MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by hnlmorg | 2025-09-06 14:57:02+00:00
You’re arguing a lot but ignoring what other people are saying. It’s pretty clear from your other comments that you have distain for “software jockies”, but that doesn’t mean that we are idiots who don’t understand how hardware works.

Case in point: even if you took the lenses out, they’d still weigh more than a pare of sunglasses. You even admitted that yourself, but then you quickly brushed over that point.

So does it really matter that lenses are also heavy when we are talking specifically about the battery?

I also happen to know a thing or two about mobile computing hardware and there’s a bunch of stuff you’ve also neglected to mention that would add weight. But ultimately the battery alone is a compelling enough argument.

Let’s also remember that I wasn’t just talking about weight but bulk too. Even if you could get the weight down so it’s comparable to a pare of glasses (you couldn’t, but let’s assume for the moment that you do manage to break the laws of physics), it’s still going to be bulkier than a pair of glasses.

So even if you were right that the lenses were the only thing that matter about weight (which you’re not), it’s still just a moot point.

> I'm not going into the second half of this response. I am sorry but I don't think it's worth anyone's time if I explained why DP Alt don't count as USB and all that stuffs.

I’m not an idiot. I’m well aware that Xreal are using DP, and I’ve already pointed out before.

My point is all I need to do as an end user is plug in a USB-C cable and everything “just works”. The underlying protocol is largely irrelevant. It’s like saying “you’re not using wireless, you’re using 802.11ac…” literally zero consumers give a shit because it’s completely irrelevant to the UX of the device.
by michaelt | 2025-09-06 14:57:53+00:00
> They're getting paid $6 an hour. [...] Why write software to micromanage minimum wage employees?

Ironically, the less a job pays, the harsher and more demanding the bosses tend to be.

Earning six figures as a software developer, working from home, and you have to take a week off sick? No problem, take as long as you like, hope you feel better soon.

Earning minimum wage at a call centre? Missing a shift without 48 hours advance notice is an automatic disciplinary. No, we don't pay sick leave for people on a disciplinary (which is all of them). Make sure you get a doctor's note, or you're fired.
by weitendorf | 2025-09-06 14:58:20+00:00
I think humans are hard-wired to distrust and dislike certain forms of self-promotion because of the risk of false signalling. In small tribes of apes everybody knows everyone so trumpeting one’s accomplishments is basically trying to change people’s perception of something without changing the actual underlying signal.

The higher status strategy almost always ends up being countersignaling, where “trying too hard” is basically the opposite of counter signaling. The problem (this is something I am actively learning in my work) is that the way society is set up right now requires you to participate in the “attention economy” and build your brand/reputation in a group far larger than an ape-sized tribe. Because you’re not established in those circles a priori you have to start with signaling instead of counter signaling.

Basically, you have to have a PR team and win the hearts and minds of The Atlantic and Forbes before you can make a public spectacle of your ketamine habits. If you skip straight to that you’re just an insecure loser with a drug problem. But after everybody knows you and what you’ve done then you can establish yourself as a tortured artist, which is socially “better” than being just a regular artist.
by lolc | 2025-09-06 14:58:44+00:00
Betting on progress has worked for Musk so far. Will we, in ten years, say that of course somebody just had to implement autonomous robots properly? Like reusable rockets or electric cars now? The only exposure I have to autonomous robots is tiny vacuums.

So what is Tesla betting on? Did I get that right, an electric butler? Wouldn't we want the tech invisible, the automation just being part of the environment? That is the trajectory we're on. Humanoid bots seems like a diversion. These toys will just be in the way all the time.

Well ok I can see demand for sexbots.
by tombert | 2025-09-06 14:58:50+00:00
This is precisely my point. For a lot of Java programmers anything that they didn’t learn in university is “bad”, as far as I can tell, purely because they don’t want to actually learn new things.

They’ll give half-hearted justifications that are usually reductive or just flat out lies [1], but ultimately it seems to boil down to new=bad.

The amount of terrible code I have had to debug because Java programmers haven’t figured out you can use queues is upsetting, because all they learned in university is how to use `synchronized` wrong.

[1] I have learned that nearly every time someone says their disgusting code is “faster”, even when they claimed they tested it, it is almost universally untrue when I write a microbenchmark to check it.
by eloisant | 2025-09-06 14:58:54+00:00
Of course if you don't have a plug at home, and have to do all your charging at a station, buying an EV now is not a great idea.

If you do have a plug for charging, which you could have even if you live in an appartment (personal parking spot with a plug at your residence), then you're trading a small inconvenience for another.

Yes during your occasional long trip you'll have to spend 20 minutes charging instead of 5 minutes filling your tank, but when you're around your home doing short trips (most of the time for most people), you no longer have to do the occasional visits to the gas station. You just plug your car at home and be done with it.
by ddavis | 2025-09-06 14:59:24+00:00
I have a similar experience. I was a devoted PhD student working long hours taking on a lot of responsibility. It burned me out, hurting my productivity. I have mixed feelings about it; I love the friends I made and the things I learned, but I don’t think I should have had to suffer what I suffered. Simultaneously I’m somewhat glad I experienced it then, because now I work in tech and I’ll _never_ work outside of business hours (I’ll hack on personal projects I consider fun if I feel like it). And I’m more productive than my colleagues that do. There’s something mysterious about the contemporary PhD, not all good and not all bad.
by bee_rider | 2025-09-06 15:00:23+00:00
Wonder how far along we’d be on the path to self driving without any hype cycles…

I suspect stuff like lane following assist and adaptive cruise control

1) will ultimately provide the path to self driving eventually

2) wasn’t particularly helped by the hype cycle

1 is impossible to say at his point, for 2 I guess somebody who works in the field can come along and correct me.
by malshe | 2025-09-06 15:00:37+00:00
I didn't show up on the first Saturday when I started my Ph.D. program. Next Monday, a professor from _another_ department stopped by my desk to tell me that assistant professors and Ph.D. students are expected to be there at least six days a week. Then he gave examples of a few professors who were there even on Sundays despite being tenured.

Tbh, I was so poorly paid that going to the university on Saturdays wasn't so bad as they had better air conditioning and heating compared to my apartment!
by southernplaces7 | 2025-09-06 15:00:39+00:00
"A North Korean boat appeared out of the dark. Flashlights from the bow swept over the water. Fearing that they had been spotted, the SEALs opened fire. Within seconds, everyone on the North Korean boat was dead."

Seeing as how this was right where this entire mission turned into a lethal clusterfuck, you'd think rigorously trained, carefully coordinated and disciplined SEALs would just try the incredibly sophisticated tactic of.... just, you know, holding their fire a few minutes to first see if the boat knew about them or had anything to do with their mission. They must have known that random people can appear for reasons of their own, without necessarily being a sign of discovery, and then just wait and see if they can resume ops soon after the intruder leaves.

Even your average career burglar knows better than to panic at the first sight of an unforeseen individual arriving at some scene they're working for a theft.
by jay-baleine | 2025-09-06 15:00:40+00:00
Your four points are correct:

1. Symbol mapping: Yes - ƒ → def, ∀ → for, λ → lambda, π → print, etc. Custom mappings are configurable.

2. Multi-layer caching: Confirmed - source content cache, transpiled Python cache, module import specs, and optimized bytecode with batch writes.

3. PhiRust acceleration: Clarification - it's a Rust-based transpiler that handles the symbol-to-Python conversion for performance, not converting Python to Rust. When files exceed 300KB, the system delegates transpilation to the Rust binary instead of using Python regex processing.

4. HTTP API: Yes - provides endpoints for transpilation, symbol mapping queries, and engine info to enable IDE integration.

The technical decision to use string replacement over AST manipulation came down to measured performance differences.

The benchmarks show 3,000,000+ chars/sec throughput on extreme stress tests and 1,200,000+ chars/sec on typical workloads. Where AST parsing, transformation, and regeneration introduces overhead that makes real-time symbol conversion impractical for large codebases.

The string replacement preserves exact formatting, comments, and whitespace while maintaining compatibility with any Python syntax. Including future language features that AST parsers might not support yet. Each symbol maps directly to its Python equivalent without intermediate representations that can introduce transformation errors.

The cache system includes integrity validation to detect corrupted cache entries and automatic cleanup of temporary files. Cache invalidation occurs when source files change, preventing stale transpilation results. Batch write operations with atomic file replacement ensure cache consistency under concurrent access.

The runtime serves cognitive improvements for domain-specific development. Mathematical algorithms become more readable when written with actual mathematical notation rather than verbose keywords. It can help in game development, where certain functions can benefit from different naming (eg.: def → skill, def → special, def → equipment).

The gradual adoption path matters for production environments. Teams can introduce custom syntax incrementally without rewriting existing codebases since the transpiled output remains standard Python. The multi-layer caching system ensures that symbol conversion overhead doesn't impact execution performance.

Domain-specific languages for mathematics, finance, education, or any field where visual clarity improves comprehension. The system maintains full Python compatibility while enabling cognitive improvements through customizable syntax.
by analognoise | 2025-09-06 15:00:53+00:00
What?

When America was strongest, we had a large and increasing middle class, and the top marginal tax rate was above 70% - it was in the 90s.

We don’t need “the elite” - they don’t actually “create jobs”, and the “engine of the economy” is just a convenient vehicle for the rich (and private equity) to ruin the middle class further - it was never about “efficient markets”.

If anything what we’ve seen over the last 40 years is that we need better systems.
by stared | 2025-09-06 15:00:54+00:00
Note sure if it is the route I recommend. Starting with classical mechanics takes more background that needed, is likely to be more confusing that needed and to build very wrong intuitions and conceptions.

I really suggest starting with quantum itself, before spin-1/2 systems are easier to start, and photons (in my opinion), even easier (vide Sec. 2 in https://doi.org/10.1117/1.OE.61.8.081809).

So, I recommend starting from "Quantum Mechanics Theoretical Minimum" by Leonard Susskind and Art Friedman, "Six Quantum Pieces: A First Course in Quantum Physics" by Valerio Scarani or "Introduction to Quantum Information Science" by Artur Ekert (https://github.com/thosgood/qubit.guide). To dive deeper, I recommend " Lectures on Quantum Mechanics" by Berthold-Georg Englert.
by aetherson | 2025-09-06 15:01:05+00:00
If you really want me to, sure. Here's the expansion:

You discovered that there are certain amounts of judgment calls and subjectivity in the legal system, and then you seemed to get really excited, stop thinking, and start patting yourself on the back for your incredible insight. This whole, "Boom, sometimes people use human judgment legal cases, bet you NEVER THOUGHT OF THAT you STUPID TECH PERSON" is the world's most banal insight and the fact that you seem to think it's the entire analysis of the situation suggests that you're a stupid person.

Go find a lawyer (ie, not a tech person), and try this out on them.

Of course there is an element of subjectivity in every law and every case. But there is also a serious and deliberate attempt by the entire apparatus of the legal system to in fact systematize the way that the legal code is applied to human behavior. Yes, there are limits both to how far that systematization can go based on the complexity of real life and how far people want to let it go. But it's a matter of degree, and your whole line about how judges and juries just think that they can and should punish any behavior they think is "bad" without reference to a systemic law is stupid and incorrect.

Sometimes of course laws are written to be extremely vague and judgment based. Those laws have objectively bad outcomes, and are usually either quietly dustbinned, reformed, or the legal system attempts to systematize them, creating judicial doctrines that apply actual rules to how they work. (And, because again it seems like I'm talking to a very naive person, I'll caveat that of course such systems do not remove all ambiguity -- they merely manage it). And this is because the lawyers and judges that you want to imagine as agreeing with you recognize that a system in which you go in front of a judge and he just decides if you're "bad" is a terrible system.

And now I predict that you're going to answer this with some kind of big "nuh-uh, you're dumb." Here's what I suggest instead: I'm done with this thread. If you actually want to improve your understanding of the world instead of trying to shore up your ego, go and find someone in the legal world and ask them what they think of your takes here.
by throiijowo9889 | 2025-09-06 15:01:10+00:00
This obsession with the time put-in (either way) is quite silly to be honest. It's a notion inherited from the blue-collar industrial factory labor. If you're working on really hard problems there's no way you're putting in 12 hour stretches. Your diet takes a hit, your sanity takes a hit and so does everything else.

Japan tried this non-sense for a while (colleagues told they used to stay on till 11am !) only to completely fail at all three software revolutions (web/smartphone/ai). China obv. has had much better success, but I don't think this is sustainable. The central-banks in these countries operate in the war-economy mode which can heat things up a lot and work very well, but I think social-burnout effects are quite real.
by cryptonector | 2025-09-06 15:01:14+00:00
Or by "none exist right now nearby". If there are technological aliens 3 bly away and 3 bya, we won't likely discover their signals. If there are technological aliens 10 ly and 10 ya then we're extremely likely to pick up their signals (if they emit any), but they're not likely to come here -- not anymore than we are to go there. The Fermi paradox is most easily understood as "the probability of two concurrent technological species in different but nearby star systems is vanishingly small".

For all we know there have been thousands of technological species in our galaxy, but never two at roughly the same time and roughly close together, and never will be.
by tombert | 2025-09-06 15:01:31+00:00
Your example isn’t good though; var is only for local variables, which should be perfectly allowed to use implementation-specific methods.

For argument types you don’t have var, so methods that take in a map can stay abstract and you can still pass in the implementation-specific version into those without casting it to the interface.

ETA:

I guess I am trying to say that if you want to be abstract, they should be at the argument or properties level. Local variables should be used locally. I agree that generally speaking you should try and prefer using Map for anything shared across different parts of code but I am not convinced it’s bad to have var be implementation-specific; if your method is big enough to where swapping out implementations like this will take a lot of time, your method is probably too big anyway.
by reaperducer | 2025-09-06 15:01:45+00:00
I don't understand this expectation that employees work more, and stigma if you go home on time, yet we don't have a corresponding stigma for when the amount of money that reaches my account is "only" what we agreed my salary would be.

Since I'm (mostly) work-from-home, my wifi router is configured to firewall my work devices outside of working hours.

This is frustrating for the IT department because it likes to push software updates overnight, but tough noogies.

The company pays for 30% of my internet connection, so it only gets to use my internet connection 30% of the day.
by MacroStan | 2025-09-06 15:01:57+00:00
Ok, I take back some of this. Its survived a macos update once. I got all 4 claude windows and their sessions back. However, the next time, it reopened 4 panes but I lost all Claude sessions.

I checked out the demo and it looks great. I am guessing it supports 4 concurrent claude sessions? I cannot find this in docs
by krinchan | 2025-09-06 15:02:11+00:00
As someone who started out a GenAI skeptic, I’ve found the truth is in the middle.

I write a TON of one off scripts now at work. For instance, if I fight with a Splunk query for more than five minutes, I’ll just export the entire time frame in question and have GHCP (work mandates we use only GHCP) spit out a Python script that gets me what I want.

I use it with our internal MCP tools to review pull requests. It surfaces questions I didn’t think to ask about half the time.

I don’t know that it makes me more productive, but it definitely makes me more attentive. It works great for brainstorming design ideas.

The code generation isn’t entirely slop either. For the vast majority of corporate devs below Principal, it’s better than what they write and its basic CRUD code. So that’s where all the hyper productive magical claims come from. I spend most of my days lately bailing these folks out of a dead end fox hole GHCP led them into.

Unfortunately, it’s very much a huge time sink in another way. I’ve seen a pretty linear growth in M365 Copilot surfacing 5 year old word documents to managers resulting in big emails of outdated GenAI slop that would be best summarized as “I have no clue what I’m talking about and I’m going to make a terrible technical decision that we already decided against.”
by hodgehog11 | 2025-09-06 15:02:21+00:00
If an LLM outputs a statement, that is by definition either true or false, then we can know whether it is true or false. Whether the LLM "knows" is irrelevant. The OpenAI definition is useful because it implies hallucination is something that can be logically avoided.

> I’m assuming the purpose of this post is to try and reframe the discussion

It's to establish a meaningful and practical definition of "hallucinate" to actually make some progress. If everything is a hallucination as the other comments seem to suggest, then the term is a tautology and is of no use to us.
by t0mk | 2025-09-06 15:02:25+00:00
Yes! I really like the idea of podman, but after 4 hours trying to make it work on 24.04, I reverted to Docker and compose.

There is some dissonance in presenting Podman as a plug-in replacement for Docker, and making it so damn hard to install on (some category's) most popular contemporary LTS Linux distro.
by gcanyon | 2025-09-06 15:02:29+00:00
Yeah, I know he said this. Setting aside the two years aspect, which obviously didn't pan out/was a lie if we're being harsh, I don't see this language as incompatible with the current change -- they're adding "supervised" to the description. He didn't say you'd be able to go to sleep in the back seat. "able to" is not the same as "guaranteed to." Believe me, I'm not a fan, but I just don't see this language as that big of a shift.
by HL33tibCe7 | 2025-09-06 15:02:30+00:00
Being a founder is a completely different situation which the article is explicitly not talking about.

Although, frankly, even as a founder, 100-hour 7-day weeks aren’t right for the vast majority of people. Clearly it worked for you, which is great, but 99% of people do not have that level of energy, and furthermore are mentally unable to withstand the sacrifices such a schedule imposes on other aspects of life.
by Aurornis | 2025-09-06 15:02:43+00:00
> What happens when the companies band together to compress wages? Like what happened with the high-tech employee antitrust litigation.

What happened with that litigation is it got shut down and those companies pay some of the highest compensation now.

One of the few jobs you can get that pays that much compensation with fewer educational requirements and better hours than alternatives in that compensation range (surgeon, specialist doctors, lawyers at demanding firms)

I don’t think that’s a great example for your point since by comparison FAANG employees have some of the best pay you can find in an attainable job for someone with a 4 year degree and the demands are lower than many of the similarly paid jobs that require a lot more education.
by rpdillon | 2025-09-06 15:02:57+00:00
The laws are all being passed and ZKP is nothing more than a proof of concept. The laws are not being passed in good faith, and so I think it's a mistake to think that ZKP will ever be used. The only two systems I've heard of that have actually been deployed to comply with these laws are either face scanning or ID scanning. Neither one is acceptable, but the legislation is passing anyway.
by TrackerFF | 2025-09-06 15:03:05+00:00
I've noticed the same here in Europe. Founders are really pushing the "Everyone should be doing 996 minimum", arguing that anything else is simply laziness, and that it is impossible to build a billion dollar company any other way.

But, of course, like many here have noted...there's billion dollar difference in incentives between a founder, and even the early members. For a "rank and file" engineer, you're sacrificing your life to make someone else filthy rich. And if lucky, you'll be left with a payday that's not too different from a regular industry job...
by saghm | 2025-09-06 15:03:14+00:00
This is a a super helpful way of putting it. I've tried to explain to my less technical friends and relatives that from the standpoint of an LLM, there's no concept of "truth", and that all it basically just comes up with the shape of what a response should look like and then fills in the blanks with pretty much anything it wants. My success in getting the point across has been mixed, so I'll need to try out this much more concise way of putting it next time!
by skybrian | 2025-09-06 15:03:18+00:00
I don’t think it’s inherently ill-defined, since the context can tell you whether fiction is being requested or not. For an AI chatbot, the default shouldn’t be fiction.

What is true is that during pretraining, the model doesn’t know enough to determine this or to distinguish between what it knows and what it’s making up. This is a higher-level distinction that emerges later, if at all.

The recent research discovering an “evil vector” is an example of a higher-level distinction.