MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 | 2025-09-30 16:54:28+00:00
"Rodney: That's why I'm skeptical of the Tesla taxi system. At the last earnings call, Elon said they're going to have safety drivers in the Teslas and they're hiring remote drivers. It's sort of a charade.

Rodney: I model myself as a realist. I've lived through so many hype cycles in AI. They weren't as big in public as this one, but they were brutal amongst AI practitioners. The arguments were strong and deeply held-screaming matches would happen. I've seen that happen again and again. Neural is ascendant at the moment, but neural was ascendant four or five times before and then got crushed. Something else took over, came back.

You can see that in agentic AI. [OpenAI promotion of "agentic AI" is currently on HN front page, directly adjacent to this submission.^1] Now suddenly everyone's got agent-based AI. They didn't have it six months ago. I suspect it's a little more marketing than reality. But when was the first paper on agentic AI published? It was in 1959 by Oliver Selfridge. There's been agent-based systems-SOAR, there's been lots. They come and go, all these ideas, and they get improved every time they come back. I'm not saying it's stupid, I'm just saying as someone who's been involved, it is not just the shiny new thing. This thing that looks shiny now may not be so shiny in a few years."

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45416080
by giancarlostoro | 2025-09-30 16:54:44+00:00
As will Stack Overflow code if you don't actually research before blindly pasting "solutions" from there. It's just a higher chance of being an issue with LLMs. Always treat an LLM like a Junior, and if you don't think you can maintain the code without the LLM, you shouldn't accept the solution. Don't cut corners for speed.
by AdmiralAsshat | 2025-09-30 16:54:46+00:00
BioWare doesn't have to be active for PE to crap on their legacy.

BioWare games notably moved the needle forward on allowing same-sex relationships in their games. [0] Should we expect that such things might be removed from the existing titles under Saudi ownership?

[0] https://medium.com/brinkbit/a-brief-history-of-biowares-lgbt...
by thisisit | 2025-09-30 16:54:47+00:00
There seems to a misunderstanding of H1B data. "Beneficiaries Approved" as a data point includes:

1. Extensions - H1B is approved for years. Once that period is complete employers need to extend it for another 3 years.

2. Amendments - This will include new job/employer. So, this does mean new H1B employee on the payroll but not exactly new H1B being brought from India.

3. New Hires - Completely new H1B hires.

For example, Google's count might include a rolling set of employees requiring H1B extension before they file I-140 petition, H1Bs from Infosys jumping ship to Google for a handsome pay increase and new H1B employees. So, there is no 1:1 comparison.

That said, I know Google departments being offshored but mostly due to the software tax code change in US. That has now been rolled back. So, hiring should pick up a bit.

As pointed in the H1B fees threads - Corporations always look to maximize benefits. If Accenture and their US clients think that their contracts will be cheaper if they have 3 H1B employees instead of 10 and let rest 7 work out of India, then that is what they will do. H1B fees is just going to make things worse. There is no good way to stop this globalization.

That said I think Accenture story is full of air. Its right there in the article > It is not immediately clear how much Accenture intends to invest in setting up the campus.
by Analemma_ | 2025-09-30 16:54:54+00:00
If it helps, I pay reasonably close attention to Fuji rumors because I'm deep in the ecosystem, and at present there appears to be no indication that an XT-6 is coming any time soon. They just released the GFX100RF and XE-5, plus there are rumors of an X-T30 III soon, and with all that in the pipeline I doubt they are also finishing up an XT-6. The -4 and -5 are still great cameras, I would just go for whichever of those you think is a better deal.
by 6gvONxR4sf7o | 2025-09-30 16:55:03+00:00
Mercury is one of those languages that seems to support so many different styles of programming in a nicely unified way, I've always been curious about it. This is so much more readable than I remember any of the Mercury docs being. Worth checking out.

It's one of those languages where I'd love to see the mainstreamification of some of its ideas, but as is, it just seems too clunky.
by kbolino | 2025-09-30 16:55:05+00:00
This is wrong.

Slices in Go are not restricted to GC memory. They can also point to stack memory (simply slice a stack-allocated array; though this often fails escape analysis and spills onto the heap anyway), global memory, and non-Go memory.

The three things in a slice are the (arbitrary) pointer, the length, and the capacity: https://go.dev/src/runtime/slice.go

Go's GC recognizes internal pointers, so unlike ArraySegment<T>, there's no requirement to point at the beginning of an allocation, nor any need to store an offset (the pointer is simply advanced instead). Go's GC also recognizes off-heap (foreign) pointers, so the ordinary slice type handles them just fine.

The practical differences between a Go slice []T and a .NET Span<T> are only that:

1. []T has an extra field (capacity), which is only really used by append() 2. []T itself can spill onto the managed heap without issue (*)

Go 1.17 even made it easy to construct slices around off-heap memory with unsafe.Slice: https://pkg.go.dev/unsafe#Slice

(*): Span<T> is a "ref struct" which restricts it to the stack (see https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/language-ref...); whereas, []T can be safely stored anywhere *T can
by toast0 | 2025-09-30 16:55:11+00:00
> They could always move to a compatible license?

Linux and OpenZFS are pretty much locked into their licenses, regardless of what people might want today. There are too many contributors to Linux to relicense, and while OpenZFS has fewer, I don't think there's any reason to think Oracle would relicense, given they went back to closed source with Solaris and ZFS on Solaris.

> It's a project that doesn't want to interoperability with Linux.

Regardless of the original intent of Sun in picking the license, it's hard to imagine a project called ZFS on Linux (which was merged into OpenZFS) doesn't want to interoperate with Linux.
by BurningFrog | 2025-09-30 16:55:22+00:00
What I describe is a summary of the book "The Elephant in the Brain: Hidden Motives in Everyday Life".

My take is that it's worse than you think, and Type 2 thinking is often used to justify or rationalize actions driven by Type 1 motives.

Link: https://amzn.to/3KqLzF7
by GuestFAUniverse | 2025-09-30 16:55:32+00:00
So, basically like any place on earth where a lot of people meet.

I stopped going to festivals for that reason.

The worst was near a lake: during the time we needed to setup our small tent, enough RVs had arrive with though dumping their full toilets into the lake wouldn't matter... yeah, bathing never happened, because a lot of brown sausages were swimming around, plus random trash. But it didn't stop there: before the first night, the way between camping grounds and the different stages was clearly visible even without a lot of artificial light,bdue to the white plastic in the trash, lining both sides. Disgusting.

A lot of festival goers are basically ignorant shit-holes on legs. Even if there are only 2-3%, that often spoils it for the rest.

/rant over
by bobbylarrybobby | 2025-09-30 16:55:45+00:00
One can hardly call using the canonical autograd library and getting incorrect gradients or using arrays whose indices aren't 1:len and getting OOB errors “shooting oneself in the foot” — these things are supposed to Just Work, but they don't. Interfaces would go a long way towards codifying interoperability expectations (although wouldn't help with plain old correctness bugs).

With regard to power and flexibility, homoiconicity and getting to hook into compiler passes does make Julia powerful and flexible in a way that most other languages aren't. But I'm not sure if that power is what results in bugs — more likely it's the function overloading/genericness, whose power and flexibility I think is a bit overstated.
by reactordev | 2025-09-30 16:55:49+00:00
Can confirm. I went to school for this very purpose. It led me down a maze of software engineering jobs and eventually prof serv that I'm in now. (Yey?)

The ability for anyone to learn Photoshop or learn how to create a website, create a game, create anything, content or otherwise, and sell it on the marketplace for a quick cash grab has never been easier. I think most people set out to try with their best intentions and run into motivation issues and it just slips downhill from there - eventually being released because they have no choice. Maybe they think some of those downhill slides are good things. The issue still remains. Quality products get drowned out by inferior ones due to letting everyone participate.

There should be some sort of quality control / gate / barrier of entry to some of these things. The ultimate issue is "quality" is subjective.
Show HN: Document extraction with human feedback loop
by sails | 2025-09-30 16:55:49+00:00
About the feature:

We built a tool for automatically assessing business health from complex management financial documents and bank statements.

In order to get this working reliably, we had to iterate extensively on the prompts for the structured output at the field level.

This led us to building a feature to allow users to improve them too, and with some context engineering, we have what we are calling “feedback loops”.

Here is a 2 min demo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDNlEZydoXU

How it works (video runs through these steps):

1. Create a target form for your extraction (AI helps create it)

2. Upload a document (choose from different models)

3. Review the quality of the extraction (and check the PDF citations)

4. If there are any mistakes, correct them and give feedback at the field level

5. Once you feel like you've seen enough errors and provided enough corrections, use the Feedback workflow to refine your field descriptions.

You can try the app here https://app.sea.dev/

(it works best when you do at least 2-3 reasonable extractions between prompt refinements)

The feedback feature is currently in beta. If you make some corrections and then go to https://app.sea.dev/feedback you'll see them ready for review and refinement.

I would love to get feedback on how we might improve this idea. The video was a toy example but it is live and working with a few early credit analysts customers and they seem to like it.
by ajross | 2025-09-30 16:55:51+00:00
> she bragged to her lead engineer she wouldn't go to prison

So... obviously she was wrong. But the line between "just cutting a few corners" and prosecutable criminality isn't nearly as bright as we in the peanut gallery like to think. Lots of very successful startup launches (Uber and AirBnB are famous examples) were kinda/sorta/prettymuch illegal by the plain language of the laws they were (not) operating under. And they got stinking rich! PG himself has an example in one of the very early essays about how Viaweb kinda just skipped most of the early bureaucracy and accounting they were supposed to have been doing, figuring it would all just work out. And it did.

Kids see those examples and figure that a little cheating here or there probably isn't going to send them to jail. And it usually doesn't. Except when it does. And the distinction, for a lot of people in this community and right here on this forum, is very much a "There but for the grace of God go I" phenomenon.

Startup culture tells you to cheat, basically. Knowing how not to cheat isn't in the instruction manual.
by pembrook | 2025-09-30 16:56:06+00:00
I think this is less of a market inefficiency and more a downside of “democratization” and the eternal September.

In many fields of human endeavor, there’s the passionate or early adopters who seek out the best, most innovative, high quality producers and pride themselves on that.

But even the most sophisticated/snobbish of connoisseurs doesn’t have time to be that way about more than a few things. Very few wine snobs spend the time to investigate the cost/quality ratio on their toilet paper in a similar way.

Most people don’t actually care that much about the thread count on their sheets and the production value on their TikTok clips.

They care more about spending time with their kids or, heck, even their community. Simply clicking buy on the algorithmic Chinese slop in the featured slot gets the job done well enough, most of the time.

I don’t see how digital algorithmic scarcity is any different than the battle to appear on scarce shelf-space when everything was still in the real world.

The fundamental issue in both cases is still scarcity of human attention. The market is pretty damn efficient at giving customers exactly what they want, and the hard truth is most people want “as cheap and low effort as possible.” I think the author just wishes other people were more passionate like him in the areas he cares about.
by lyu07282 | 2025-09-30 16:56:23+00:00
That's just media literacy I think. I would add to that "Sourcing": if the article just parrots some press release or badly summarizes some paper, it should at least link to that but they rarely do. Then it is hard to find the primary source, because you'll only find articles about it, not the actual primary source that they bury in google search.
by programmertote | 2025-09-30 16:56:26+00:00
A tangential note -- these days when I'm casually reading through job postings, a lot of companies mention in their job requirements something along the lines of "Must be familiar/knowledgeable about GenAI technologies (RAG/MCP)" even for roles that are not strictly related to GenAI.

When you look deeper into most of these companies, they seem better off using third-party services (like Claude/ChatGPT) instead of building their own GenAI models, MCP servers and whatnot. This is not considering that the domain they are operating in would have no apparent and obvious gain from utilizing GenAI (sure, they can buy ChatGPT/Claude organization subscription and that's all they need). I don't know if this is the indicator of how big this AI bubble is, but it sure is interesting...
by thomascountz | 2025-09-30 16:56:31+00:00
I feel the same. I can't quite tell where this fits in, in a production context.

I suppose the value proposition might be that it's all built-in, meaning there's no events to publish over the network nor any OTEL collectors to deploy. This is just a file on the host that you can read and use go's built-in trace tool to examine. In that way, I guess it's simply like any log file, but enriched with trace data and configured to only contain only the traces you're interested in.
by chmod775 | 2025-09-30 16:56:55+00:00
This thread was not discussing the FAA's ATC duties.

I was trying to take the ATC component of the FAA out of the equation and illustrate why that is necessary. We should be looking specifically at the arm that certifies aircraft and try to figure out which order of magnitude we're dealing with. Luckily their European counterpart exists, which does not do ATC and thus allows us to get a better idea.

In fact if you look at the FAA's budget request breakdown you can see that the requested budget for their entire AVS services arm is less than 2B[1] (still much more expensive than EASA, but not too terrible).

While your comment is interesting, it's only tangential to what is being discussed.

[1] https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2025-05/F...
by bhouston | 2025-09-30 16:57:00+00:00
Nice. The iPads generally measure around ~8% slower than the MacBooks, I guess for cooling reasons. So we should see approximately a 4400 single core Geekbench score for the MacBook series. This is nice.

Single thread MacBook progression on Geekbench:

M1: 2350

M2: 2600

M3: 3100

M4: 3850

M5: 4400 (estimated)

https://browser.geekbench.com/mac-benchmarks
by everforward | 2025-09-30 16:57:04+00:00
From a glance, it looks like very similar tradeoffs vs bash. Much harder to read in a medium-large application, but much more ergonomic IO and process control.

I.e. much faster to use dgsh for a basic processing DAG, much more painful to use dgsh for a large ETL pipeline.

Python with something like Prefect isn't something you'd use a REPL to bang out a one-off on, but it'd be more maintainable. dgsh would let you use a REPL to bang out a quick and dirty DAG.
by danw1979 | 2025-09-30 16:57:23+00:00
And also, I've read plenty enough about how hard it has been to maintain btrfs over the years. It's never really felt like the future.

Plus I needed zvols for various applications. I've used ZFS on BSD for even longer so when OpenZFS reached a decent level of maturity the choice between that and btrfs was obvious for me.
by observationist | 2025-09-30 16:57:33+00:00
It's a parenting issue. There may be kids who can use it responsibly, to a specific purpose. It's up to parents to decide and monitor and parent that, and I think it's fine for companies to not take it upon themselves to act for the parents. Part of the goals of parenting is to teach children how to engage with the world responsibly, and for better or worse, social media is now a fixture.

In a perfect world, the internet shouldn't be used by anyone under 18 without monitoring by their parents. That doesn't mean we should legislate criminal penalties for parents who fail to "correctly" parent, nor should we penalize companies whose service or product is used poorly or whose use results in a negative outcome.

Some things are cultural and social, and government isn't the right tool to fix problems. The cost of governance - loss of privacy and agency, unnecessary intrusion and bureaucracy, mistakes and waste of money and time - far exceeds the cost of letting society figure its shit out.

Yeah, there will be tiktok casualties, zombies, people with feed-fried brains. There will even be suicides and tragedies and stupid avoidable deaths from meme challenges. That's better than the alternatives, and it's not ok to put the responsibility for those negative social outcomes on companies when it's a failure of parenting. It's tragic and terrible, but we shouldn't let sympathy for parents allow shifting the blame to social media or AI companies.

That being said, there should be guardrails - no algorithm tuning to target children, rapid detection, reporting, expulsion, and lifetime bans for predators on a platform, no advertising to children, and so forth. Require parental consent and monitoring, with weekly activity summaries emailed to parents, or things like that - empowering parents and guardians and giving them tools to make their life easier, that'd be admirable.

With platforms like Roblox, they're effectively so large that it's impossible to responsibly moderate, so they get infested with predators and toxic situations.

I think it's probably going to require society to limit how big platforms and companies can get - if the service or product or platform cannot be managed responsibly at a certain scale, then they're not allowed to operate at that scale anymore.
by o11c | 2025-09-30 16:57:47+00:00
And they almost always 'forget' to mention "that was in 2010" or "I was using the BTRFS feature marked 'do not use, unstable'".

It's really difficult to get a real feel for BTRFS when people deliberately omit critical information about their experiences. Certainly I haven't had any problems (unless you count the time it detected some bitrot on a hard drive and I had to restore some files from a backup - obviously this was in "single" mode).
by guhcampos | 2025-09-30 16:57:59+00:00
I was diagnosing an issue in production. The idea was to have the LLM would need to collect the logs of a bunch of pods, compare the YAML code in the cluster with the templates we were feeding ArgoCD, then check why the original YAML we were feeding the cluster wasn't giving the results we expected (after several layers of templating between ArgoCD Appsets, ArgoCD Applications, Helm Charts and Prometheus Operator).

I have a cursor rule stating it should never make changes to clusters, and I have explicitly told it not to do anything behind my back.

I don't know what happened in the meantime, maybe it blew up its own context and "forgot" the basic rules, but when I got back it was running `kubectl patch` to try some changes and see if it works. Basically what a human - with the proper knowledge - would do.

Thing is: it worked. The MF found the templating issue that was breaking my Alertmanager by patching and comparing the logs. All by itself, however by going over an explicit rule I had given it a couple times.

So to summarize: it's useful as hell, but it's also dangerous as hell.
by mystraline | 2025-09-30 16:58:03+00:00
Yep, that makes a lot of sense then.

But yeah I call the site Scamazon. Even if you think you buy legit, theres a good chance of counterfeit due to SKU mixing.

And weirdly enough, in quite a few areas, Scamazon is like 20% more expensive than other retailers.

These days, I ask in discord groups who they recommend. At least I can avoid the AI shitfest and get real humans' expertise.
by aengelke | 2025-09-30 16:58:04+00:00
TPDE co-author here. Nice work, this was easier than expected; so we'll have better upstream ORC support soon [1].

The benchmark is suboptimal in multiple ways:

- Multi-threading makes things just slower. When enabling multi-threading, LLJIT clones every module into a new context before compilation, which is much more expensive than compilation. There's also no way to disable this. This causes a ~1.5x (LLVM)/~6.5x (TPDE) slowdown (very rough measurement on my laptop).

- The benchmark compares against the optimizing LLVM back-end, not the unoptimizing back-end (which would be a fairer comparison) (Code: JTMB.setCodeGenOptLevel(CodeGenOptLevel::None);). Additionally, enabling FastISel helps (command line -fast-isel; setting the TargetOption EnableFastISel seems to have no effect). This gives LLVM a 1.6x speedup.

- The benchmark is not really representative, as it causes FastISel fallbacks to SelectionDAG in some very large basic blocks -- i24 occurs rather rarely in real-world code. This is the reason why the speedup from the unoptimizing LLVM back-end is so low. Replacing i24 with i16 gives LLVM another 2.2x speedup. (Hint: to get information on FastISel fallbacks, enable FastISel and pass the command line options "-fast-isel-report-on-fallback -pass-remarks-missed=sdagisel" to LLVM. This is really valuable when optimizing for compile times.)

So we get ~140ms (TPDE), ~730ms (LLVM -O0), or 5.2x improvement. This is nowhere near the 10-20x speedup that TPDE typically achieves. Why? The new bottleneck is JITLink, which is featureful but slow -- profiling indicates that it consumes ~55% of the TPDE "compile time" (so the net compile time speedup is ~10x). TPDE therefore ships its own JIT mapper, which has fewer features but is much faster.

LLVM is really powerful, and despite being not particularly fast, the JIT API makes it extremely difficult to make it not extra-slow, even for LLVM experts.

[1]: https://github.com/tpde2/tpde/commit/29bcf1841c572fcdc75dd61...
by cs702 | 2025-09-30 16:58:10+00:00
Basically, it's the "rapture" as a Marvel-style fantasy-action movie, generated by AI.

Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3uhVJTxNko

Original source: https://www.npr.org/2025/09/07/nx-s1-5518263/ai-bible-christ...