MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by simmerup | 2025-09-03 21:09:01+00:00
I think the view of this article is too optimistic to be believable.

It would be nice if social media fractured into a web of small communities shepherded by influencer-come-content-creators, a bit like finding a ncie pub in your local area with like minded people.

But the majority will still be in McDonalds, a la FaceBook/Instagram/Reddit

Edit: Also, further than this, I think the article is completely overlooking just how much the autocratic regimes and companies love the influence they have over us from social media. And overlooks just how much they will try to cement social media as the one stop shop to influence public opinion.
by xpe | 2025-09-03 21:09:03+00:00
>>>> different commenter above: It is all fake and made up, and the numbers are detached from the real world, but it's not like the market doesn't know that.

>>> me: Perhaps there are salient differences between art on a wall and a company.

>> you: At heart, not really. The whole point of all of this is to motivate humans to get off their butt and reduce entropy.

> me: A painting on a wall is merely an inanimate object. / A company has agency; it seeks to add economic value to itself over time including changing people’s perceptions.

The Horror! Just look at the disjointed conversational history above. It seems like some sort of drunken history episode where people aren’t paying attention to each other.

Should I assume you are trying to understand what I’m saying? It is becoming less plausible with every comment. (I’m referring to the “be charitable” part of HN guidelines.)

Additionally, there is another anti-pattern at work here: this seems like a pretty inane definitional argument. You’re claiming there’s no difference between art on a wall and a corporation entity? By what definition? What is the utility of your definition; meaning, what can you do with your definition that provides differential predictive power?

My claim: when it comes to valuation, an agent is sufficiently different from a non-agent (yes, even if it appreciates!) What is the criteria for “sufficiently different”? To explain: if you get more benefit out of a distinction than it costs you to make the distinction, it is a net benefit.

In this case about valuing things, someone who makes a living building predictive valuation models is going to distinguish wall art from corporate entities because doing so is useful for prediction.

Of course they have some things in common. This is irrelevant to the question of “is making this distinction worth it?” As long as predicting the difference between them is valuable paying attention to the distinction is valuable.

This kind of talking past each other is one of many reasons “why we can’t have nice things” such as useful discussion. Shameful.

If you propose some grand unified theory that says two things ultimately derive from the same thing, that’s fine, but if you’re going to use it for prediction you’ll have to explain how to apply it.
by jeroenhd | 2025-09-03 21:09:53+00:00
This exemplifies why DoH is not enough, and why we need something like DNSSEC to prevent big brother from tampering with your internet connection.

Yes, DNSSEC as specified by the RFC is flawed and many TLDs/countries don't bother with it, let's skip the usual discussions, but something like it would make tampering obvious.

To prevent regular TLS MitM attacks, we have HTTPS pinning (though HKPK died in browsers), but most DNS, even with layered encryption on top of it, has "trust me bro" as an authenticity model.
by nickpapciak | 2025-09-03 21:11:38+00:00
Yes, some of this definitely resonates. We really want the agents to suggest their own, novel projects, beyond security or cost optimization. I think this is more feasible for coding agents to do in infra rather than dev work because a lot of the dev work depends strictly on what the customers want, whereas infra work can be more internal and developer focused so there’s opportunities to suggest improvements to the internal system.

I think in the near-term, however, the problem we have identified is that while developers at growth stage have been vastly accelerated, the infra engineers have not been. So our tool is almost helping them “catch up” to the new rapid pace of development. This is dangerous due to the complexity and need for infrastructure to be robust, hence why we are really focused on making it safe to use.

At larger enterprisey companies, AI has not yet been an extreme productivity boost for the developers like it has been for growth stage companies. But I do believe that an enterprise adoption wave is coming.
by jm__87 | 2025-09-03 21:11:42+00:00
Another thing I think about a lot is that our own brains and sensory organs change (degrade) over time, so my own subjective experience is probably different in some important ways than it was like 20 years ago. My memory likely isn't good enough to fully capture the differences, so I don't even fully know what it was like to be me in the past.
by nickpinkston | 2025-09-03 21:12:33+00:00
Also for those who aren't familiar, there's also "hand scraping" for flatness which is more common and used for things like refreshing the "ways" (ie precision linear bearings) on a lathe or other precision machine tool.

This is done like the "dye / rub / scrape" method described above, which I believe is still used as it's superior to grinding for these applications.

See video below for the process: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7w84CrBEE8
by jibal | 2025-09-03 21:12:47+00:00
I stated what's incoherent about it. Your "Do you not think" is a non sequitur ... coherence is about meaning, and no one can say what the phrase means.

Aside from that, breathing fresh air in the morning is an activity, not a "quality of subjective experience". Generally the language people use around this is extremely confused and unhelpful.
by 7402 | 2025-09-03 21:13:02+00:00
I took an intensive first-year Latin class last summer (The Latin Workshop at Berkeley).

Very early on, we were given a sample of a translation into Latin by Google, with the assignment to list dumb grammatical mistakes that Google had made.

I think this was to cause anyone who had the idea of using Google to help with homework to abandon THAT idea pretty quickly!

It's not a good idea to use Google to translate into Latin.
by crowbahr | 2025-09-03 21:13:07+00:00
The problem isn't the affordability of life, it's the perception of affordability of life.

If Fox News spends $200M of screen time telling everyone that the tax is making all the prices of everything go up then that will be the predominant talking point.

That's the whole issue with "post truth" - perception _is_ reality at this point, at least effectively.
by rstuart4133 | 2025-09-03 21:13:17+00:00
> I don't follow; you can read the code that your LLM produces as well.

You can. You can also read the code a compiler produces perfectly well. In fact https://godbolt.org/ is a web site dedicated to programmers do just that. But ... how many programmers do you know who look at the assembler their compiler produces? In fact how many programmers do you know who understand the assembler?

Now lets extrapolate a bit. I've seen people say they've vibe coded a some program, yet they can't program. Did they read the code the LLM produced? Of course not. Did it matter? Apparently not for the program they produced.

Does the fact that they can vide program but not read code alter the types of programs they can produce? Of course it does. There limited to the sort of programs an LLM has seen before. Does that matter? Possibly not if the only programs they write are minor variations of what has been posted onto the internet already.

Now take two people, one who can only vide code, and another who knows how to program and understands computers at a very deep level. Ask yourself, who is going to be paid more? Is it the one who can only write programs that have been seen many times before by an LLM, or is it the one who can produce something truly new and novel?
by mesutgenai | 2025-09-03 21:13:49+00:00
Stack/infra (high-level): - Frontend: React (Vite/Next) - Backend: Node/TypeScript + REST; queued renders - Inference: Nano Banana on Gemini Flash 2.5 Image on Vertex; - Infra: Docker/K8s; object storage for short-lived assets; CDN

Privacy/safety: No training on user images; no resale/sharing of uploads “AI Edit / Parody” watermark on exports; celebrity use is for parody/visualization only NSFW/minors detection; blocklist for abusive inputs;

Limitations: Best with front-lit, uncovered faces; large occlusions/sunglasses degrade results Extreme poses and complex hair can produce edge artifacts

Roadmap: Side-by-side before/after, bridal templates, batch renders, higher-res, pose-match hints

Happy to share more details or logs/screens if useful.
by Sohcahtoa82 | 2025-09-03 21:14:06+00:00
Back when I got an i7-3770K (4C/8T), I did a very basic benchmark using POV-Ray.

Going from 1 thread to 2 threads doubled the speed as expected. Going from 2 to 4 doubled it again. Going from 4 to 8 was only ~15% faster.

I imagine you could probably create a contrived benchmark that actually gives you nearly double the performance from SMT, but I don't know what it would look like. Maybe some benchmark that is written to deliberately constantly miss cache?

Side note, I should run that POV-Ray test again. It's been years since I've even use POV-Ray.
by mr-wendel | 2025-09-03 21:14:10+00:00
Let's also recall that almost nobody changes their mind when engaged in these types of conversations, and the more confrontational the more likely you cement existing biases.

Where you do stand to make a difference is with more casual observers and people on the fence. A show of patience and respect bolsters a good argument better than perhaps even the argument itself.

What does tend to change people's minds is forming good relationships with people who hold differing opinions and their desire to make the relationship work. Logic and rationality are secondary considerations. Hopefully they will accept better conclusions for these reasons, but it's quite unlikely without adopting the kind of approach espoused by Dig1t.
by harmmonica | 2025-09-03 21:15:02+00:00
Think I've done that and I'll raise you an "and yet barely any houses burn down due to their electrical!" I actually jest. But electrical is one of those things that anyone can do, but ought to be done with the utmost care (and in the US many jurisdictions allow DIY electrical if you're doing the work for your own place).

And just to clarify I don't think I'm the exception. I was actually making the opposite argument. Almost anyone can and should attempt to deconstruct complexity because doing things is not always as difficult as it would seem (or as difficult as we've been told).

Appreciate the dialogue, lazide!
by supernova87a | 2025-09-03 21:15:17+00:00
Is it because journalists think of their special talent as talking to people to get information (which is a scarce and priviliged resource), versus reading and summarizing things that we all have access to?

So they rarely are forced to do anything but state the name of who they interviewed, and that's it. And puts them in the habit of not acknowledging what they read, as a source?
by godelski | 2025-09-03 21:15:19+00:00
FWIW, I think this summary is pretty in line with most "anti-LLM" crowd. Being in that "side" myself it is not that I don't use LLMs it is that I do not think LLMs are close to being able to replace me.

I also think there's some big variance in each of the "sides" (I think it is more a bimodal spectrum really) with a lot to you last point. Sometimes they save you lots of time, sometimes they waste a lot of time. I expect more senior people are going to get less benefits from them because they've already spent lots of time developing time saving strategies. Plus, writing lines is only a small part of the job. The planning and debugging stages are much more time intensive and can be much more difficult to wrangle an LLM with. Honestly I think it is a lot about trust. Forgetting "speed", do I trust myself to be more likely to catch errors in code that I write or code that I review?

Personally, I find that most of the time I end up arguing with the LLM over some critical detail and I've found Claude code will sometimes revert things that I asked it to change (these can be time consuming errors because they are often invisible). It gives the appearance of being productive (even feeling that way) but I think it is a lot more like if you spent time in a meeting vs time coding. Meetings can help and are very time consuming, but can also be a big waste of time when over used. Sometimes it is better to have two engineers go try out their methods independently and see what works out within the larger scope. Something is always learned too.
by westurner | 2025-09-03 21:15:50+00:00
> What is the computational complexity of Tetris with ARM instructions?

If it is Turing complete it is undecideable. If the user only builds programs that halt, is Teris with ARM instructions of the complexity class NEXPTIME-complete (which is harder than NP-Complete)?

NEXPTIME: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEXPTIME

Complexity Zoo:N: https://complexityzoo.net/Complexity_Zoo:N
by johnisgood | 2025-09-03 21:15:55+00:00
// CURL_GLOBAL_ALL combines all initialization flags. CURL_GLOBAL_ALL: i64 = 3

It has nothing to do with "curl_global_init()". This - which is a high-level function intended to be called by the users of the library - has:

init :: proc() -> (ok: bool) { return curl_global_init(CURL_GLOBAL_ALL) == 0 }

As you can see, higher-level function calls low-level function. The higher-level function does not have "curl" as the prefix.

My question still stands and has not been answered.
by nserrino | 2025-09-03 21:15:56+00:00
PyTorch is the baseline because that's what people prototype in, and the most common reference point. The aim here is to show that you can start from prototype code and automatically produce lower-level kernels (in this case Metal) that are more usable in real deployments, without additional work from the developer. Frontier models are capable at generating efficient Metal kernels automatically/immediately, and will only get better. We expect to see significant improvements as we refine the approach, but it's enough to show this seems to be a tractable problem for AI.
by chermi | 2025-09-03 21:16:04+00:00
Let's get something out of the way, just to make sure we're able to continue. Do you agree that his tweet saying lidar can be inaccurate and mess up results compared to cameras only is idiotic? Do you think Elon really believes that tweet?

If so, do you think he's stupid? Do you think he thinks sensor fusion is a grand unsolved problem his cracked engineers can't implement?

I absolutely agree vision is very very important, given the roads + signage are designed for humans using their eyes among other factors.

Do I think we should take the abilities of human drivers with eyes as the gold standard for what we can achieve with autonomous vehicles? No, and I doubt he does either, but his ego can't backtrack. In fact, I'm pretty sure he finally accepted radar.

Do I believe that looking at humans driving and saying "they do it just their eyes (they don't) so we should!" is an example of his acclaimed first-principles reasoning ability? No, I think its shallow reasoning by analogy.

Also, I'm not aware of anyone going or championing full lidar. It was only musk who (apparently) believes more than one type of sensor is a negative.

What really gets me is that musk, the man who's proven just how good he is at scaling & supply chain, somehow didn't think lidar wouldn't dramatically come down in cost.

My most charitable interpretation is that he really saw the value in gathering as much data about driving as fast as possible, and the best way to do that was to build a bunch of cars with just cameras.(Smart) Somewhere along the way he got annoyed or jealous of the lidar-incorporating companies that were doing quite well with autonomy. Then some ego thing happened and he got ahead of his skis and said vision-only is the best(dumb) and his ego/brand value won't let him take it back.

I admire the hell out of musk based on his output, so I choose to believe that he can't possibly be stupid enough to not understand sensor fusion.

Oh back to the original subject. If he's never said that vision-only is first principles, I apologize for the misinformation. But you have to admit that the "reasoning" of saying humans can drive with vision only therefore no other sensors is quite firmly outside the realm of first principles, which is his m.o.
by Joel_Mckay | 2025-09-03 21:16:04+00:00
A lot of code has multiple FOSS licenses that are not contaminating like GPL. GPL violations do occur on code, but have nothing to do with the training Data.

For example, many academic data sets are not public domain, and can't be used in a commercial context. A GPL claim on that data is often an argument of which thief showed up first.

Rule #24: A lawyers Strategic Truth is to never lie, but also avoid voluntarily disclosing information that may help opponents.

Thus, a business will never disclose they paid a fool to break laws for them... =3
by kfreds | 2025-09-03 21:16:07+00:00
We have a few partners who use our infrastructure (e.g. Mozilla), but we're not trying to dominate as a white-label solution. In fact, we've said no to a few well-known brands who wanted to white-label our infrastructure.

As for our long term goals, take a look at our owner's directive: https://mullvad.net/en/blog/ownership-and-future-mullvad-vpn

We want to make online mass surveillance and censorship ineffective. Mullvad is political action through entrepreneurship. We're reinvesting a lot of our profit into open-source software and hardware projects that benefit both Mullvad and the wider community.

I really don't want us to "corner the entire market" because that would make us a single point of failure. I would like to think that our hard work help push the market to keep improving.
by JohnLocke4 | 2025-09-03 21:16:17+00:00
I should probably have specified that I bought the phone in northern Europe where prices are generally higher due to companies' selective pricing and VAT. If I had to guess, those $250 would probably correspond to around $180 to $190 if the device was bought in America during the time of my purchase - you guys don't know how good you have it when it comes to the price of consumer electronics!
by astura | 2025-09-03 21:16:18+00:00
>It's more complicated than that.

No, It's absolutely not. Like i said, I've bought multiple cars with personal checks, all over $10,000, never gave SSN or had credit check. Unless it's some sort of local law, it's a ridiculous policy. Find another dealer.

>Dealers are often involved on the financing side directly, and their systems are just set up to require a Social Security number to put anything into the system.

This seems totally made up and doesn't match my experience at all.
by benlivengood | 2025-09-03 21:16:51+00:00
I think a formalism for AMMs might go a long way toward making formal software development more straightforward. All the formalisms I am aware of pair some logic with some programming language, or worse a logic with an abstract model of a language, but implicitly or explicitly portions of architecture get dragged into the formalism as well, e.g. resulting in seL4 having differing levels of proofs for various architectures (arm, amd64, risc-v).

If instead we pair a logic with a parameterized (by cache coherency semantics, hardware protection and isolation levels, register layout, etc.) abstract machine model then it could presumably apply over multiple architectures and languages with derived specializations for each language.
by imiric | 2025-09-03 21:18:36+00:00
I'm usually sensitive to such issues, but I'm not seeing it in this case.

Can you point out where that's most visible? Or screenshot it?

Maybe it has to do with font rendering on your system. It looks fine for me on Windows and Firefox.

Hhmm although upon a closer look, the kerning in "We" is a bit wide. But the small caps look fine to me. If this is the only thing, I'd hardly label it "atrocious".
by moomoo11 | 2025-09-03 21:18:37+00:00
I mean.. say its an enterprise mobile app. Maybe there are 2 shells, each shell has 5 tabs. Each tab might have 5 screens on it.. that's 50 files already just for the screens. Each screen might have various UI components or steppers, etc.

Most noobs, such as those who think 700 files is too many because they've only worked on apps they never published, might just cram everything into that one file.

However, there would be various files for components, functions, etc. Code that's single responsibility and easy to test might mean there are lots of files. There might be upload queues, offline functionality, custom code to go beyond what the ios/android SDKs offer, and so on. DTOs, DAOs, etc. various services..

You probably (won't) get the gist but yeah.
by skavi | 2025-09-03 21:18:47+00:00
The headline isn’t referenced until the last question:

> In your piece, you tell the story of a clinical trial in which they put blood on ambulances and got it to people before the hospital, and it showed a huge improvement in survival. Then, as soon as the clinical trial was over, they had to take it out because there was no way to get it paid for.

> The surgeons who spoke to me about this called it criminal. And I think they’re right. It’s really wrong that we know how to save lives already and we aren’t doing it because it’s not reimbursable.
by chneu | 2025-09-03 21:19:04+00:00
I have no idea why people, especially in the United States, trust companies so much. I bump elbows with a lot of different crowds(rural, urban, conservative, liberal, etc) so I have a pretty decent sample size and without fail most people trust companies waaaay too much. Then they're shocked when a company lets them down because the company could make more money.

Stop trusting companies. They only care about 3 month profits.
by sxp | 2025-09-03 21:19:14+00:00
As far as I can tell, OP's argument is bullshit. I did a bunch of research into max contrast displays and haven't found any reason to not use them. There are reasons to not use max _brightness_ since a bright screen can be problematic in the dark, but it's better to use max contrast on a slightly dim screen than to use max brightness with a slightly lower contrast.

There was some minor effects for people with dyslexia and high contrast, but no science-backed a11y guidelines provide evidence of reducing contrast for the general population. And since most people have crappy cheap screens instead of fancy Macbooks that UI designers use, reducing contrast makes it worse for them. Particularly at off-screen angles.

I'm not sure who started this UI trend of grey-on-gray, but it's shitty and should be avoided unless there is an intentional stylistic reason to sacrifice form for function.
by lyu07282 | 2025-09-03 21:19:17+00:00
They mention that in the FAQ here: https://github.com/microsoft/VibeVoice/tree/main?tab=readme-...

> In fact, we intentionally decided not to denoise our training data because we think it's an interesting feature for BGM to show up at just the right moment. You can think of it as a little easter egg we left for you.

It's not a bug, it's a feature! Okaaaaay
by pmontra | 2025-09-03 21:19:51+00:00
It's a Shelly S. Among the many ways to control it I'm using its local web server to turn on and off the power from my phone, and a curl to do it from my scripts. I'm also polling the url for reading the power level and know when a shutdown is complete, before turning off the power. I think it can be interfaced by home assistant and similar platforms but I never tinkered with them. Self made small scripts are more than enough for my use cases.