MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by artemonster | 2025-09-21 10:02:01+00:00
I get my blood pressure to dangerous levels each time I stumble upon some high quality video lectures on youtube that explain some topics that were totally fucked in university, like PID control. 30 Minute video made by some amateur with cool animations explains basically 95% of everything you need to know vs old lifeless dork professor at "elite" university mumbling some nonsense and throwing walls of formulas with zero context, explanation or examples to help you understand. And in the end, your uni knowledge is at most 5% applicable in your work, you are still totally unprepared to enter the workforce and your first employer carries the burden to teach you.
by WhyNotHugo | 2025-09-21 10:02:09+00:00
> Maybe systemd (service management, logind, the DNS resolver, the loggig system, etc) will eventually be re-implemented in a way that does not have the irritating properties of the original systemd.

One the topic or an eventual successor, one of the aspects of systemd is how intertwined all of it is.

It’s really hard to replace just one part without either (1) replacing it with another which the same general design, or (2) remove all of systemd entirely.

Take what op is taking about for example. Instead of relying on small, reusable components for sanboxing, it just re-implement all of it into the monolithic service_manager+service_supervisor_sandboxer+…

You can’t even think of replacing the service supervisor or the logging subsystem without replacing all the other parts.

Of course, I won’t deny that this design has its upsides: this monolithic approach ships a lot faster than trying to integrate different components to work together.
by SCdF | 2025-09-21 10:03:34+00:00
> The early narrative was that companies would need fewer seniors, and juniors together with AI could produce quality code

I'm not deep into it, but I have not a single time seen that direction argued before this post. Maybe it was _really_ early on?

The narratives I always saw were, firstly, "it will be as a good as a junior dev", then "it's like pairing with an overly enthusiastic junior dev", then finally arguments similar to those presented in this article.

Which, frankly, I'm still not so sure about. Productivity is incredibly hard to measure: we are still not completely, non-anecdotally sure AI makes folk broadly more productive. And even if it does, I am beginning to wonder how much ai is short term productivity with long term brain rot, and whether that trade off is really worth it.
by tecleandor | 2025-09-21 10:04:28+00:00
I barely know them. Not because they don't like bikes, but because in my country fewer than 1 in 10 households with children had 3 children or more.

But my friend that has four children brings her kids to the school that's in front of my apartment, that promotes bike riding to school, and they even have a morning bike route that kids alone or with parents can join.

(Yeah, they both work)
by keiferski | 2025-09-21 10:06:27+00:00
There is definitely a lot of information on the internet, but I wouldn’t undervalue the benefits of being in a classroom with a small group of bright people focusing on the same topic every week.

Probably the best class I took for my philosophy degree was a 3 hour metaphysics course, held once every Wednesday. There were maybe 6-7 people in the class, and the discussions we got into were incredibly educational.

I don’t think reading a bunch of books and web pages about metaphysics would have been 10% as insightful. Maybe with talking to an AI, you could get that up to 20%…but still, it’s not the same.
by lxgr | 2025-09-21 10:06:55+00:00
That said, the Apple 40W charger does support AVS according to the fine print on its exterior:

https://photos5.appleinsider.com/gallery/65105-135925-Dynami...

I could definitely see maximum sustained charging speeds only being sustained with optimal supply voltages, which minimizes converter loss (and thereby heat, which is the actual limiting factor for fast charging these days) in the phone.
by patriceckhart | 2025-09-21 10:07:07+00:00
Thank you for your comment! I think it's actually your very first one on Hacker News, or am I mistaken?

If you run into bugs and want to share them, please just open an issue in the GitRepo's, or send us a message, ... Genesis DB is already being used in production projects, and so far issues that came up have been addressed in newer builds, including performance.

On performance specifically, it would be really helpful to know more about your setup: machine, architecture, how much RAM, ... Performance issues mainly existed in the very early versions, some of which were still SQL wrappers.

On the "one-man show" point: The architecture of your software can allow you to swap out the underlying database system, meaning you're not dependent on anyone. Thanks to CloudEvents, your data remains compatible with other CloudEvents-supporting systems.

In the end, it's up to everyone to decide which software they want to use.
by manx | 2025-09-21 10:08:08+00:00
I fully agree with this approach! 5 years ago I built a prototype to execute that same concept of language covering. But instead of just using words, I used n-grams. It ii trained on subtitles to model spoken language. Combined with sqlite in the browser to get the next sentence with the most impact.

github here: https://github.com/fdietze/ravioli

prototype deployed here: https://raviolio.web.app/
by serbuvlad | 2025-09-21 10:08:33+00:00
To be precise, there's an Android API called Play Integrity that defines a device's integrity. This integrity can be STRONG, DEVICE, BASIC, and no integrity.

GrapheneOS can only pass a check for BASIC integrity. It cannot pass a check for DEVICE or STRONG integrity.

STRONG integrity is hardware-backed (think TPM) and is not spoofable. DEVICE integrity can be spoofed and there are tools to do it, if you root your device, but Graphene does not want to this for various reasons. [1]

It is up to the developer of every app to choose to use this API or not, and to lock some or all of the features of their app behind this API.

GrapheneOS actually supports hardware integrity (the STRONG variant), but in a particular way. Every OS integrity API (including eg. Secure Boot) is based on a list of master keys, that are installed with every computer. Users that want to install custom operating system that are not signed by a major company will have to enroll their own keys into the Secure Boot system.

Hardware integrity also requires root keys, and those are owned by Google. But the API is actually general enough to allow both a "Verified" (signed by a root Google key) and "SelfSigned" custom keys. GrapheneOS provides a guide [2] that describes how to adapt the hardware integrity checks to accept either a Verified key or a SelfSigned key from a list of keys from GrapheneOS.

There is no reason why app developers should not accept operating systems signed by GrapheneOS just like those signed by Google, for the simple reason that it provides the exact same anti-tamper protection.

Note that all this anti-tamper protection is, in the end, an effort to protect users from others hacking their devices and gaining access to their apps. These measures do not help companies per-se, since user commands should ALWAYS be verified server-side.

[1]: "they use fingerprinting techniques such as GPU fingerprinting and send along that data, which enables detecting and banning spoofing. It is NOT practical to pretend to pass these checks. It is only possible in the short term at a small scale. It will get banned and stop working."

[2]: https://grapheneos.org/articles/attestation-compatibility-gu...
by roenxi | 2025-09-21 10:09:31+00:00
I have no horse in the race and would usually just implement my clamp function the way the article does. However, if the clamp function clamping a number is an unpleasant surprise, I'm not going to accept that it is the fault of the clamp function. This hypothetical loop is buggy code and should be rewritten to expect clamp to clamp.

It is a special type of madness if we're supporting a reliance on implementation specific failure modes of the clamp function when someone calls it with incoherent arguments.
by lxgr | 2025-09-21 10:10:43+00:00
Wow, that does look very neat for an Apple charger. The prongs are individually foldable, right?

I wish there was something like this for Europlug chargers. Ironically, the most compact USB adapter for me so far is one with a US plug, combined with an US-to-Europlug adapter, which can be made very compact, but seem a bit risky at 220V, given that US plugs expose the prongs while connected.
by literalAardvark | 2025-09-21 10:10:46+00:00
If she's not used to sharp knives you're not doing her a favour by getting them crazy sharp.

Just get a cheap knife sharpener (not a whetstone) with good reviews and sharpen them a bit once every few weeks, it takes a minute, gets good results, and you can work with her on how sharp they should be.

Most of the time knives that are too sharp are much more dangerous than knives that are too blunt. The people worrying about your knife slipping into your finger have never actually used a knife imo. If it's dull enough to be slipping you'll get a welt before you get cut.
by ManBeardPc | 2025-09-21 10:11:34+00:00
Regarding async I kind of agree with you right now, but the new design is there and currently getting implemented. If you don’t believe it will work out or need to use async right now sure, use something else. It is not a stable language yet and very much WIP. I don’t think it’s dishonest to write about something that has a design and is worked on right now with a realistic chance of working out.
by ben30 | 2025-09-21 10:12:18+00:00
This mirrors exactly what we learned from outsourcing over the past two decades. The successful teams weren’t those with the best offshore developers - they were the ones who mastered writing unambiguous specifications.

AI coding has the same bottleneck: specification quality. The difference is that with outsourcing, poor specs meant waiting weeks for the wrong thing. With AI, poor specs mean iterating indefinitely on the wrong thing.

The irony is that AI is excellent at helping refine specifications - identifying ambiguities, expanding requirements, removing assumptions. The specification effectively IS the code, just in human language instead of syntax.

Teams that struggled with distributed development are repeating the same mistakes with AI. Those who learned specification discipline are thriving because they understand that clear requirements determine quality output, regardless of the implementer.
by dmos62 | 2025-09-21 10:13:20+00:00
Same. I didn't know how to express my passions, and I didn't know that I didn't know. I've since been (re?)discovering this. I'm still working on it.

I wish that we didn't talk down to kids to teach them, and instead approached them as equals, so that they wouldn't think that their passions and interests are below that of "grown ups". I recently learned that there's a term for that. Well sort of. It's "andragogy", which directly translates as education for adults, contrasting with "pedagogy" which is education for kids.
by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 | 2025-09-21 10:14:27+00:00
This. Based on what I have seen so far in my company so very anecdotal.

Assuming they know and/or have the capability to do it, between the cost of correcting the issue and push to use AI into everything meaning raising any issue now, politically speaking, is a direct criticism of someone major VP pet projects. I personally simply started to log stuff.

The first thing they need to do first is acknowledge there is a problem to begin with. I am so glad I am not an actual programmer though. It would drive me nuts.
by gourlaysama | 2025-09-21 10:14:35+00:00
Putting API contracts aside, the problem is also that people use a package manager as if it was a code snippet manager.

As in, "how do I check if a string starts with a shebang" should result in some code being pasted in your editor, not in a new dependency. There is obviously a complexity threshold where the dependency becomes the better choice, but wherever it is it should be way higher than this.
by tjansen | 2025-09-21 10:14:56+00:00
These days, AI can do much more than "Cranking out boilerplate and scaffolding, Automating repetitive routines". That was last year. With the right instructions, Claude Sonnet 4 can easily write over 99% of most business applications. You need to be specific in your instructions, though. Like "implement this table, add these fields, look at this and this implementation for reference, don't forget to do this and consider that." Mention examples or name algorithms and design patterns it should use. And it still doesn't always do what you want on the first attempt, and you need to correct it (which is why I prefer Claude Code over Copilot, makes it easier). But AI can write pretty much all code for a developer who knows what the code should look like. And that's the point: junior developers typically don't know this, so they won't be able to get good results.

Most of the time, the only reason for typing code manually these days is that typing instructions for the LLM is sometimes more work than doing the change yourself.
by CaptainOfCoit | 2025-09-21 10:16:34+00:00
> I'll bet $10 it hasn't! That I can't send $10 from one country to another, without paying fees that are a significant proportion of that amount

I'd take you up on that bet! I'm not sure what an envelope costs, but probably less than $0.1 if you buy more than one, then add a stamp (usually around/below $1 in most places in the world AFAIK, even for international destinations).

Please send the $10 in an envelope to Oranjerie 114, 7311 WP Apeldoorn, Netherlands whenever you can :)
by mattmanser | 2025-09-21 10:17:02+00:00
I was thinking about this last week.

I don't think this is necessarily a massive moat for senior programmers. I feel it's a not a massive jump to teach AI architecture patterns and good data modelling?

I feel that anthropic etc al. just haven't got to that training stage yet.

That then leaves you with the mental model problem. Yes, there then a large context problem, but again I was wondering if setting up an MCP that presented the AI a meaningful class map or something might help.

Essentially give the AI a mental model of the code. I personally find class maps useless as they tend to clash with my own mental model. But it might work with AI. The class map can obviously be built without AI, but then you might even get AI to go through the code function by function and annotate the class map with comments about any oddities of each function. The MCP server could even limit the size of the map, depending on what part of the code it's looking to change (working on the email sending, don't bother sending them the UI later).

I'm guessing someone's already tried it given some of the ridiculous .Claude folders I've seen[1] but I've seen no-one talking about whether it works or not yet in the discussions I follow.

[1] That I suspect are pointlessly over complicated and make CC worse not better
by walleeee | 2025-09-21 10:17:18+00:00
If your point is that competent people must direct the activities of a group in order to accomplish a complicated task, sure. That's almost always true.

> Collective intelligence of a group is bounded by the smartest person there.

I maintain this is false. Who was the smartest person in the Vienna circle? A group of competent, well aligned people is potentially a much more capable thing than the one member with the highest IQ score alone. Collective intelligence is no simple combination of the capacities of its constituents. That is what the anthill demonstrates. The capacities of individuals do limit the capacities of the whole in some way, but it is nowhere near as simple as "bounded by the smartest person". This has a lot to do with the fact that "smartest person in the room" is not a particularly meaningful title absent a precise definition of what intelligence/competence means in your context of interest.

I agree with your point that adding people to an organization does not necessarily improve its capacities. Collective intelligence is not simply additive, nor is it simply bounded by the best individual on any particular dimension
by cma | 2025-09-21 10:18:21+00:00
AI 3D conversion has gotten good enough recently for that kind of thing, just layered translucency is the main thing that doesn't work well. Some minor edge artifacts mostly worked around with dilating the foreground or generative infill.

You can convert your whole desktop/browser/youtube etc in realtime at slightly lower quality than offline conversion with a 5090 GPU.
by Hendrikto | 2025-09-21 10:18:32+00:00
> I could have written it but it would have taken me about 3x longer when all is said and done.

Really does not sound like that from your description. It sounds like coaching a noob, which is a lot of work in itself.

Wasn’t there a study that said that using LLMs makes people feel more productive while they actually are not?
by throw0101a | 2025-09-21 10:18:46+00:00
> Now with kids, I understand why "Americans love their cars" - it switched form a derogatory statement to one of understanding. There's a reason that "ban the cars" posters never mention a partner or children in their bios.

Maddy Novich, https://www.instagram.com/cargobikemomma/, for one, may disagree with you. Interviews:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PoKcQRlDGs

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDhJt26dQTs

And I'm not sure how many folks are about banning cars (completely), as opposed to designing things so that (two) cars go from being mandatory to optional.
by j1elo | 2025-09-21 10:18:47+00:00
I read you both late to say this but you were misunderstanding each other fundamentally because no one stated it clearly (until this last message) what is trusted code. You consider OneDev as trusted, the other user does not. Given the recent track record of vulnerable dependencies in FOSS (and everywhere really), I would also consider that the platform software itself must be considered as untrusted, and user guides should only request for advanced permissions as long as they also instruct to install everything in an isolated VM.
by josefrichter | 2025-09-21 10:19:45+00:00
I am fiddling with some language learning utilities myself. Can anyone recommend some relatively simple ways of tracking users' knowledge of a given language? Something like having a sorted frequency list of words/phrases/concepts, and tracking how many times each word has been seen vs used correctly vs used incorrectly, etc.?

I believe this does not have to be perfect, simplicity is preferred. But it should be just enough for an LLM to take a glimpse and estimate users' level in given language.
by jwr | 2025-09-21 10:19:52+00:00
Are you using high-power wireless charging? Does your phone heat up significantly?

As a counterpoint, I've been using low-power wireless charging (5W adapters) with my phones for the last several years (three phones at least). The battery degradation was minimal, I was able to pass my phone to my kid after 3 years of use with near perfect battery.

The key here is to prevent heat buildup.
by WesolyKubeczek | 2025-09-21 10:20:16+00:00
> the AI writes the coding route is slower, though the developer percieves it as faster.

I have this pattern while driving.

Using the main roads, when there is little to no traffic, the commute is objectively, measurably the fastest.

However, during peak hours, I find myself in traffic jams, so I divert to squiggly country roads which are both slower and longer, but at least I’m moving all the time.

The thing is, when I did have to take the main road during the peak traffic, the difference between it and squiggly country roads was like two to three minutes at worst, and not half an hour like I was afraid it would be. Sure, ten minutes crawling or standing felt like an hour.

Maybe coding with LLMs makes you think you are doing something productive the whole time, but the actual output is little different from the old way? But hey, at least it’s not like you’re twiddling your thumbs for hours, and the bossware measuring your productivity by your keyboard and mouse activity is happy!
by throw0101a | 2025-09-21 10:21:18+00:00
> Nope. It's universal. The denser the city, the more child-hostile it is.

Maddy Novich, https://www.instagram.com/cargobikemomma/, for one, may disagree with you. Interview:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PoKcQRlDGs

She has three kids IIRC.

> Just imagine getting into Tokyo subway with a stroller for 2 kids. There's a reason why Tokyo fertility rate is below 1.

Hong Kong has always been dense, and it used to have a fertility rate of ~5:

* https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/SPDYNTFRTINHKG

Further, all US states, regardless of how urban or rural they are, have fertility rates with basically the same slope:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territ...

In every industrialized, Western-ish society rates dropped during the 1970s, regardless of initial or final density.
by tao97 | 2025-09-21 10:22:18+00:00
Thanks for sharing!

I've been working on my own knowledge management app to help small businesses with high part-time and employee turnover to manage FAQs and centralize local expertise. I think the 3-pane with the chat in the middle is a really clean way of making a whole library knowledge repository easily accessible, especially for someone wanting to avoid minimize clicks or as you say 'tab-overwhelm'.
by general1465 | 2025-09-21 10:22:57+00:00
For private universities in Europe it is true. For public (state owned) universities much less so. This is simply because public university does not look on student like on a customer who put some good money on the table to get the final paper. While private universities do.

This is also a reason why in Europe when you have a diploma from private university, nobody really takes that seriously and looks at you like you would be showing him diploma from University of McDonalds.
by notarobot123 | 2025-09-21 10:23:44+00:00
I am not the biggest fan of LLMs but I have to admit that, as long as you understand what the technology is and how it works, it is a very powerful tool.

I think the mixed reports on utility have a lot to do with the very different ways the tool is used and how much 'magic' the end-user expects versus how much the end-user expects to guide the tool to do the work.

To get the best out of it, you do have to provide significant amount of scaffolding (though it can help with that too). If you're just pointing it at a codebase and expecting it to figure it out, you're going to have mixed results at best. If you guide it well, it can save a significant amount of manual effort and time.
by imiric | 2025-09-21 10:24:08+00:00
"AI" tools accomplish one thing: output code given natural language input. That's it.

Whether the generated code meets specific quality or security standards, or whether it accomplishes what the user wanted to begin with, depends on the quality of the tool itself, of course, but ultimately on the user and environment.

They're not guaranteed to make anyone "stronger". The amount of variables involved in this is simply too large to make a definitive claim, which is why we see so much debate about the value of these tools, and why benchmarks are pretty much worthless. Even when the same user uses the same model with the same prompts and settings, they can get wildly different results.

What these tools indirectly do is raise the minimum skill level required to produce software. People who never programmed before can find them empowering, not caring about the quality of the end result, as long as it does what they want. Junior programmers can benefit from being able to generate a lot of code quickly, but struggle to maintain the quality standards expected by their team and company. Experienced programmers can find them useful for certain tasks, but frustrating and a waste of time for anything sophisticated. All these viewpoints, and countless others, can be correct.