MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by brookst | 2025-09-03 06:01:24+00:00
The ruling is not that Google can never have exclusive contracts for anything. If they rent Moscone Center for an event, there's no requirement that others be allowed to use the same space at the same time.

And there is no exclusive contract between Google and users with regards to sources of apps. It's a change in technical requirements for the platform.

In law, the actual thing matters; just being able to draw vague parallels doesn't mean anything.
by keepamovin | 2025-09-03 06:01:28+00:00
Lead leads to above normal hostility and aggression. Lead paint, lead petrol, lead pipes - all must go. And maybe some kind of protection at shooting ranges?

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6068756/

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10393136/
by tdb7893 | 2025-09-03 06:01:29+00:00
"disgusting level of violence in minority communities" -> this is so clearly an insulting way to refer to these communities it boggles the mind that someone would say it while accusing someone else of not being concerned enough. These communities have people I like and care about so I do care about these communities, which is exactly why I am careful about what I say and don't compare them to warzones or tell them about what violence is like in their communities (it reeks of the same condescension towards these communities that I grew up with in the suburbs).

If you're in these communities in Chicago then I'm sorry but judging from your general ignorance of Chicago it seems pretty clear that you are not.
by kazinator | 2025-09-03 06:04:47+00:00
Well, solving/mitigating the ABA ambiguity can debug use-after-free errors in single-threaded programs also. Because when a pointer A is freed to B, and then recycled again for a new object, we can make it into a different pointer A' (e.g. with a tagging scheme). So then when the old A pointer copies are lingering around, we can tell they are invalid due to having the wrong tag.

Solving ABA is probably a point in favor of indices (if we are working in a higher level language) because their type supports the bit operations for tagging. However, some hardware has support for hardware tagging for pointers. E.g. ARM; Android uses it.
by jraph | 2025-09-03 06:05:51+00:00
> I'm quite sure the world would largely be a better, more just place without the 'open' culture of the internet.

This intrigues me a bit. In particular, what do you mean by the 'open' culture of the internet? Is there more to that than the "dangerous tendency to 'democratize' by letting bad ideas and ignorance spread" you mention earlier?
by slau | 2025-09-03 06:06:38+00:00
It’s on purpose. Search Engine, the podcast, has a two part episode on why: Why are drug dealers putting fentanyl in everything? [1]. I didn’t know there was fentanyl in weed before this episode.

Short answer: junkies are always looking for next greater high. A occasional dead customer isn’t that much bad rep for a dealer. It’s a calling card; a proof he’s got the good stuff. It’s not the cartels doing the lacing. It’s the middlemen and the final dealers.

[1]: https://www.searchengine.show/why-are-drug-dealers-putting-f...
by Mars008 | 2025-09-03 06:08:05+00:00
At least not "open source"

> "open weights + open data + full training details including all data and training recipes"

Is it reproducible?

> respecting opt-out consent of data owners (even retrospectivey)

Were they notified and given an option to opt out? Owners and authors are not the same. Data owners aren't copyright owners either.

> avoiding memorization of training data

Not convincing.
by hinkley | 2025-09-03 06:08:06+00:00
The number of times I've worked at places where the competent people likely could not pass their own interview questions if they hadn't thought of them themselves is too goddamned high.

I'm getting tired of having to coach other senior devs on how to interview like they mean it instead of like it's a drinking game.

Google has come right out and said that none of their interview strategies have made a statistically significant difference in employee outcomes.
by Frieren | 2025-09-03 06:09:17+00:00
I prefer to have better designed cities and to use of tunnels/walkways when there is no better alternative. In Asia, the walkways usually exist for wide roads that are in themselves not very friendly for the eyes, nor ears.

The newest parts of Shenzhen are bare deserts with wide roads with cars and emptied of people. Their tunnels are full of restaurants, shopping malls and young people enjoying themselves. But all that is illuminated by artificial light. Not the worst kind of city, but so much worse than to have all people and activity at surface level like Paris or London.

I agree, thou, that to have tunnels is an advantage during winter for cold countries. But as soon as the sun shines, I want to be outside getting as much sun and light as possible. Tunnels should not be a substitute to walkable cities but they can be a great addition.
by klausa | 2025-09-03 06:10:29+00:00
My gut feeling is that Claude Code being so popular is: - 60% just having a much better UX and having any amount of "taste", compared to Cursor - 39,9% being able to subsidize the raw token costs compared to what's being billed to Cursor - 0,1% some magical advantage by also training the model

Claude Code is just much _pleasant_ to use than most other tools, and I think people are overly discounting that aspect of it.

I'd rather use CC with slightly dumber model, than Cursor with a slightly better one; and I suspect I'm far from being the only one.
by nickff | 2025-09-03 06:10:39+00:00
Not parent, and I don’t know about Chicago (I’ve never even visited Illinois), but if the police response is unsatisfying, people just don’t bother to report many crimes to the police. It is common for many ordinary people not to report property crimes unless required by an insurer, and many violent crimes against minorities or troubled people also go unreported due to lack of trust in the police.
by physicsguy | 2025-09-03 06:10:41+00:00
One of the big reasons I'd say is that 90% of Python work doesn't actually benefit from async? Basically nothing in the data science / simulation / etc. world benefits at all. Web development it does, and Django has sprinkled it in (but not DRF), Flask has a fork that's async and FastAPI is async. At work people have suggested we should switch our Flask code to async to 'make it faster' but for us, we're largely using Flask to server ML models and so there's no benefit by being async at all since we're largely compute bound within the request cycle.
by krig | 2025-09-03 06:10:54+00:00
Maybe the most interesting part is the semi-space garbage collector. The whole thing fits in a single screen:

https://git.liten.app/krig/LISP/src/branch/main/komplodin.od...

Andy Wingo has a good summary of how a very similar implementation works:

https://www.wingolog.org/archives/2022/12/10/a-simple-semi-s...
by deivid | 2025-09-03 06:12:20+00:00
Great post. Not sure if 200ms is fast though, you can definitely boot from zero to pid1 in <10ms.

I guess it depends on the workload, if you are snapshotting an already-loaded Python program, the time savings are huge, but if it's a program with fast startup, it's probably slower to snapshot.

> Waking up instantly on real traffic without breaking clients

is this for new TCP connections? Or also for connections opened prior to sleep?
by itake | 2025-09-03 06:12:34+00:00
You must follow the rules exactly. Easy mistakes include:

For credit card:

- not meeting spending targets to earn signup bonuses

- not utilizing all the cards benefits (For example, discover requires you click a couple buttons to activate 5% reward.

- minimum points redemption (must have > x points to convert to cash)

- Forgetting to redeem points before closing the account.)

For checking/savings rewards:

- not meeting direct deposit targets

- not maintaining an account balance
by Frieren | 2025-09-03 06:12:34+00:00
> They also cite prior cases where class lawsuits have been denied certification because the class was too big to be manageable.

Evil corp got away with it once. All evil corps should be able to do the same is not a sane argument.

But it is an argument to add regulations and make large corporations accountable as soon as possible. So, make them pay for their past damage and force them to have better practices from now on.
by vintermann | 2025-09-03 06:13:20+00:00
Whether you feel empathy to someone/something or not, is really quite different from whether you have moral obligations to it. I do not think I have moral obligations to a chicken, but then again, I think everyone agrees the chicken has no moral obligations to me - jokes about asshole roosters aside, I don't think you really think the rooster has wronged you by being as it is.

Maybe moral obligations can be one-way, but then only temporarily as I see it. Someone who's sleepwalking, or a baby, don't really have moral obligations to me, but they will when they wake up / grow up.
by sometimes_all | 2025-09-03 06:16:05+00:00
From where I'm from, there's a saying (badly paraphrased): "only the shopkeeper who talks well can get his stuff sold". Most of which the OP talks about is marketing, and marketing is a given, else the business will have a hard time existing.

If businesses need to make an effort towards marketing, it follows that counterparties will need to make an effort to block out that marketing if they do not want it. And the more aggressive marketing I get, the more aggressive I become about blocking it:

- giving more or all my business to companies who do leave me alone

- throwaway / hide-my emails

- unsubscribing, or even better, marking as spam

- not downloading unnecessary apps, and turning notifications off for most of them

- complaints to telecom operator for spam calls and messages (government has actually started taking strict action against these recently)

- complaints for bad behavior, in very public platforms

- actively making sure to delete accounts when no longer needed

Companies spend real money to reach me. So I return the favor and spend some time to ensure that I throw them off my lawn.
by 4gotunameagain | 2025-09-03 06:16:33+00:00
> If you look closely, you'll also see the coffee/tea cups actors sip from are usually empty. Can't afford the risk of accidentally spilling liquid on the costume and delaying the shoot.

Sometimes they are colored water, so you cannot drink but it still looks like a cocktail. Or at least that's how it was on the few movie sets I've been at.
by jackvalentine | 2025-09-03 06:16:46+00:00
> Money is a very complex subject, the fact that you think of money as "something that is stored in a bank" is testament to the fact that banks do a good job, it's an illusion

Thanks for assuming I’m stupid, rather than engaging with what I actually said.

You didn’t explain anything, just wrote a bunch of words about ‘it’s so complex!’ Everything you said is basically motivations for the bank. If I’m happy with the fees and the simple relationship… don’t call me unless there is a problem. As TFA points out you can absolutely do that and ignore everything else you wrote. The guy did it quite successfully.
by adrian_b | 2025-09-03 06:17:17+00:00
While the author has seen this pattern in Zig, this pattern was the normal way of writing programs in FORTRAN, decades before the appearance of the C language.

The early versions of FORTRAN did not have dynamic memory allocation. Therefore the main program pre-allocated one or more work arrays, which were either known globally or they were passed as arguments to all procedures.

Then wherever a C program might use malloc, an item would be allocated in a work array and the references between data structures would use the indices of the allocated items. Items could be freed as described in TFA, by putting them in a free list.

The use of the data items allocated in work arrays in FORTRAN was made easier by the fact that the language allowed the aliasing of any chunk of memory to a variable of any type, either a scalar or an array of any rank and dimensions.

So this suggestion just recommends the return to the old ways. Despite its limitations, when maximum speed is desired, FORTRAN remains unbeatable by any of its successors.
by juped | 2025-09-03 06:17:35+00:00
American jurisprudence has the best standard for incitement in the world, the Brandenburg standard: imminent lawless action. "Imminent" is vital, and unique to America; the government is barred from constructing hypothetical situations around acts of speech to prosecute them, as is easy to do with quite a lot of speech.

And we only reached it in the 1960s! Freeing speech is always an active fight.
by zwnow | 2025-09-03 06:18:39+00:00
This advice basically is "be fake and people will eventually like you" which is one of the reasons im constantly pissed off about other people. I respect authenticity and I do not need people in my life preferring a version of me that's not authentic. Im content with being alone a lot, its preferable for me to having a lot of acquaintances. I have a good circle of friends which is enough.
by idiomat9000 | 2025-09-03 06:20:22+00:00
They did, every chance they got? Ntifadas, suicide bombings , 7 October , on and on.

Only exception was when the west bank was part of the Palestinian state and ghaza part of Egypt for 30 years. They where "peaceful" under islamic rule, though still warring against Israel.

Peace = Colonializing the world for the faith. Its very medieval and very real .
by lelanthran | 2025-09-03 06:20:29+00:00
> You need a 100+gigs ram and a top of the line GPU to run legacy models at home. Maybe if you push it that setup will let you handle 2 people maybe 3 people.

This doesn't seem correct. I run legacy models with only slightly reduced performance on 32GB RAM with a 12GB VRAM GPU right now. BTW, that's not an expensive setup.

> You think anyone is going to make money on that vs $20 a month to anthropic?

Why does it have to be run as a profit-making machine for other users? It can run as a useful service for the entire household, when running at home. After all, we're not talking about specialised coding agents using this[1], just normal user requests.

====================================

[1] For an outlay of $1k for a new GPU I can run a reduced-performance coding LLM. Once again, when it's only myself using it, the economics work out. I don't need the agent to be fully autonomous because I'm not vibe coding - I can take the reduced-performance output, fix it and use it.
by energy123 | 2025-09-03 06:21:22+00:00
Liberal norms are an iterative game. We can't play that game unilaterally. It is a bilateral game.

Dictators don't respect your attempts to play this game with them. If you try to play this game with them, they will use your attempts as a weapon against you.

For example, the liberal pursuit to get Ukraine to surrender its nuclear weapons. Or the liberal pursuit behind UNSC Resolution 1701, where Hezbollah pinkie promised not to keep its arms.

These people don't think like you do. They see your restraint as a weakness to exploit, not as a quality to reciprocate.

This is why I advocate only for selective bilateral liberalism as a foreign policy. Play the liberalism game with parties who want to play that game. Respect the sovereignty of democracies. Get that iterative game running.

But for dictators, at least those without a nuclear deterrent who follow a policy of cruelty, show them overwhelming power, and kill them in targeted strikes whenever the opportunity presents itself.
by dns_snek | 2025-09-03 06:21:40+00:00
> Gemini frequently just straight up lies to me

I'm pretty sure they meant LLMs in general, not just ChatGPT. They all straight up lie to very similar degrees, no contest there.

> The only people who are being homogenized or "down-graded" by Chat GPT are people who wouldn't have sought other sophisticated strategies in the first place, and those who understand that Chat GPT is a tool and understand how it works, and it's context, can utilize it efficiently with great positive effect.

I know for a fact that this isn't true. I have a friend who was really smart, probably used to have an IQ of 120 and he would agree with all of this. But a few of us are noticing that he's essentially being lobotomized by LLMs and we've been trying to warn him but he just doesn't see it, he's under the impression that "he's using LLMs efficiently with great positive effect".

In reality his intellectual capabilities (which I used to really respect) have withered and he gets strangely argumentative about really basic concepts that he's absolutely wrong about. It seems like he won't accept it as true until an LLM says so. We used to laugh at those people together because this could never happen to us, so don't think that it can never happen to you.

Word of advice for anyone reading this: If multiple people in your life suddenly start warning you that your LLM interactions seem to be becoming a problem for one reason or another, make the best possible effort to hear them out and take them seriously. I know it probably sounds absurd from your point of view, but that's simply a flaw in our own perception of ourselves, we don't see ourselves objectively, we don't realize when we've changed.
by hinkley | 2025-09-03 06:21:49+00:00
Do you go through the whole process? I never know if I should just bow out in the middle if I they've scared me off. Just say I think I can save us both our afternoon.

The alternative is to try to keep up the pretense and I'm terrible at that, so I end up sandbagging the interview and then they of course don't make an offer. And no matter how many times I look at it, I can't decide which is less likely to cause me problems in the long term.
by sadanand4singh | 2025-09-03 06:22:39+00:00
I built an AI system that generates comprehensive academic review articles from web research—complete with citations, LaTeX formatting, and PDF compilation. We're talking hundreds of pages synthesizing vast literature into coherent narratives.

The Reality

While tools like Elicit and Consensus are emerging, building a complete system exposed unexpected complexity. The hardest parts weren't AI reasoning, but orchestration for real-world standards:

- Synthesis vs. Summarization: True synthesis requires understanding relationships between ideas, not just gathering information

- Quality Control: Academic standards demand perfect formatting—AI make systematic errors

- Integration: Combining working components into reliable pipelines is surprisingly difficult

Key Insights

Specialized agents work better than monolithic approaches

Multiple validation layers are essential

Personal solutions outperform one-size-fits-all tools

I documented this journey in an 8-part series covering everything from architectural decisions to citation integrity. The goal isn't prescriptive solutions, but illuminating challenges you'll face building systems that meet professional standards.

Whether automating literature reviews or technical documentation, understanding these complexities is crucial.

https://reckoning.dev/series/aireviewwriter

TL;DR: Built AI for publication-quality review articles. AI reasoning was easy—professional standards were hard.
by yokto | 2025-09-03 06:22:55+00:00
Journee | Berlin, Germany, Europe | REMOTE (CET +/- 2h) | Full-time | https://journee.ai

==========

Journee is an independent technology startup founded in 2020. Our in-house streaming technology and GPU fleet orchestration systems is what made our award-winning work with brands such as BMW, H&M, and Siemens possible.

We are now building and launching *Ojin*, a real-time generative AI platform for developers. Building upon our core technologies and expertise, we aim to serve the growing demand for interactive real-time AI applications. For this new venture, we are building a small, ambitious team and are hiring for the following positions:

* Lead Platform Engineer

* Senior Machine Learning Engineer

Apply via our Careers page: https://www.journee.ai/en/career/

Our tech stack: TypeScript, Python, AWS, Infrastructure as Code, React, Unreal Engine, WebRTC
by lelanthran | 2025-09-03 06:23:12+00:00
> Can you explain to me where Anthropic (or it's investors) expect to be making money if that's what it actually costs to run this stuff?

Not the GP (in fact I just replied to GP, disagreeing with them), but I think that economies of scale kick in when you are provisioning M GPUs for N users and both M and N are large.

When you are provisioning for N=1 (a single user), then M=1 is the minimum you need, which makes it very expensive per user. When N=5 and M is still 1, then the cost per user is roughly a fifth of the original single-user cost.
by eloisant | 2025-09-03 06:23:24+00:00
From my experience, the idea that you shouldn't waste things, and food in particular, is similar in Japan and France. That was even stronger with my grand-parents who lived through food scarcity during WWII in France.

US however seems pretty unique in its not caring about waste. Heck, it's really tough not waste food because all servings in restaurants are for 3 people so unless you bring everything in boxes you'll be wasting things.
by singron | 2025-09-03 06:23:44+00:00
It doesn't make sense to amortize model training over multiple years since they train multiple models per year (e.g. Claude 3.5, 3.7, and 4 were released within 12 months). Or you can, but then you have to overlap amortization schedules multiple times over. E.g. if they amortized over 24 months, then they would still be amortizing Claude 2.1, 3, 3.5, 3.7, 4, and 4.1.
by danaasa | 2025-09-03 06:25:18+00:00
Location: Remote/Worldwide Remote: Yes Willing to relocate: yes Technologies: Python, Pytorch, Scripting, Fine-tuning, ChatBots, Javascript, No-code, Linux, Git, Serverless Framework, Docker, Google Cloud Platform (Cloud Resource Management, Data Engineering, ML & AI Tasks, Infrastructure Automation with Terraform), Microsoft Azure Fundamentals, Project Management, Program Management, Project Coordination, Project Planning, Project Delivery, Community Organizing Résumé/CV: https://daniel-aasa.github.io/ <Full CV available upon request.> Email: aasaoluwagbemiga@gmail.com
by mkbosmans | 2025-09-03 06:25:26+00:00
Especially in HPC there are lots of workloads that do not benefit from SMT. Such workloads are almost always bottlenecked on either memory bandwidth or vector execution ports. These are exactly the resources that are shared between the sibling threads.

So now you have a choice of either disabling SMT in the bios, or make sure the application correctly interprets the CPU topology and only spawns one thread per physical core. The former is often the easier option, both from software development and system administration perspective.
by userbinator | 2025-09-03 06:27:26+00:00
I myself am bottlenecked by my brain, not my typing speed.

If you ever have a thought that you want to put into words but need to wait for your fingers, you are being bottlenecked by your typing. Most people think and speak faster than they can type, especially in short bursts; and I'm saying that, as someone who can comfortably type at ~160-180wpm and burst over 200 for a few seconds at a time, I still find myself waiting for my fingers. Holding a conversation over IM is one of the most common places where this bottleneck becomes very noticeable.
by vindex10 | 2025-09-03 06:27:38+00:00
Location: Oslo/Norway

Remote: yes (can do hybrid if in Oslo)

Willing to relocate: no

Technologies:

Core: Python, Cloud (GCP), Data, Linux. I'm quite comfortable with these: ML, HTML/CSS, JS, Rust/Golang/C

CV: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/8n0a92l00yh23xvahf3uc/v.anany...

Email: my username at google's mail service