MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by jandrewrogers | 2025-09-06 01:37:53+00:00
They don’t necessarily know what the mission was, just that the mission left dead bodies. Furthermore, they don’t know which country did it. There are probably a dozen countries that would do a mission like this against them with various objectives.

You also have to consider the possibility that the mission was intentionally designed as a distraction, such that the purpose was to leave evidence of a mission.
by sroerick | 2025-09-06 01:38:37+00:00
Sorry, sir, I didn't realize nobody should ever spend any time learning anything or, failing that, describe what happened to them during that time. I'm no neckbeard savant but I do have a dozen years of deploying web apps and also using Docker during that time, so I think I'm allowed to have an opinion. Go drink some warm milk, you will feel better.
by horn1ot | 2025-09-06 01:39:40+00:00
It's like when the doctor says "this won't hurt at all". It WILL hurt your brain, QM is not easy.

I'm looking for a QM book structured similar to Norvig LISP books, ie following a demonstrative didactic method, by building computational implementations of toy models demonstrating various aspects of QM (not just QC), toy models of resonator, particle in a box, etc
by layer8 | 2025-09-06 01:40:58+00:00
> Alice is strongly incentivized to help her students whenever they need it, because she has equity in their long-term success.

You are assuming that the student will be interested in that help, but you can't force help onto someone. How do you prevent the student just taking the money and doing whatever?

How many students will you have to mentor to get a guaranteed return?

Also, teachers typically don't have that kind of investment money, so would have to get funded themselves for that purpose. How would risk management work along that double-tiered, decades-long funding structure? It seems like a good way to burn a lot of money.
by DoesntMatter22 | 2025-09-06 01:41:01+00:00
Still profitable while other competitors are losing money like BYD and a bunch of traditional gas manufacturers.

They have already released multiple revolutionary products including the first real electric car and then the model y which is the best selling car in the world.

Tough economic situation for a car manufacturer. If you consider running a profitable company during a tough situation and unprecedented tariffs to be "driving into the ground" that's up to you.

Considering Ford and everyone else is absolutely getting clobbered in electric vehicles I do find that comical
by jmclnx | 2025-09-06 01:41:07+00:00
I guess this is what we get when Congress gave their responsibility to the Executive Branch little by little over the past few decades. All Congress people want to do now is collect contributions. Contributions in the US would be called bribes in other "first" world countries.

Recently the US Supreme Court saw what Congress is doing and decided to join the fun.

Unless things change soon, we will end up with a dictator.
by theptip | 2025-09-06 01:41:15+00:00
I agree to some extent, but there is a slippery slope to “no rules apply to the rich”.

I do agree that in the case of victimless crimes, having some ability to recompensate for damages instead of outright ban the thing, means that we can enact many massively net-positive scenarios.

Of course, most crimes aren’t victimless and that’s where the negative reactions are coming from (eg company pollutes the commons to extract a profit).
by randallsquared | 2025-09-06 01:41:47+00:00
The previous two administrations (Trump I and Biden) being somewhat anti-Tesla or anti-Musk was some part of what prompted Musk to get into politics in the first place. Given the Biden admin's hostility, I would have expected the SEC and FTC to have been directed to do all they could against him within bounds, and so my first guess would be that they did, in fact, do everything justifiable.
by AlotOfReading | 2025-09-06 01:41:53+00:00
The word "driving" has multiple, partially overlapping meanings. You're using it in a very informal sense to mean "I don't have to touch the controls much". Power to you for using whatever definitions you feel like.

Other people, most importantly your local driving laws, use driving as a technical term to refer to tasks done by the entity that's ultimately responsible for the safety of the entire system. The human remains the driver in this definition, even if they've engaged FSD. They are not in a Waymo. If you're interested in specific technical verbiage, you should look at SAE J3016 (the infamous "levels" standard), which many vehicle codes incorporate.

One of the critical differences between your informal definition is whether you can stop paying attention to the road and remain safe. With your definition, it's possible have a system where you're not "driving", but you still have a responsibility to react instantaneously to dangerous road events after hours of of inaction. Very few humans can reliably do that. It's not a great way to communicate the responsibilities people have in a safety-critical task they do every day.
by nomel | 2025-09-06 01:43:16+00:00
> but big-o comes before all of those other things

If you're attempting to quantify algorithmic scalability with big-o, without those in mind, you'll often be wrong. There was a great post here a few years ago going into this, and how memory access "complexity" is what usually matters, and what dominantly shapes the scalability curve. It had nice examples showing how the expected big-o scalability curves were often completely wrong, outside of toys.

If you're not trying to quantify algorithmic scalability with big-o, then have fun coming up with a fun collection of symbols to put next to your code, and petting your spherical cow!
by briHass | 2025-09-06 01:44:03+00:00
Given how modern browsers are increasingly hostile to long-lived, self-signed certs, I've resigned to paying the .com tax every year for a real domain. There's so many ACME clients now (e.g. HomeAssistant has a plugin), that it's fairly easy to have legitimate certs on internal devices. A side benefit is having a subdomain that can be used as a dynamic DNS record.

Cloudflare (and probably others) let you enter non-routable IPs into their DNS, so myhomeserver.mydomain.com can point to 192.168.1.45 on your LAN without having to run your own DNS/hosts.
by ekidd | 2025-09-06 01:44:37+00:00
> I would also like to know who the people behind Z.ai are — I haven’t heard of them before.

To be clear, Z.ai are the people who built GLM 4.5, so they're talking up their own product.

But to be fair, GLM 4.5 and GLM 4.5 Air are genuinely good coding models. GLM 4.5 Air costs about 10% of what Claude Sonnet does (when hosted on DeepInfra, at least), and it can perform simple coding tasks quite quickly. I haven't tested GLM 4.5 Air, but it seems to be popular as well.

If you can easily afford all the Claude Code tokens you want, then you'll probably get better results from Sonnet. But if you already know enough programming to work around any issues that arise, the GLM models are quite usable.

But you can't easily run GLM 4.5 Air quickly without professional workstation- or server-grade hardware (RTX 6000 Pro 96GB would be nice), at least not without a serious speed hit.

Still, it's a very interesting sign for the future of open coding models.
by jerlam | 2025-09-06 01:45:20+00:00
It is bonkers that sunscreen (edit: SPF) testing still requires testing on a human subject, which makes testing both expensive and unreliable. Michelle Wong, who is quoted in the article as Lab Muffin Beauty Science, discusses it in more detail for a previous scandal, this one for a Korean sunscreen brand:

https://labmuffin.com/purito-sunscreen-and-all-about-spf-tes...
by Jtsummers | 2025-09-06 01:45:27+00:00
> Actual waterfall looks very much like actual agile, in that it is designed around iteration loops.

No, Waterfall was not agile, it was the diagram from Royce but not what he recommended from his paper (which tore down that diagram). What Royce added to that diagram (fundamentally, just common sense with feedback loops) was closer to agile, though. Royce himself never called anything Waterfall, but what was termed Waterfall was the bad process he tore apart.
by koopuluri | 2025-09-06 01:46:22+00:00
Oh absolutely, these students would be actively applying to be trained by the teacher. And you’re right, the student retains full agency; the teacher can’t (and shouldn’t) control what they do.

As for returns: there are no guarantees, just like in venture capital. The model assumes a power-law distribution — you might mentor many students, but only a few will generate outsized successes. As AI makes outcomes more extreme, this dynamic will likely intensify, which is why equity (rather than debt) is the only model that works.
by bawolff | 2025-09-06 01:46:48+00:00
> That rage grew when she learned the sunscreen she had been using for years was unreliable and, according to some tests, offered next to no sun protection at all.

If it wasn't working at all, wouldn't you notice getting sun burned?

Initially i thought it was going to be something advertised as spf 30 but actually 15. However spf 4 or less seems so low it should be noticable i would assume.
by rgoulter | 2025-09-06 01:47:01+00:00
> It’s too slow and instead of focusing on formulating my thoughts or capturing what’s being said

AFAIU, if you're trying to take notes capturing what was said in a conversation between people.. to some extent you're going to need to focus and summarize anyway.

For handwriting notes for your own work.. I think writing stimulates & catalyses thought.

If you're in the flow, it doesn't make sense to stop and write notes. (Other than maybe so as to dispatch distracting thoughts, to preserve flow, or to enable flow for later).

If you're not flowing.. IME writing notes can help draw out thoughts: identify what it is you're confused or unclear about, what doesn't make sense, or what needs to be prioritised. -- For some reason, I've found pen & paper (especially 4-5 colours) to be more effective than just using a keyboard.
by sroerick | 2025-09-06 01:47:09+00:00
OK, this seems like an absolutely valid use case. Big enterprise microservice architecture, I get it. If you have islands of dev teams, and a dedicated CI/CD dev ops team, then this makes more sense.

But this puts you in a league with some pretty advanced deployment tools, like high level K8, Ansible, cloud orchestration work, and nobody thinks those tools are really that appropriate for the majority of devteams.

People are out here using docker for like... make install.
by jader201 | 2025-09-06 01:47:22+00:00
Tangential comment, but it’s crazy to think about how, when we look up at the stars in the sky, we’re seeing light in wildly varying degrees of age.

For example, when we look at the sun, that’s 8-minutes-old light. When we look at Polaris (the North Star), that light is 447 years old.

When we look at Andromeda?

Yeah, that light is 2.5 million years old.
by thisoneisreal | 2025-09-06 01:47:37+00:00
That's why the XP book arranges itself into values, principles, and practices. The best line in the book is about how practices without underlying values are dead, while values without practices are wishy-washy abstractions. What he's really advocating for at the highest level is skilled teams, who are given ownership, that are actively defining their own processes, and executing them with discipline to produce well-designed and reliable software. The book is a "grab bag" (very legitimate point) because those are the sorts of techniques that those kinds of teams use.
by the_af | 2025-09-06 01:47:53+00:00
Oh, I wasn't arguing that any companies actually do Agile (lower or upper case).

I meant in my experience, the methodology most companies I've worked in seems to follow is capital-C Chaotic. Requirements change at the whim of customers or leadership week to week, pivots are frequent and unpredictable, leadership gets fired/quits and the whole plan changes, lots of effort is wasted on stuff that then gets ignored, and customers are sold one thing but delivered another.

I don't believe organizations or companies follow either Agile (any brand of it) or Waterfall. I don't think what they do can be called a methodology at all.
by mdaniel | 2025-09-06 01:48:46+00:00
I actually put a directive to always reply to me in French just to see if it was reading the rules. Spoiler: it was reading the rules and ignoring the ones that I cared about but it could tell me about it in French so.. victory?

I've only had good experience concluding any prompt with "and don't talk about it" but my colleague says it hampers the agent because talking to itself helps it think. That's not been my experience, and I vastly prefer it not spending tokens I give no shits about
by hcs | 2025-09-06 01:48:51+00:00
If I'm reading this right yes the training was fair use, but I was responding (unclearly) to the claim that the pirated books weren't used to train commercially released LLMs. The judge complained that it wasn't clear what was actually used, from the June order https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/jnvwbgqlzpw/... [pdf]:

> Notably, in its motion, Anthropic argues that pirating initial copies of Authors’ books and millions of other books was justified because all those copies were at least reasonably necessary for training LLMs — and yet Anthropic has resisted putting into the record what copies or even sets of copies were in fact used for training LLMs.

> We know that Anthropic has more information about what it in fact copied for training LLMs (or not). Anthropic earlier produced a spreadsheet that showed the composition of various data mixes used for training various LLMs — yet it clawed back that spreadsheet in April. A discovery dispute regarding that spreadsheet remains pending.
by AlotOfReading | 2025-09-06 01:50:00+00:00
There's a simple test I find useful to determine who's driving:

If the vehicle has a collision, who's ultimately responsible? That person (or computer) is the driver.

If a Waymo hits a pole for example, the software has a bug. It wasn't the responsibility of a remote assistant to monitor the environment in real time and prevent the accident, so we call the computer the driver.

If we put a safety driver in the seat and run the same software that hits the same pole, it was the human who didn't meet their responsibility to prevent the accident. Therefore, they're the driver.
by the_af | 2025-09-06 01:50:21+00:00
> Actual waterfall looks very much like actual agile, in that it is designed around iteration loops. The primary difference is that waterfall prescribed steps in the iteration process, and agile is just a set of principles in a manifesto.

In that case, I don't believe companies follow either. I've never seen anything as principled (in any form) practiced anywhere.

Companies claiming to do Agile were usually doing some rituals and cosplaying as agile. I don't believe I've ever seen a company doing "waterfall" or anything resembling what your link describes either.

They mostly do chaos-driven development.
by phire | 2025-09-06 01:50:25+00:00
Geofencing and occasional human override meets the definition of "Level 4 self driving". Especially when it's a remote human override.

But is Level 4 enough to count as "Full Self Driving"? I'd argue it really depends on how big the geofence area is, and how rare interventions are. A car that can drive on 95% of public roads might as well be FSD from the perspective of the average drive, even if it falls short of being Level 5 (which requires zero geofencing and zero human intervention).
by dfabulich | 2025-09-06 01:50:47+00:00
The explainer goes into more detail about how it would work, if it ever ships: https://github.com/dickhardt/email-verification-protocol

> The Email Verification Protocol enables a web application to obtain a verified email address without sending an email, and without the user leaving the web page they are on. To enable the functionality, the mail domain delegates email verification to an issuer that has authentication cookies for the user. When the user provides an email to the HTML form field, the browser calls the issuer passing authentication cookies, the issuer returns a token, which the browser verifies and updates and provides to the web application. The web application then verifies the token and has a verified email address for the user.

> User privacy is enhanced as the issuer does not learn which web application is making the request as the request is mediated by the browser.
by amluto | 2025-09-06 01:50:53+00:00
Replying again, having actually read the problem more carefully: the problem isn’t that simple. There will be a few tens of thousands of variables. The LP is extremely sparse, and I’m sure a good solver could solve it within the time limit, but a little team-notebook-sized dense solver would take at least a few trillion operations to finish and would not be nearly fast enough.
by mountainriver | 2025-09-06 01:52:08+00:00
It’s insane that the RFK crowd continues to not consider that the increase is just due to better diagnoses.

I wouldn’t entirely rule out there being environmental factors, but from the data I could gather it seems that acetaminophen usage has decreased in pregnancy over the last several decades in the US, while autism has increased.

This all seems to go back to the boomer generation believing the world was simpler when they grew up and that it was somehow ruined. That may be true about some things but the reality of their generation is they had no idea what people were going through, and didn’t have the language to describe it
by papascrubs | 2025-09-06 01:52:46+00:00
Sure!

Technitium is a full fledged authoritative recursive DNS resolver with adblock, whereas pihole is more focused solely on the adblock experience. Technitium supports full zone management, DNSSEC, and all DNS record types. Pihole is limited to a handful of types and can't do custom zones and the management is somewhat clunky IMO. Technitium has full DNS logging, statistics, conditional forwarding, and a full rest API for management.

I think Pihole is a great project, but Technitium caters better to power users and people that want/need more complex control over their internal DNS infrastructure (while still remaining relatively simple from a management perspective).

Simply put, Pihole is adblock with some DNS sprinkled in, Technitium is a DNS server first with adblock support. I don't think you can go wrong either way, but if you're going to need more advanced DNS capabilities at home, roll Technitium to save yourself a migration down the line.
by johnnyanmac | 2025-09-06 01:53:01+00:00
What do they say about that?

On one hand, it's beyond clear by now that these numbers are always much more optimistic than usual. We just say June and July revised down to negative 10,000 or so. And even then those jobs are inflated by gig work that can barely make ends meet.

On the other hand, I don't think hyper inflation is the solution to the recession we are seemingly heading towards at this rate. Seems like something is going to give. Sadly doesn't seem to be the billionarires being taxed properly./
by amradio1989 | 2025-09-06 01:54:51+00:00
I think the jury is still out on how fair use applies to AI. Fair use was not designed for what we have now.

I could read a book, but its highly unlikely I could regurgitate it, much less months or years later. An LLM, however, can. While we can say "training is like reading", its also not like reading at all due to permanent perfect recall.

Not only does an LLM have perfect recall, it also has the ability to distribute plagiarized ideas at a scale no human can. There's a lot of questions to be answered about where fair use starts/ends for these LLM products.
by footlose_3815 | 2025-09-06 01:55:18+00:00
In related thought, when I listen to Suno, when I create "Epic Power Metal", the singer is very-often indistinguishible from the famous Hansi Kursch, of Blind Guardian.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hansi_K%C3%BCrsch

I'm not sure if he even knows, but that is almost certainly his tracks they trained on.
by add-sub-mul-div | 2025-09-06 01:55:48+00:00
> If RFK Jr says it's true, that's how I know it isn't.

And one of the reasons you don't let morons take over your party is that if they ever are right, they won't be believed. If these are actual risks with Tylenol then oops, that take is being lumped in with the antivax hysteria.
by koopuluri | 2025-09-06 01:55:48+00:00
It is a long-term investment, but it doesn’t have to be decades before there’s liquidity. Teachers could sell portions of their equity along the way through secondary sales.

For example, if a student shows strong potential - say they ship a prototype that gains traction online - new investors may want to back them. At that point, the teacher can sell some of her shares to those investors (with the student’s approval), realizing value earlier while still staying aligned with the student’s long-term success.
by kristianp | 2025-09-06 01:56:15+00:00
> "95% of the sunscreens tested [by Choice] have high enough SPF to more than halve the incidence of skin cancer," Dr Wong said.

I found this surprising; is halving the incidence of cancer enough to consider it safe? I would expect 90 or 95% reduction in the incidence of cancer to be considered safe.
by rise_before_sun | 2025-09-06 01:57:02+00:00
Thanks for the link.

Among several places where judge mentions Anthropic buying legit copies of books it pirated, probably this sentence is most relevant: "That Anthropic later bought a copy of a book it earlier stole off the internet will not absolve it of liability for the theft but it may affect the extent of statutory damages."

But document does not say Anthropic bought EVERY book it pirated. Other sections in the document also don't explicitly say that EVERY pirated book was later purchased.

I stopped using Claude when this case came to light. If the newer Claude models don't use pirated books, I can resume using it.

When you say, "I'm pretty sure we do...", do you mean that pirated books were used, or were they not used?
by koopuluri | 2025-09-06 01:57:50+00:00
Education is already reduced to financial profitability today — just in a worse way. Tuition and student debt force students to pay up front regardless of whether the education actually helps them succeed.

This flips the incentives: teachers only win if students do. Instead of extracting value at the start, they share in the upside when their students succeed. That seems like a healthier alignment than the status quo.
by ricericerice | 2025-09-06 02:00:14+00:00
there's 1,000,000 validators (defined as a public key), but you can run multiple validators per machine. Most estimates that crawl the p2p network to index nodes comes out at like ~20,000 machines

doesn't invalidate your point but it at least shaves off a few orders of magnitude

and a single PG node is not a fair comparison, we're talking 100% uptime global networks. Visa does about 70,000 transactions per second - how many servers do you think they run across their infra?
by Nursie | 2025-09-06 02:00:24+00:00
> pirating of the books is the issue

I have an author friend who felt like this was just adding insult to injury.

So not only had his work been consumed into this machine that is being used to threaten his day job as a court reporter, not only was that done without seeking his permission in any way, but they didn’t even pay for a single copy.

Really embodies raising your middle finger to the little guy while you steamroll him.
by myvoiceismypass | 2025-09-06 02:00:47+00:00
FWIW Septa has had tap-to-pay working for about 2 years now (so, 2 years longer than what BART just rolled out like last week). But barely a decade ago they (septa) were still using physical tokens!

When I moved to the bay area, I thought it was so rad I could use the clipper card for vta + bart + caltrain + muni + ferry all in one.