MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by Jordan-117 | 2025-09-01 22:10:15+00:00
They basically have with Alexa+. It's slightly more limited than ChatGPT, but it sounds much more realistic than stock Alexa and blows it out of the water in terms of smarts. The old model was basically a Siri-like "set timers and check the weather with specific commands," plus some hit-or-miss skills you had to install separately. But the new one gives much more of a sense of understanding your question and can carry on conversations with contextual responses. I've been pretty impressed with it, and the nature of the Echo device makes it much easier to query at will than having to open the ChatGPT app and switch to voice mode.
by kbolino | 2025-09-01 22:10:20+00:00
Hmm. I don't understand how that would work.

I think it would be possible for e.g. microkernels to greatly reduce the size of the reservation (though not to eliminate it entirely). However, I can't imagine how you would handle the privilege escalation issue without having at least some system code in the application's virtual address space that's not modifiable by the application.
by maxdo | 2025-09-01 22:10:33+00:00
Yeah, they will come, new companies from China, that will eat the market too, with their beautiful 996 work life balance, and we will go back to growing corn.

As a bonus you will have a very long vacation.

We, the tech, are literally a leftover of the once overwhelming engineering superiority of the west that will shrink in the next 5 years.
by maxbond | 2025-09-01 22:10:54+00:00
That's a very regressive tax. Despite what was asserted earlier in the thread, the people who are victims of crime are usually lower class, not those living in mansions. Lower class people will get hit with a double whammy of being robbed and having higher insurance premiums as a result. Their neighbor's premiums will go up, as well.

I would speculate this would lead to a feedback loop of neighborhoods pushed into poverty or out of their homes by higher premiums, creating incentives for crime, leading to even higher premiums.
by alexey-salmin | 2025-09-01 22:11:39+00:00
> Is Intel unique or is it common? Does Novick have this position due to pension funds specifically, or index funds in general?

I'm not a market guru, just happen to know about Intel because I worked there between 2009 and 2015 and it was sad for me personally to witness the downfall. The company started to rot around 2012, but the stock prices shot up and kept rising for 8 years. The strategy was "higher CPU price, less R&D, less people budget, no risky bets like mobile", this drove the earnings up to the pleasure of shareholders. You can't even call this strategy "shortsighted", it's "medium-sighted" because of the huge momentum that took years to dissipate, but the company's fate was sealed then. I don't know details of what happened to Boeing but suspect it was something similar.

> AIUI index funds own large stakes in many public companies so if this is true, they are all effectively run by Blackrock and Vanguard (or should be).

They almost never have the majority so control is determined by the presence of other figures which smaller investors could follow during the vote. A founder even with a partial control is often enough to steer it. When there's no one left but the funds they run the show.

> As opposed to other investors? Outside of founder-owners you've described 99% of retail and institutional investors.

Well first of all in this thread we are discussing precisely the question of how to redistribute the shares of the founder. OP says that the "policy" should have taken them away. "And who to give them?" I ask.

Second, I don't think 99% of investors (measured by volume of investment) have no strategy.

> Why do you believe pension funds specifically lack "talent"?

Because they're not backed by anyone in particular. Talent is always risky, systems that try to please millions of stakeholders are inherently risk-averse.

> I've long believed that's the only way to make the welfare state numbers (in any country) work in the long run.

I do realize many people think like that and that's why it's so scary for me. I don't believe this system could work.
by bubblebobble99 | 2025-09-01 22:11:57+00:00
That’s the point though. They are called noon/midday and midnight. There is no am/pm on the 12. It’s 11:59pm, midnight, 12:01am, and 11:59am, midday, 12:01pm. Really it’s not that confusing, it’s just two points in time in the whole day and it’s fairly easily to tell which of them you are at unless you are close to the poles.we’ve managed to cope this long with them.
by nbbaier | 2025-09-01 22:12:22+00:00
- Location: Chicago, IL, USA - Remote: Yes - Willing to relocate: No - Technologies: JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, SQLite, PostgreSQL, SPARQL, HTML/CSS, Tailwind, Git, Node.js, Bun, Deno, React, Astro, HTMX, Hono, Cloudflare, Vercel, MCP, AI - Résumé/CV: https://bit.ly/4cXoofS - Email: nico.baier@gmail.com - Github: https://github.com/nbbaier - LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicobaier - Website: https://nicobaier.com

I'm a former academic researcher (in linguistics) turned self-taught software engineer who'd like to transition into professional software development. I'm experienced across the stack using Javascript/TypeScript, Python, and SQL with platforms like Cloudflare and Val Town. I bring a research-driven approach from my Ph.D. in linguistics. I'm especially interested in working on AI tooling and integrations.
by mainframenzo | 2025-09-01 22:13:34+00:00
Location: Seattle-ish, WA, USA

Remote: Both OK

Willing to relocate: Yes (to EU)

Technologies: See resume for details

Résumé/CV: https://mainframenzo.com

Email: mainframenzocv@gmail.com

I love to design and build digital and physical things! SWE with 15 years experience solving business problems across a variety of industries. I have designed and built distributed sytems, backends, web, native and mobile applications, simulations, and internal/external tools. I speak devops, am fluent in many computer languages, and gosh darnit you'll be happy to see me.
by PaulRobinson | 2025-09-01 22:14:02+00:00
F1 is a wonderful sport if you're a geek.

The drivers are of course the athletes - they have to spend a couple of hours driving cars at up to 200mph through lateral and longitudinal forces that can exceed 5G, or race in conditions where they can lose 4kgs (9lbs) of weight in sweat - but the edges, the performance gains, it's all in the engines and aero departments back at the factory, the crews getting setups right, the pit stops down into the sub-2s, and so much more.

If you were to ask a casual fan who has won the most World Championships they might suggest in recent history that is Max Verstappen (he's won four). A more serious fan will tell you that Lewis Hamilton (still driving today) is tying with Michael Schumacher (who isn't), with 7 drivers' championships, which is the all-time record.

But a more serious fan might suggest it's Adrian Newey - an engineer who has designed cars that have won 12 constructors' championships and 14 drivers' championships. He is now working at Aston Martin on their 2026 car, when all the regulations are changing and Cadillac is joining as an 11th team.

There is ample geekery on YouTube about various design aspects (Phase changing materials to change airflow over inner brake drums? Rear wings that flex "illegally"? Technical regulation deep dives? It's all there), and there is a sofa-friendly series to get partners interested in "Drive to Survive" on Netflix where you'll get to know all the human personalities, and even a - frankly absurd, but popcorn-worthy fun - Hollywood film starring Brad Pitt.

On race weekends there are teams of hundreds of people back at factories analysing not just their own teams' data, but what data is available from other teams: just over 1m data points a second through 3 practice sessions, a qualifying session, potentially a sprint qualifier and sprint race, and then the race itself.

There are team members who specialise in strategy, some who do nothing but figure out the likelihood of rain and understanding where the prevailing wind is coming from (aerodynamics are critical), and squads of people who think long and hard about tires - the three compounds they can choose from (and they must race a minimum of two per race), pressures, and degradation - and even a few people making sure that the car (which is fuelled to not quite finish the race for weight reasons), is correctly being coasted when needed if a safety car doesn't turn up.

Then there's the simulator setups. There are sims back in the factories with dedicated sim drivers testing setups with engineers, but you can join in at home to a point. The gaming sims are now getting good enough that with a decent wedge or with a visit to one of the F1 arcades, you can get something that, g-forces aside, will give something that's about 80% accurate in terms of track layout and some car setups, which is enough for the lay person to realise how insanely hard it is to get the car setup right and consistently send it around the tracks at those speeds and tolerances.

It's a deep well. It's my favourite sport to watch, and I recommend it to all.
by themafia | 2025-09-01 22:14:51+00:00
We do something similar except we use an existing OAuth flow and simply add custom attributes to the authorization token. That authorization token is then sent along with requests to various services and these attributes are picked out and then used to apply policies or output filtering as appropriate.

As a suggestion I would look to name the properties of your current token in such a way where they could be compatible with the embedded case.
by nickperry12 | 2025-09-01 22:15:15+00:00
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

Remote: Preferred, open to hybrid and on-site

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: JavaScript, TypeScript, React, Node.js, Express, Ruby, Python, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, Vector DBs, Debezium, Kafka, Docker, AWS, RAG, Embeddings, Chunking

Résumé/CV: Available upon request

Email: nick.perry604@gmail.com

Hi there, my name is Nick and I'm a software engineer with 3+ years experience developing fullstack web applications. Most recently, I've been interning with Mastra AI, an open-source TypeScript AI Agent framework, where I've introduced a new sentence-based chunking strategy with intelligent boundary detection, and a chunking strategy for semantic markdown with hierarchical section merging. I value empathy and great communication, and I'm looking for a team of like-minded individuals who want to create great software together. If this sounds like a great fit, I'd love to hear from you!
by foobarqux | 2025-09-01 22:17:05+00:00
Mostly a note for myself: something like this would probably work (not tested):

<new-landings.txt parallel --pipe --recend '\n\n' --colsep '\n' --plus curl '{1/large/medium}' -o '{#} + 101'.jpg

Adding multiple commands should be in a script to avoid quoting issues.
by behnamoh | 2025-09-01 22:17:09+00:00
How is this fundamentally any different than Erlang/Elixir concepts of supervisors controlling their child processes? It seems like the AI industry keeps re-discovering several basic techniques that have been around since the 80s.

I'm not surprised—most AI "engineers" are not really good software engineers; they're often "vibe engineers" who don't read academic papers on the subject and keep re-inventing the wheel.

If someone asked me why I think there's an AI bubble, I'd point exactly to this situation.
by gary_0 | 2025-09-01 22:17:14+00:00
> Only a small portion of software is going to be able to be properly annotated to take advantage of this

The same could be said for, say, SIMD/vectorization, which 99% of ordinary application code has no use for, but it quietly provides big performance benefits whenever you resample an image, or use a media codec, or display 3D graphics, or run a small AI model on the CPU, etc. There are lots of performance microfeatures like this that may or may not be worth it to include in a system, but just because they are only useful in certain very specific cases does not mean they should be dismissed out of hand. Sometimes the juice is worth the squeeze (and sometimes not, but you can't know for sure unless you put it out into the world and see if people use it).
by wiredpancake | 2025-09-01 22:18:02+00:00
How exactly do you foresee "pre-internet" data sources being the future of AI.

We already train on these encyclopedias, we've trained models on massive percentages of entire published book content.

None of this will be helpful either, it will be outdated and won't have modern findings, understandings. Nor will it help me diagnose a Windows Server 2019 and a DHCP issue or similar.
by fsckboy | 2025-09-01 22:18:56+00:00
>to be dumped at the border

does this mean you were originally on your way into the US and that's where they nabbed you, and then when they finished with you they took you back to where they picked you up?

i'm not here to debate or defend in either direction, i don't know enough about any of it, but i believe that i have heard from a lawyer podcast that whether you are a US citizen who is entitled to enter or not, the rules (including your bill of rights status) are different "at the border" because you are not in the US yet
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-09-01 22:18:58+00:00
> This isn’t a gdpr opt out where both alternatives need to be equally easy. We (as a society) absolutely need the devices to default to the current model when purchased.

I feel like this is completely the opposite. The case for closed devices is that if grandma is senile she can't be trusted to make sound choices and needs a piece of hardware to limit her options, whereas that isn't the case for random chemists and college students and farmers, i.e. the general population.

It's one of the cases where tech people can't see the forest for the trees. The vast majority of people can make reasonable decisions about their own lives, but then if a tiny percentage make mistakes, those are the ones who come to you with problems and then it seems like everyone who comes to you is having problems because only the people having problems come to you.

Then megacorps use that false perception that everyone is incompetent to try to weasel their way in as a middle man taking a thick margin while locking the doors so the average person can't go to the competition, which is the option that needs to be not just preserved but actually used by ordinary people.

And not just because of the margins. Centralizing everything is a skeleton key for authoritarians. If you want to ban a social media app because people are using it to find out about something you want to censor or organize opposition to your administration and having it banned from Google Play and Apple makes it so 99% of people can't use it, you'd win when we need you to lose.
by pinkmuffinere | 2025-09-01 22:19:16+00:00
> unique pay structure

As an ex-Amazonian, I hate seeing this corporate euphemism. We would be reminded yearly that compensation at Amazon was “peculiar”, when really it was just relatively low for FAANG. I would have preferred frank honesty, which I think would look like “we pay relatively low wages, for relatively good engineers, and the difference makes more money”
by themafia | 2025-09-01 22:20:08+00:00
> The drivers are of course the athletes

In the modern sport they're a weird hybrid between athlete and pilot. The cars are exceptionally complex and in addition to the forces you mention there's incredibly complicated input devices embedded into the steering wheel and it's not uncommon to have 15 to 20 different, specific, timed control changes during the course of a lap.

A comparison, and I'm not sure everyone will appreciate this, but to my elderly eyes, a major difference is in how drivers look when they get out of a car at the end of a race. Modern drivers spring out of their cars with plenty of spare energy to parade around the paddock. In previous eras drivers would come out of their cars drenched in sweat, often in visible pain, and had to be assisted to get back into the garage.

It reflects a fundamental shift in the role and use of technology in the cockpit. I love both sports; however, I do see them as almost two entirely different sports.
by raddan | 2025-09-01 22:20:16+00:00
Interesting post. I occasionally encounter signs of violent death while hiking in the woods. Where I live it is usually most obvious and dramatic during the winter, and usually caused by coyotes. Thankfully none of the remains I have discovered were human. The chaotic scenes left by our local coyote population is usually pretty shocking, even if you’ve seen it before. It’s a reminder that nature is both beautiful and brutal. Fortunately it’s usually pretty easy to avoid this kind of encounter; I am usually way off-piste when I stumble across them.
by nostrademons | 2025-09-01 22:20:46+00:00
Simply put, because we want to incentivize people to build things that have not been built before, and by nature these are always monopolies when they get started. While with natural monopolies, no person built them, they were taken from nature, and so we don't want to incentivize people to profit simply from plundering what as there before. There's also a justice argument: most people are okay with people owning and profiting from work that they themselves did, but not okay with people profiting from taking control of the commons.

The idea of a "natural" monopoly is also fairly broadly applied in modern Georgism. Things like the natural resources, the electromagnetic spectrum, pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions are included, for example, in addition to land. There's a good argument for things like utility rights of way. Some proponents (more radical than I) also favor including IP in it, which actually would cover the google.com domain name.

I'd prefer some other mechanism (outside the scope of Georgism) to handle cases where "You built a monopoly through your own efforts to deliver a superior product, but now you've moved on and the current managers are mismanaging this resource to the detriment of society, but since it's a private monopoly there are no ways the get them to stop doing it." This is a really common problem in the economy today, and I'd like to find a way to manage it that preserves the incentive to invent new things while also removing the ability to prevent others from inventing new things.
by StopDisinfo910 | 2025-09-01 22:20:52+00:00
The question is not if you are engaging with me but with the issue.

As you keep coming back to the Fiji example, refuse to admit the postulate your clearly holds, refuse to consider the moral question of what should be done with descendants of settlers, I’m personally standing by my opinion that you are the one using bad faith here. I’m personally entirely fine with leaving the discussion as is as an illustration of my vision of the New Caledonian issue. I don’t think it makes me look bad.
by jakelazaroff | 2025-09-01 22:20:54+00:00
Copyleft licenses don't even need to be free! All copyleft means is that derivative works must use the same license. For example, the Creative Commons BY-NC-SA license [1] wouldn't fulfill freedom 0, since you can't use the material for commercial purposes.

(Granted, Creative Commons licenses are typically not used for software, but the point stands.)

[1] https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
by curl-up | 2025-09-01 22:21:18+00:00
In the context compression approach, why aren't the agents labeled as subagents instead? The compressed context is basically a "subtask".

This is my main issue with all these agentic frameworks - they always conviniently forget that there is nothing "individual" about the thing they label "an agent" and draw a box around.

Such "on demand" agents, spawned directly from previos LLM output, are never in any way substantially different from dynamic context compression/filtering.

I think the only sensible framework is to think in terms of tools, with clear interfaces, and a single "agent" (single linear interaction chain) using those tools towards a goal. Such tools could be LLM-based or not. Forcing a distinction between a "function tool" and an "agent that does somethng" doesn't make sense.
by nothrabannosir | 2025-09-01 22:21:43+00:00
I’ve heard this one before and if the agpl were two years old I’d buy it. But they had ample opportunity to craft a better license by now, so at this point it’s hard to believe that’s not just a convenient excuse.

Don’t like the agpl wording, but agree with the spirit? Ok, you have the lawyers, write a better agpl that abides by the same spirit and which you trust.

But: nothing. And waiting won’t change that. It may be also true, but it’s just excuse at this point. They’re not chomping at the bit to introduce networked virality of software freedom into their platforms.
by catchafish | 2025-09-01 22:22:15+00:00
Can I put a recommendation out there for andOTP?

https://github.com/andOTP

* Open source

* Support for encrypted backups

* It allows you to peek at the previous 30 seconds code (so it doesn't just vanish if you're halfway through typing it)

* Lockable via pin or pass etc

* Filterable views
by tpmoney | 2025-09-01 22:22:23+00:00
A lot of the digital cruise controls that I've used in cars increment by 1 for each press, but increment by jumps (3-5 IME) if you hold it down. I wonder if that bug is a state machine problem. Pressing fast enough puts it into the "holding" mode, but because you're not actually holding, it also doesn't register that you've "stopped" holding.
by vlovich123 | 2025-09-01 22:22:41+00:00
I'm not sure how privilege escalation would be an issue since you'd never escalate privilege in the first place (I'm assuming you're talking about CPU ring privileges and not OS privileges). You'd just enqueue into the shared kernel/user space ring buffer your operations and the kernel would pick them up on its side, but you'd never jump between rings.

Such a design may require at least one processor dedicated to running the kernel at all times, so it might not work on a single processor architecture. However, single processor architectures might be supportable by having the "kernel process" go to sleep by arming a timer and the timer interrupt is the only one that's specially mapped so it can modify the page table to resume the kernel (for handling all the ring buffers + scheduling). As you note, there's some reserved address space but it's a trivial amount just to be able to resume running the kernel. I don't think it has anything to do with monolithic vs microkernels.
by bschne | 2025-09-01 22:23:07+00:00
- Location: Zurich, Switzerland

- Remote: Both OK

- Willing to relocate: Open for good fit

- Tech: Main focus is (technical) product work, though I have hands-on experience across the stack (mainly .NET, RoR, Angular, React)

- Resume: http://linkedin.com/in/schneiderbenjamin/

- Email: mail@benjaminschneider.ch

My main thing are roles where I get to talk to users and clients and work closely with devs at the same time, plus I have a strong knack for UX, so e.g. product work in a hands-on environment, or engineering that needs someone product-minded, might be a good fit. Have also recently freelanced and am open for more of that.
by kbolino | 2025-09-01 22:24:07+00:00
That's fair. If so, then you still can have things like drivers and HAL and so on too. However, there's no hard security barriers.

How do multiple processes actually work, though? Is every executable position-independent? Does the kernel provide the base address(es) in register(s) as part of vfork? Do process heaps have to be constrained so they don't get interleaved?
by rendx | 2025-09-01 22:24:10+00:00
> It's true, but I'm not sure it's some great "hack" to get people to start caring.

Ha. I actually think it's going to make people potentially care even less? "Why would I need to preserve anything if nature and life is going to be fine no matter what?"

Some even argue to better speed it up, so we don't destroy too many other species in our own downfall.