MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by sipofwater | 2025-09-06 02:00:55+00:00
* "Windows 11 Update KB5063878 corrupted my 8TB Seagate drive (RAW, data loss)": https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/5534282/... (learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/5534282/windows-11-update-kb5063878-corrupted-my-8tb-seaga)

* "Potential SSD Detection Bug in Windows 11 24H2 Following Update KB5063878 (August 12, 2025)": https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/5536733/... (learn.microsoft.com/en-us/answers/questions/5536733/potential-ssd-detection-bug-in-windows-11-24h2-fol)
by Jcampuzano2 | 2025-09-06 02:01:04+00:00
Hmm with the lower context length I'm wonder how it holds up for problems requiring slightly larger context given we know most models tend to degrade fairly quickly with context length.

Maybe it's best for shorter tasks or condensed context?

I find it interesting the number of models latching onto Claude codes harness. I'm still using Cursor for work and personal but tried out open code and Claude for a bit. I just miss having the checkpoints and whatnot.
by nick238 | 2025-09-06 02:01:24+00:00
When OpenAPI opened the polymorphism door with 'oneOf' and the like, it seems like it turned into a shitty language written in YAML rather than being a good concise way to communicate API design.

Former company enforced OpenAPI specs to be able to publish any API endpoint, devs just wanted to push code, so they made vague shit specs because it's pulling teeth to do it the right way (didn't help that the spec enforcer couldn't fully read YAML documents with references, so copypasta was rampant)...

I guess there's the endless cycle of 1) a format is created, 2) the format evolves to do more, 3) winds up being overbearing, 4) a new format is created...
by sipofwater | 2025-09-06 02:01:45+00:00
Comments by whmxtra (https://www.youtube.com/@whmxtra) posted at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbFIUu_7LIc ("BEWARE! Windows Update and SSD Problem is WAY worse than we thought! Full Demonstration" video by JayzTwoCents)

* whmxtra, "It goes even deeper": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbFIUu_7LIc&lc=UgxOFAkpMCaks... (www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbFIUu_7LIc&lc=UgxOFAkpMCaks_ANsv14AaABAg&pp=0gcJCSMANpG00pGi)

* whmxtra, "And a new problem": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbFIUu_7LIc&lc=Ugwg2WrjpvM2e... (www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbFIUu_7LIc&lc=Ugwg2WrjpvM2epZ1Rn54AaABAg)

* whmxtra, "And another update. Just did a quick check in linux": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbFIUu_7LIc&lc=Ugy6GoefcNaic... (www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbFIUu_7LIc&lc=Ugy6GoefcNaic_iR4TB4AaABAg)

* whmxtra, "And mystery partly solved": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbFIUu_7LIc&lc=UgyXcnwyWqy9M... (www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbFIUu_7LIc&lc=UgyXcnwyWqy9MMVFfIN4AaABAg)

* whmxtra, "Ok another update (and possible solution). I called up 20 of my local customers and asked if I could swing by and test their systems to see if they had issues. Out of those 20 PC's half of them had the space missing issue.": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbFIUu_7LIc&lc=Ugy2W5D-KDtpN... (www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbFIUu_7LIc&lc=Ugy2W5D-KDtpNk-BE3R4AaABAg)
by lmm | 2025-09-06 02:02:20+00:00
Low-quality UX (e.g. you have to switch tabs and switch back if you ever want to see the current state of your containers, because it loads it once when you open the tab and never updates, and doesn't even give you a button to refresh it), lack of documentation, behavioural changes that happen silently (e.g. it autoupdates which changes the VM hostname, so the thing that was working yesterday doesn't work today and you have no idea why) and general flakiness.
by jandrewrogers | 2025-09-06 02:02:54+00:00
SPF doesn’t mean what people think it does. The level of protection is something like (1 - (1 / SPF)), such that the difference in marginal protection between SPF 15 and SPF 30 is literally only a few percent. While SPF 4 sounds “low”, it is already providing you 75% of the maximum possible protection.

The returns on protection are very much diminishing by SPF 30.
by TheAlchemist | 2025-09-06 02:02:56+00:00
It's very worrying. Besides the sheer absurdity of it, as it is, it's a mix of valuation milestones and operational ones. But the thing is, that the first operational ones are 'easy' - Tesla is already on track to deliver 20 million vehicles within next 10 years. 10 million FSD subscription, 1 million robots, 1 million robotaxi ? This can all be very easily achieved if you bend the definition a bit. Hey, according to Tesla, they are already running a Robotaxi that is accessible to the public. Nevermind that there is a driver now in the driver's seat and the only thing that is public is an app, that puts you on the waiting list.

Given that, the only real issue is the valuation targets - and that folks, that's an open invitation for stock manipulation for the master manipulator himself.
by CuriouslyC | 2025-09-06 02:04:36+00:00
The worst is when it can't do something right, and it does a horrible mock/hack to get it "working." I had a claude fake benchmark data, that pissed me off a bit, though I did make a major architectural improvement to a tool as result (though the real benchmark would have probably made me do it anyhow) so it wasn't all horrible.
by treetalker | 2025-09-06 02:04:44+00:00
I'll offer a broad summary of the procedural meaning, but not of the substance of the rule.

So, in a nutshell, the FTC (a federal administrative agency) promulgated a rule, which has the force of law. That rule was challenged in court in more than one case. (Usually such challenges arise under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).)

In one case, a federal district court in Texas held the rule invalid and vacated it.

(When a court vacates something, such as a judgment, an order, or a rule, the court renders that thing without effect — and depending on the area of law and the situation, that court action could be retroactive or only prospective in operation. Vacatur is the act of vacating, and the name of the particular legal remedy — it sounds better than vacation, and it should be pronounced "vay-ca-tchure", although some say "VAY-ca-dur".)

The FTC originally appealed that ruling, to defend its own rule. But, with the power shift of the new administration, the FTC has decided to accede to the vacatur (that is, to accept the district court's ruling that vacated the rule, and to dismiss the appeal, thus allowing the district court to effectively wipe the rule off the books instead of the FTC changing the rule itself through notice and comment rule-making).

For more detail about the rule and the procedural history of these cases, and to get a glimpse of the overt politicking happening on the FTC board, check out the links in TFA to the board members' statements — both the Chairman's statement and the dissenting view.

I hope that helps; if anything remains unclear or you have further questions, please ask and I'll do my best to help out.
by rise_before_sun | 2025-09-06 02:05:02+00:00
The following document indicates otherwise.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.43....

"Similarly, different sets or “subsets” or “parts of” or “portions” of the collections sourced from Books3, LibGen, and PiLiMi were used to train different LLMs..." Page 5

"In sum, the copies of books pirated or purchased-and-destructively-scanned were placed into a central “research library” or “generalized data area,” sets or subsets were copied again to create training copies for data mixes, the training copies were successively copied to be cleaned, tokenized, and compressed into any given trained LLM, and once trained an LLM did not output through Claude to the public any further copies." Page 7

The phrase "Finally, once Anthropic decided a copy of a pirated or scanned book in the library would not be used for training at all or ever again, Anthropic still retained that work as a “hard resource” for other uses or future uses" implies to me Anthropic excluded certain books from training, not that they excluded all the pirated books from training.
by Nursie | 2025-09-06 02:05:49+00:00
Yeah it’s not really enough.

The actual difference between (say) SPF 30 and 50 is not a lot, 96.7% UV filtering vs 98% but I’m not 100% sure how that translates to actual rates of cancer.

However the worst offenders in the testing advertised SPF 50 but delivered SPF 4 (~75% AFAICT)
by rayiner | 2025-09-06 02:06:07+00:00
Highly conscientious white people often can’t view these issues logically. They get hung up on moral outrage over racism, which has made them susceptible to the decades of emotional blackmail and misinformation peddled by the left.

Imagine a robot or alien who has no moral reaction either way to individual prejudice. Do you think they’d analyze the history and reach the same conclusion? I think the robot would realize that you’ve got a part of the country that was building its economy on deregulation and low taxes. And it was also the most religious part of the country, at a time when the defining issue globally was the atheist, communist soviet union. Of course that region shifted to the GOP.
by lmm | 2025-09-06 02:06:47+00:00
> Large HPC clusters are multi-tennant by nature, so running these containers needs to be rootless.

I can't see how any kind of sensible security evaluation process would reach that conclusion. If you trust your users you don't need rootless, if you don't trust your users rootless containers aren't good enough. I suspect people do rootless because it seems easy and catches a few accidental mistakes rather than it being a legitimate security measure.
by andrewinardeer | 2025-09-06 02:06:48+00:00
What is also awful was the number of "influencers" aka digital door-to-door salespersons pushing that Ultra Violette sun screen slop on TT and Insta.

There is no repercussions for these clowns pushing a faulty product into the masses. I guess they actually are the winners here because they walk away with cash while their followers end up with shitty product and the company has to deal with the fallout. I doubt the digital door-to-door salespersons reputation suffers as their audience will still lap up anything they sell like a thirsty dog in the desert.
by mockingloris | 2025-09-06 02:07:17+00:00
> They say that you remember more when handwriting than when typing

I believe that too.

Writing is one of my tools for taming my ADHD tendencies. I have journals of different sizes and when I am in the zone, I capture the moment in my own words and in my own way. I draw lines and art on my notes and just scanning a few lines on another day instantly immerses me back in the moment when the ideas/words/thought hit me.

For those who type better than they write, I don't see any reason to not do that, even though for me, it's pen on paper.

We're all different and I am a strong believer of the idiom that goes "One man's food..."
by chisleu | 2025-09-06 02:07:27+00:00
I've been using GLM 4.5 and GLM 4.5 Air for a while now. The Air model is light enough to run on a macbook pro and is useful for Cline. I can run the full GLM model on my Mac Studio, but the TPS is so slow that it's only useful for chatting. So I hooked up with openrouter to try but didn't have the same success. Any of the open weight models I try with open router give sub standard results. I get better results from Qwen 3 coder 30b a3b locally than I get from Qwen 3 Coder 480b through open router.

I'm really concerned that some of the providers are using quantized versions of the models so they can run more models per card and larger batches of inference.
by MathMonkeyMan | 2025-09-06 02:09:24+00:00
Guile has [multi-methods][1] and [fast hash maps][2], but not yet [dynamic vectors][3].

Clojure's data structures are easier to use, though.

[1]: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/Methods-...

[2]: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/manual/html_node/Hash-Tab...

[3]: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2022-01/msg00...
by rise_before_sun | 2025-09-06 02:11:35+00:00
Thanks for this info. I was looking for which pirated books were used for which model.

Ethically speaking, if Anthropic (a) did later purchase every book it pirated or (b) compensated every author whose book was pirated, would it absolve an illegally trained model of its "sins"?

To me, the taint still remains. Which is a shame, because it's considered the best coding model so far.
by contingencies | 2025-09-06 02:12:05+00:00
Everyone in Australia gets skin cancer. It's just normal. My grandma had something like 5 or 10 of them removed. In general, kids these days spend less time outside and do understand the value of hats and sunscreen or long sleeves, so it's getting better. The face can be hard, particularly without a hat.

I always laugh when people wear those stupid baseball caps instead of proper hats with brims. They think it's 'cool'. Mate, the main person laughing at your 'cool' is future you - dying from skin cancer on your face.

"Mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the midday sun." - https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/mad-dogs-and-englishmen....
by AlphaSite | 2025-09-06 02:12:09+00:00
Having a reproducible dev environment is great when everyone’s laptop is different and may be running different OSes, libraries, runtimes, etc.

Also docker has the network effect. If there was a good light weight tool that was better enough people would absolutely use it.

But it doesn’t exist.

In an ideal world it wouldn’t exist, but we don’t live there.
by Rhea_Karty | 2025-09-06 02:12:28+00:00
Background: from this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp9MwZkHiMQ)

Floxk AI is a startup that apparently runs highly suspicious police data collection services. As a fun bonus, it sells this data to private bidders and retains no liability for any mess-ups.

Apparently, it uses a Bluetooth system to relay some of this information. And seems to generally have awful security...

Any thoughts? Or further projects on this?
by vincent-manis | 2025-09-06 02:13:03+00:00
No, recursion still works well without TCO (though as a Schemer, I love TCO). I was programming in BCPL in the early 1970s, and it handled recursive procedures with aplomb. The big revolution was realizing that, if you don't allow access to automatic variables declared in outer scopes, you could store all the variables in the stack frame, and access them with a small offset from the stack or frame pointer. That made automatic variables just about as fast as static ones (which, on System/360, had to be accessed via a base register), with small overheads at call and return sites.

Again on System/360, I benchmarked BCPL procedure call costs against subroutine call costs in Fortran G (the non-optimizing compiler). BCPL was about 3 times faster.

That said, as soon as you added multi-tasking (what we'd now call threads), it all went to hell. It's not an accident that one IBM PL/I manual of the 1960s said “Do not use procedures, they are expensive.”

As mentioned by others, it was the tiny stack in the 6502 that killed this approach. I appreciate all those who pine for the 6502, but it made implementing modern (even for the 1970s) languages almost impossible.
by notherhack | 2025-09-06 02:14:30+00:00
Is that really how cat theft works- thief gets a couple hundred and it’s smuggled offshore and broken up for raw materials to make new cats? Why can’t the thief sell to a local shop for $1000, to repair maybe the very car it was stolen from? Are cats serialized and tracked?

When I was in Central America people would steal windshields from cars left outside at night. New replacements were very expensive because of import taxes but you could just go to the nearest shady shop and what do you know, they just happen to have a used one for your car in stock!
by gpm | 2025-09-06 02:15:41+00:00
> But document does not say Anthropic bought EVERY book it pirated

Yeah, I wouldn't make this exact claim either. For instance it's probably safe to assume that the pirate datasets contain some books that are out of circulation and which Anthropic happened not to get a used copy of.

They did happen to get every book published by any of the lead plaintiffs though, as a point towards them probably having pretty good coverage. And it does seem to have been an attempt to purchase "all" the books for reasonable approximate definitions of "all".

> When you say, "I'm pretty sure we do...", do you mean that pirated books were used, or were they not used?

I'm pretty sure pirated books were not used, but not certain, and I really don't remember when/why I formed that opinion.
by zw17 | 2025-09-06 02:17:39+00:00
Interesting points here. I’ve found the “graph DB vs. relational DB” discussion usually gets framed as an either/or, but there’s a middle ground.

A lot of teams already have their data sitting in Postgres, Mongo, or a lakehouse. Spinning up a separate graph database just for traversals often means duplicating data, building pipelines, and keeping two systems in sync. That’s fine if you need deep graph algorithms, but for many workloads it’s overkill.

What some folks are exploring now is running graph queries directly on top of their existing data, without having to ETL into a dedicated graph DB. You still get multi-hop traversal and knowledge graph use cases, but avoid the “yet another database” tax.

So yeah...graph databases are great, but they’re not the only way to model or query graphs anymore.
by seanmcdirmid | 2025-09-06 02:18:25+00:00
I was thinking about going from gas to induction in a remodel to cut down on fumes and make cleaning easier, but we have not a 220V to do it, so an electrician will have to fish wires up to the kitchen if we go that far. We would also install a speed oven at the same time, so that’s another 220V outlet, what would be one more on the counter for a kettle?
by SV_BubbleTime | 2025-09-06 02:19:05+00:00
Well, that’s disgusting. But not even the worst case.

That’s just today’s nonsense tacked on to tomorrow’s tool.

I’m talking about Apple and OpenAI having all your context and an ads-baked-in system where you work out hard on Thursday and on Friday as you are passing by a advertising-buyer ice cream shop that your phone tells you that you earned whatever flavor it knows you like.
by lmeyerov | 2025-09-06 02:19:52+00:00
We have been on a fork for louie.ai:

* Small data - talk to your PDF on-the-fly etc: Getting bigger & faster via cloud APIs

* Big data - for RAG: Getting smaller, bc we don't want to pay crazy fees for vector DB hosting, and doable bc easier to get higher-quality small embeddings that do that
by zzo38computer | 2025-09-06 02:19:53+00:00
I use many older technology, and sometimes use both older and newer ones.

I have both analog and digital clocks; I do not currently have a sundial but I intended to make two (one in the front and one in the back).

I use incandescent lights when I need light inside (although I do not use as many lights as some people do)), but prefer to have open windows so that the sun light can come in, and will sometimes use candles when necessary.

Many programs I use on the computer are older ones (although sometimes I write the programs by myself).

I usually use pencil and paper for writing, and prefer physical books for reading.

I do not have a cell phone.

I also do not have a car (I usually walk, or go together with someone else in their car if they are going to the same place).

For payment, I prefer to pay in cash (or sometimes barter) when I can.

I also still use analog radio (both AM and FM).

And, I think that many things do not need to have computers or electricity, and even those that do, usually should not need to have excessively functions and should not need internet connection and other stuff like that.

Unfortuantely, many people outside have light on even at night, and there is also sometimes noise of cars outside, that I don't like so much.
by gpm | 2025-09-06 02:22:26+00:00
Nope, the settlement specifically excludes actions after Aug 25th 2025 (not perpetuity), and it specifically excludes the output of LLMs (not one form of redistribution).

Meanwhile it's not alleged that they redistributed the books in any form except as the output of LLMs (not any other form of redistribution).

This looks to be almost entirely a settlement for pirating the books. It does also cover the act of training the LLMs on the books, but since the district court already found that to be fair use it's unlikely to have been a major factor in the amount.
by mockingloris | 2025-09-06 02:22:44+00:00
Kudos to you and the journey. I appreciate your honesty honestly about giving up on open source alternative for a quite cheap alternative for something you get to keep as your own is not a bad tradeoff.

Your story resonates. I am a self-taught creative and I get stubborn at times about wanting to use/bend a specific technology/tool to achieve a task; maybe it's a sunk cost fallacy OCD thing.

Your site design has character.

PS: Bookmarked your site with the tags - fonts, developer-blog, creative-sites, boutique-designs... on my firefox browser.
by mitthrowaway2 | 2025-09-06 02:23:20+00:00
It's not side-effects that are in question here, it's the intended effect. When it comes to its effectiveness at blocking UV, there should be a better way than just "apply some to a dozen random volunteers and time how long it takes before they get a sunburn".

In my imagination, the lab would have some a testing process that spreads a precisely-controlled volume over a standard surface area, textured to be similar to skin, then measures UV transmission percentage vs wavelength with a diffraction grating and photocell. Or something like that!
by devmor | 2025-09-06 02:24:18+00:00
Existing Taxi services did not improve - they were replaced by a lower quality, more expensive alternative with a lesser economic infusion to local economies.

Hotels and the hospitality industry did not improve at all.

None of those points refute me or support the argument I was contesting - that a “uber or airbnb of banking” would cause banks to “get their act in order”.
by nonethewiser | 2025-09-06 02:25:34+00:00
Do you understand what I am saying?

He's suggesting that the money Google does not make because of this regulation may be rolled into prices. The fact that eating the fees is not sustainable doesn't mean they have to take the margin hit for all associated costs.

Whether or not Google is "losing value" (aka money) or losing "illegal income", which aren't mutually exclusive by the way, has nothing to do with that dynamic. They could, in theory, roll that difference into prices either way.
by wilkystyle | 2025-09-06 02:26:54+00:00
An extremely infuriating one that repeatedly gets me because I forget about it: the AM/PM wheel when setting an iOS alarm. If I set an alarm the night before and the last thing I do is flick the wheel to AM, but then hit save before the animation has finished it's very subtle and slight easing/bouncing animation, the setting remains at its original value (PM because I'm creating the alarm at night) and thus the alarm does not go off in the morning when I expected it to.
by th2o344234234 | 2025-09-06 02:28:16+00:00
Classic "internet-of-shit" material.

Worse are all these home-automation IoT devices etc. that "need" to re-route and ping servers outside even to get commands sent from devices on the same subnet! How absurd is this design ?

This ads-ification and "productization" of the user is the bane of tech industry. Such a scummy practice...
by jaggs | 2025-09-06 02:29:11+00:00
One problem might be that American driving is not exactly... well great, is it? Roads are generally too straight and driving tests too soft. And for some weird reason, many US drivers seem to have a poor sense of situational awareness.

The result is it looks like many drivers are unaware of the benefits of defensive driving. Take that all into account and safe 'full self driving' may be tricky to achieve?