be intrusive or annoying. This does not mean that every job provides value, but not knowing about something can cause people to feel negatively. Marketing is telling people about things.
by bpierre | 2025-09-04 09:21:08+00:00
I recently migrated to it [1], no issues so far. It doesn’t have the many features Lazy.nvim has (e.g. lazy loading of plugins that can be triggered in various ways), but this is a tradeoff I am fine with.

[1] https://github.com/bpierre/dotfiles/blob/main/nvim/lua/packa...
by verzali | 2025-09-04 09:21:36+00:00
If I ask that question and your first suggestion is to use a truck, you probably aren't getting the job!

Surely the obvious answer is to go with ftp or a usb stick and then wait for the interviewer to say, well this file is 15 terabytes or something insane. Bonus points if your first suggestion is a floppy disk.
by chithanh | 2025-09-04 09:21:55+00:00
> It is also unethical to propose a radical change to society with only very tenuous basis in reality: people should be able to demonstrate knowledge (and not just knowledge about what beliefs will prove popular or fashionable) before they engage in public policy discussions. If the person I'm discussing with hasn't tried eating insects at least once (preferably a lot more often) he is doing us all a disservice in even engaging in a public discussion of the topic unless perhaps he has deep professional-level knowledge of the nutritional value of insects and the effect of nutrients and anti-nutrients on human health (and "insects are high in protein" alone doesn't begin to be enough knowledge).

That is a strange position. The most that I could contribute is anecdotal evidence anyway. The nutrient composition and the safety of insect-derived food has been rigorously studied, for example in: https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2023.8009

I linked the EU FAQ on insects in my other reply.
by sylware | 2025-09-04 09:23:51+00:00
More real life C compilers is always a good thing. But remember: to be able to build a linux kernel, you will need zillions of gcc extensions... (I have a sweet spot for the alignment attribute of stack variables in printk).

That said, "C" (C99 with benign bits of c11 required for modern hardware programming) is only the "less worse" compromise for a computer language: its syntax is already way too rich (I let you think about the beyond sanity computer language syntax out there, yep... even for currently hyped ones).

For instance: C should have only one loop keyword loop{}, finally a real hard compile time constant definition, no integer promotion, no implicit cast (unless void* or some generic number literals), probably explicit static/dynamic casts (but certainly not with the c++ syntax), sized types should be primitives and not the other way around (s32,u32,f64...), no typedef/typeof/generic/etc, but should include inline support for modern hardware architecture programming aka memory barriers/"atomics"/explicit memory unaligned access, etc.

The benchmark is a small team of average devs should be able to develop a real-life compiler in reasonable amount of time.

Ofc, the more the merrier.
by falcor84 | 2025-09-04 09:24:34+00:00
Sometimes worse is better. I haven't used it a lot yet, but so far I quite like this reduced focus on editing - I see this as close to the sweet spot of vibe coding, in between Claude Code and a full editor/IDE, whereby I generally trust the agent to right the code, but just want a simple editor to steer it more effectively.

I see this similarly to the way I would have a work session with a more junior dev where sometimes during the chat I would "drop down in abstraction" to show them how I'd code a specific function, but I don't want to take over - I'm giving them a bit of direction, and it's up to them to either keep my code or ignore/rewrite it to better suit their approach.
by yorwba | 2025-09-04 09:24:43+00:00
The argument isn't that anything is possible for LLMs, but that representing LLMs as Markov chains doesn't demonstrate a limitation, because the resulting Markov chain would be huge, much larger than the LLM, and anything that is possible is possible with a large enough Markov chain.

If you limit yourself to Markov chains where the full transition matrix can be stored in a reasonable amount of space (which is the kind of Markov chain that people usually have in mind when they think that Markov chains are very limited), LLMs cannot be represented as such a Markov chain.

If you want to show limitations of LLMs by reducing them to another system of computation, you need to pick one that is more limited than LLMs appear to be, not less.
by InsideOutSanta | 2025-09-04 09:24:57+00:00
As a developer, I think we all learn how this works in our first year of our first job.

We're attending a company presentation where a C-level executive discusses our project. They explain how we're going to ship this in the next eight months or so. We get confused because we know this will not happen, so we shoot them an email saying there is no way it will happen, and there must have been some miscommunication.

One of two things occurs:

1. The person we sent an email to ignores us or tells us that we are stupid and don't know what we're talking about.

2. The person we sent an email to believes us, talks to the chain of management, and we get punished by middle management for skipping them.

Either way, we learn not to do that again.
by Rapzid | 2025-09-04 09:25:18+00:00
Why though? Vite supplies a project scaffolder and lists a one liner under getting started;

ie pnpm create vite

Tailwind is similarly a one liner to initialize(might be a vite create option now).

Edit: My bad, you are talking about the LLMs! I'm always surprised how still for past years, even though we have great projects scalfolding across the node verse, people are still complaining about how hard setting up projects is..
by daveoc64 | 2025-09-04 09:25:27+00:00
On iOS, each app's files and settings are usually completely backed up by the OS.

That means that when you restore a backup, the app should be exactly as it was when the backup was taken.

That includes all files stored in the app, accounts remaining logged in, settings exactly as they were.

Some things won't be backed up to save space/time (e.g. if you downloaded a Netflix movie offline, it won't be backed up), but it is almost a perfect replica of how things were before the backup.

Android has support for a similar concept, but apps can opt out.

If the app stores files in a non-standard location, they won't be backed up.

One of the worst parts of setting up a new Pixel device is having to log in to dozens of apps again! It's a pleasant surprise when an app used the backup framework properly.
by qnpnp | 2025-09-04 09:25:33+00:00
Sometimes this is indeed merely "fancy" and vacuous, but other times it is a meaningful and more engaging way to present the content. I feel like this is an example of the latter.

Even if you're not a fan and would have done it differently, it seems a bit hard to understand what could be so bothersome that you have to close it in 10s...
by m13rar | 2025-09-04 09:26:25+00:00
I use zed and claude code side by side right now. I haven't tried out the newly released assisted agent mode with Zed.

Yes Opus has been good with instruction following and same with Gemini for 2nd opinions and brainstorming.

They're not perfect but definitely I see plenty of value in both tools as far as they are reliable services.

I don't like the cloud based functioning of the models as the experience is extremely flaky and not reliable. I've gound OpenAI Codex and the models in codex too be more reliable in responses and consistency of the quality service.

I would still prefer to have a fully locally hosted equivalent of what ever the state of the art coding assisstant models to speed up work.

That will take time though as in with every technological evolution. We will be stuck with time sharing for sometime haha. Until the resource aspect of this technology scales and economizes to become ubiquitous.
by weinzierl | 2025-09-04 09:28:29+00:00
Out of curiosity and because I don't want to create a test account right now:

How does billing with "Deploy on AWS" work? Do I need to bring my own AWS account and Polars is payed for the image through AWS or am I billed by Polars and they pass a share to AWS. In other words do I have a contract primarily with AWS or Polars?
by rorads | 2025-09-04 09:28:30+00:00
I usually agree with this, but I make an exception for Pudding because they consistently do this and it’s kind of their brand to have really immersive JS art/media. But I have the benefit of having read and enjoyed their stuff before.

It’s probably a false distinction, but it feels different to a SaaS product offering page, or product launch, where I need to get information, compared to someone using JS to create art.

This whole article could be summarised in about 300 words, but I would have had very little emotional or conceptual enjoyment of it.
by conartist6 | 2025-09-04 09:28:34+00:00
It would be relevant that they were the team behind Atom if they seemed to understand the lessons of Atom...

Instead of learning from what worked and fixing what didn't, they just threw everything away and wandered off in some totally different direction. They did the reactionary kind of learning instead of the theory-building kind: https://xkcd.com/242/
by cedws | 2025-09-04 09:30:48+00:00
I saw an ad[0] recently and was in disbelief it was an actual, official Coinbase ad. It’s making fun of the lower class and deprived areas of the UK with the implication people should gamble away their money on crypto in hopes of a better life.

[0]: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l0bmJlrhRg4
by fsflover | 2025-09-04 09:31:17+00:00
> Didn't Apple say that 1) they weren't interested in being in the Search Engine business 2) (in testimony) Google was by far the best search engine that they were going to use anyway ?

Aren't Apple getting 20 bln annually to say that? Google search quality has deteriorated drastically in the last decade, as evidenced by the court and numerous HN threads.

> but knowing Apple's negotiation tactics they could also have used their weigh

These two megacorps are parts of the duopoly and have no incentive to change that.
by grumbelbart2 | 2025-09-04 09:31:55+00:00
That is only true if your path to AGI is to take models similar to current models, and feed them with tons of data.

Advances in architecture and training protocols can and will easily dwarf "more data". I think that is quite obvious from the fact that humans learn to be quite intelligent using only a fraction of the data available to current LLMs. Our advantage is a very good pre-baked model, and feedback-based training.
by flohofwoe | 2025-09-04 09:32:17+00:00
> I finally learned C, and came to realize that there aren't actually any compilers that implement all of the C spec.

I think the main reason for this is that the C spec was always just an attempt to somewhat harmonize the already existing features of different C compilers, e.g. implementations come first and then after one or two decades, the C committee tries to standardize the features that have survived. That doesn't mean that all C compiler vendors immediatedly hop on board.

But then there's of course MSVC which after a few hopeful years of modernizing their C frontend now seems to have abandondend it again (I wonder though if MSVC as a whole has been abandondend looking at the abundance of red for MSVC in the C++23 and C++26 tables: https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/compiler_support.html)

While looking like a weird approach at first, it has definitely worked better than the C++ committee's approach to accept 'ideas' into the standard without even a proof-of-concept implementation - e.g. the one good thing about C++ is that it acts as a filter to stupid ideas before they can make it into C ;)
by pbmonster | 2025-09-04 09:32:37+00:00
> Maps (search > categories > water)

For my home town, that displays historic wells (deep, dry, no bucket, barred and locked) but not the little tab in the sandbox of the playground and not the public restroom in the center.

So on first sight it's less useful than "fountain". But I'll play around with it on my next tour.
by a5c11 | 2025-09-04 09:32:51+00:00
Same. However, I had a few encounters where I was scared initially that I won't know what to say, and the talk will be quiet and weird, but my freshly met partner was so into the chat that I had problems cutting into. It was fun. Remember that the other person doesn't want to be weird either and will try to maintain the chat, unless it's totally not interested.
by threeducks | 2025-09-04 09:32:54+00:00
9 lines seem to be sufficient (assuming string keys and int values).

// Hashtable definition #include <string.h> #define N 1024 int* map_ptr(const char **keys, int *values, const char *key){ size_t h = 0, c = 0, i; for (const char *c = key; *c; c++) h = h * 33 + *(unsigned char*)c; for (i = h % N; c < N && keys[i] && 0 != strcmp(keys[i], key); i = (i + 1) % N, c++); if (!keys[i]) keys[i] = key; return 0 == strcmp(keys[i], key) ? &values[i] : NULL; } // Example usage const char *keys[N]; int values[N]; #include <stdio.h> int main(){ // Set some values *map_ptr(keys, values, "one") = 1; *map_ptr(keys, values, "two") = 2; *map_ptr(keys, values, "three") = 3; // Retrieve values printf("one: %i\n", *map_ptr(keys, values, "one")); printf("two: %i\n", *map_ptr(keys, values, "two")); printf("three: %i\n", *map_ptr(keys, values, "three")); return 0; }
by InsideOutSanta | 2025-09-04 09:34:51+00:00
I believe we are vastly underestimating the number of programmers needed, as some companies reap unusually high rewards from hiring programmers. Companies like Google can pay huge sums of money to programmers because they make even higher sums of money from the programmer's work.

This means that they inflate programmer salaries, which makes it impossible for most companies that could benefit from software development to hire developers.

We could probably have five times as many software developers as we have now, and they would not be out of work; they would only decrease average salaries for programmers.