MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by goku12 | 2025-09-28 14:08:19+00:00
According to Wikipedia, UMN only announced that they would charge for their implementation of Gopher. They said nothing about the protocol and its competing implementations. But this ambiguity made people a bit apprehensive and this proved costly for Gopher at a time when WWW was actively competing with them. TBL and CERN capitalized on this by unamiguously opening the standard, while the Mosaic browser became competitive with Gopher implementations.
by konmok | 2025-09-28 14:08:23+00:00
As they say, every exponential is a sigmoid in disguise. I think the exponential phase of growth for LLM architectures is drawing to a close, and fundamentally new architectures will be necessary for meaningful advances.

I'm also not convinced by the graphs in this article. OpenAI is notoriously deceptive with their graphs, and as Gary Marcus has already noted, that METR study comes with a lot of caveats: [https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/the-latest-ai-scaling-grap...]
by mothballed | 2025-09-28 14:08:46+00:00
>, not be because the law is _unenforced_

False, they say exactly that

...As a result, Plaintiffs contend they reasonably fear that Defendants will continue to enforce the Federal Knife Ban against them.”10 The evidence presented by Defendants show there are only records of four enforcement actions in the county under the Act since 2004 and it has not been enforced since Plaintiffs do not counter this factual assertion. Accordingly, the threat of prosecution under Section 1242 “is therefore a mere hypothetical dispute lacking the concreteness and imminence required by Article III. ...it has not been enforced since at least 2004—the farthest back that systematic data is available.26 As a result, Plaintiffs plainly lack standing when they fail to provide evidence that the statutory provision has ever been enforced against them or regularly enforced against others.

This is my last transmission -- both of you are in a loop denying the documents say the very things I've quoted ( other commenter just keeps sea lioning the 10th amendment in a loop then doesnt understand the word 'power' or why POTUS is part of the 'United States' because it doesnt explicitly say that in that sentence lmao). Good luck, you now have the facts, our nation will need it.
by solarkraft | 2025-09-28 14:08:48+00:00
It's an optimized backend for running LLMs, much like CoreML on macOS, which has been received very positively due to the acceleration it enables (ollama/llama.cpp use it).

Since this uses ONNX you probably won't be able to use ollama directly with it, but conceptually you could use an app like it to run your models in a more optimized way.
by jsnell | 2025-09-28 14:09:13+00:00
The key problem is that his economic analysis is absolute trash. I used to think he was just totally incompetent at it, but given the bias in the errors, it is pretty clearly intentional deception. But it's often pretty hard to address that, because every article he writes is a 10k word gish gallop. I've tried debunking key points a few times in HN comments for just one of the intentional mistakes he makes, and people complain about the reply being too long.
by Sesse__ | 2025-09-28 14:09:19+00:00
Seemingly, their way of thinking goes roughly like this:

If I have 10 billion rows in an SQL database, with a UNIQUE index, and do SELECT * FROM t1 WHERE pk=<number>, then I have “processed” 10 billion rows.

If I do 10k of these queries per second, I have processed 100T rows per second.
by sevensor | 2025-09-28 14:09:34+00:00
I don’t know anything about your jit compiler, but generally the value I get from type annotations has nothing to do with what they do at runtime. People get so confused about Python’s type annotations because they resemble type declarations in languages like C++ or Java. For the latter, types tell the compiler how to look up fields on, and methods that apply to, an object. Python is fine without that.

Python’s types are machine-checkable constraints on the behavior of your code.. Failing the type checker isn’t fatal, it just means you couldn’t express what you were doing in terms it could understand. Although this might mean you need to reconsider your decisions, it could just as well mean you’re doing something perfectly legitimate and the type checker doesn’t understand it. Poke a hole in the type checker using Any and go on with your day. To your example, there are several ways described in comments by me and others to write a succinct annotation, and this will catch cases where somebody tries to use a dict keyed with strings or something.

Anyway, you don’t have to burn a lot of mental energy on them, they cost next to nothing at runtime, they help document your function signatures, and they help flag inconsistent assumptions in your codebase even if they’re not airtight. What’s not to like?
by runlaszlorun | 2025-09-28 14:11:35+00:00
> (I do believe that climate change worries are also the root of the resurgence of authoritarianism, but that's a story for another time. Just in short the key hypothesis: adopting a hate ideology is just another type of looking away from the problem that has no simple convenient answers)

Oh that's an interesting insight. I'd be up to hear more if you're up for sharing...
by dragontamer | 2025-09-28 14:11:48+00:00
I'm about 9 Kyu, at least back when I was practicing and reading every day.

I'd say that at 9 Kyu level, my main gains were playing and abusing Tenuki. Refusing to respond to the opponent's (weak) early game moves and instead playing significantly stronger elsewhere on the board.

If the opponent were stronger than me, I'd pay attention when they ignored my moves. Its actually very difficult IMO to play sente every time as a double-digit kyu (or even high-single digit kyu). Recognizing that the last move wasn't forcing and that playing elsewhere is a surprising way to get ahead.

Vs stronger opponents who can tell when the board is sente, gote, appropriate to Tenuki, and is able to count up Ko threats... well yeah. I lose. But there's significant skill in this part of the game and NOTHING in this set of tutorials that teaches it.
by gmuslera | 2025-09-28 14:11:57+00:00
Evolution is multidimensional, if for improving one trait you diminish another that may for our survival some compromise will be reached. Not by design, but natural selection, at the end matters that the genes manage to survive. If living more implies that against food scarcity you get no surviving children that is the end of the line for the genes that enabled that extra lifespan.

And in evolutionary terms, having agriculture, civilization, technology and a global culture that may support those traits is the exception not the rule.
by hnlmorg | 2025-09-28 14:12:00+00:00
> Types are expensive and dont tend to pay off on spikey/experimental/MVP code, most of which gets thrown away.

I find I’ve spent so much time writing with typed code that I now find it harder to write POC code in dynamic languages because I use types to help reason about how I want to architect something.

Eg “this function should calculate x and return”, well if you already know what you want the function to do then you know what types you want. And if you don’t know what types you want then you haven’t actually decided what that function should do ahead of building it.

Now you might say “the point of experimental code is to figure out what you want functions to do”. But even if you’re writing an MVP, you should know what that each function should do by the time you’ve finished writing it. Because if you don’t know who to build a function then how do you even know that the runtime will execute it correctly?
by TeMPOraL | 2025-09-28 14:12:15+00:00
In context, I think this sentence is pretty nicely written, and sounds like something I'd expect of a human.

It's basically saying: LLMs are not structured like databases, their knowledge is not localized. In a database, a fact lives in a specific place; cut that out, lose the fact. In an LLM, every thing the model learned in training is smeared across the entire network; cut out a small piece, and not much is lost.

As a crude analogy, think of a time vs. frequency domain representation of a signal, like a sound or an image. The latter case is particularly illustrative (!). Take a raster image, pick a pixel. Where is the data (color) of that pixel located in the Fourier transform of the image? A little bit in every single pixel of the transformed image. Conversely, pick a block of pixels in the Fourier transform, blank them out, and transform back to "normal" image - you'll see entire image got blurred or sharpened, depending on which frequencies you just erased.

So in terms of data locality, a database is to an LLM kinda what an image is to its Fourier transform.

(Of course, the other thing the sentence is trying to communicate is, LLMs are not (a different representation of) databases - they don't learn facts, they learn patterns, which encode meanings.)
by frozenseven | 2025-09-28 14:13:01+00:00
When confronted with an actual analysis from a technical person, he immediately resorts to insults and hand-waving: https://old.reddit.com/r/BetterOffline/comments/1n2c12q/arti...

Not unlike his blog posts and podcasts. Spiteful insult-laden rants (he even admits to this on occasion). If you're looking for a financial analysis on AI, I'd literally look anywhere else.
by bryanlarsen | 2025-09-28 14:13:29+00:00
Which doesn't make any sense, because the article also claims that the chip was soldered in place. Solder generally only works between two pieces of metal, making an electrical connection.

So either the chip was glued in place and not soldered or it was soldered and electrical connections were made. Either way, the article is wrong.

Standard operating procedure for a board with a messed up footprint is to glue the chip into place upside down, and then use patch wires to make the correct connections. Obviously you fix this for production boards, but I have personally seen this done for prototype boards.

Training personnel on prototype boards is also very common. It's also very common to do training on non-working boards.
by sipjca | 2025-09-28 14:13:36+00:00
To be fair on the other side there is a fair lack of specific ML inference libraries in Rust, and this project is pushing some of that forward with Parakeet at the very least. The Rust library `transcribe-rs` came from it and hopefully will support more models in the future.

While certainly it's not an ML project in the sense of I am not training models, the inference stack is just as important. The fact is the application does do inference using ONNX and Whisper.cpp.
by alephnerd | 2025-09-28 14:13:56+00:00
That's the point.

Hedging and multipolar tactical relations is by definition a post-America relationship, and is a result of the relative (not absolute) decline in American power.

America was able to be the sole hyperpower in the 1990s and 2000s because we were the largest economy in PPP by far in 2000 [0] with 20% of global GDP PPP and with no near competitor. In 2025, we are now at 14% of global GDP PPP [1] and outcompeted by China. And in the 2030s, the US's share of GDP PPP will converge with India's [2]

Mind you, GDP and especially GDP PPP is basically a function of production based on relative value, and China+India are seeing this growth due to a large population size along with generational reforms from the 1970s-1980s and 1990s-2000s respectively finally starting to pay off, but there is no way to deny that middle powers can now make their own economic and defense alliances independent of the "West" or "China", and will increasingly make their own poles.

For example, the fact that the newly constructed Dangote Refinery - Africa's largest refinery, and 6th largest in the world and larger than any refinery owned or operated by an American company - is built and operated by an Indian SOE [3] highlights how an entire region (West Africa) that has historically been dependent on American refining capacity from Chevron despite being a major oil producer is now working with a non-western country to remove that reliance. A Nigeria+India story, a Cambodia+China story, a Angola+Brazil story, a Vietnam+Russia story, and others are developing out of relative convergence of interests.

This is not a stable world. This means that regional conflicts can cause contagion in other conflicts in the world.

For example, the Russia-Ukraine War now pulling the South Korea, North Korea, and Japan into the conflict. Or the Thailand-Cambodia conflict, where neither the US nor China knew how to respond because it would alienate either Thailand or Cambodia to align with either the US or China.

[0] - https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPSH@WEO/OEMDC/ADVE...

[1] - https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPSH@WEO/OEMDC/ADVE...

[2] - https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPSH@WEO/OEMDC/ADVE...

[3] - https://engineersindia.com/dangote-refinery-and-petrochemica...
by matthewdgreen | 2025-09-28 14:14:42+00:00
I think you misunderstand how US drug purchases work. There is very little competitive market whatsoever anywhere in the prescription med system; there are simply "brands" and "patented meds" and "generics" plus various underserved niches where pharma companies can extract high prices from desperate patients (see e.g., Martin Shkreli and Daraprim.)

With respect to generics, there's little incentive to make a better formulation. If patients have insurance, they'll get whatever "bioequivalent" generic is available from the pharmacy if it matches the insurance provider's formulary price requirements. That manufacturer can change any time, since by law they're all deemed equivalent. It's like buying generic store-brand ibuprofen: you have no idea which factory is actually making the stuff, and it can change from package to package.

There's also very little benefit to having a "brand name" generic that has better bioavailability since you really can't charge more for it: insurance companies and pharmacies will just switch to another generic brand with lower costs. Trying to argue better bioavailability could also involve admitting that your existing bioequivalence studies are bunk, which would require an expensive new certification process. Plus, even in a functioning and truly competitive market, trying to experiment with different formulations to figure out which "gets better results" is a dangerous game for individuals; it's not like buying different Kleenex and deciding which holds together better. You have to do a lot of risky trial and error and get frequent blood tests.

So basically we have a system that ensures a completely non-functioning non-competitive market, and then we throw in an exclusive term where new medication can be sold at any price and we expect market forces to somehow constrain manufacturers. But the market forces are very weak and limited here. When we clearly end up paying dozens of times more than other countries (even for unpatented medicine) people raise the R&D issue to justify the costs. But that's sort of like saying "hey, the Mafia spends a lot on churches, so their extractive business model is fine." If you really want churches (or R&D) we should find a more rational way to come up with those funds.

PS this paper is a good (old) study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8026413/
by throw0101c | 2025-09-28 14:15:00+00:00
Is the "mad as hell" an allusion to the movie Network?

> In one impassioned diatribe, Beale galvanizes the nation, persuading viewers to shout, "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!" from their windows. He is soon hosting a new program called The Howard Beale Show, top-billed as "the mad prophet of the airwaves".

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_(1976_film)

Scene:

> It's like everything everywhere is going crazy, so we don't go out any more. We sit in the house, and slowly the world we're living in is getting smaller, and all we say is, "Please, at least leave us alone in our living rooms. Let me have my toaster and my TV and my steel-belted radials, and I won't say anything. Just leave us alone."

> Well, I'm not going to leave you alone.

> I want you to get mad!

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

* Transcript: https://www.americanrhetoric.com/MovieSpeeches/moviespeechne...
by softwaredoug | 2025-09-28 14:15:15+00:00
It feels like in the US we need collective, civic organizations independent of the Federal government. I would like to see the Democratic party and other left-leaning / governance institutions / activists on specific issues work to make priorities resilient of the government. Especially since working on many of these issues is popular and not particularly partisan. And many people in upper-middle class would rather donate/work on these causes rather than a private company squeezing 1% more profit.
by cs702 | 2025-09-28 14:15:56+00:00
Yes. It's true that we don't know, with any certainty, (1) whether we are hitting limits to growth intrinsic to current hardware and software, (2) whether we will need new hardware or software breakthroughs to continue improving models, and (3) what the timing of any necessary breakthroughs, because innovation doesn't happen on a predictable schedule. There are unknown unknowns.[a]

However, there's no doubt that at a global scale, we're sure trying to maintain current rates of improvement in AI. I mean, the scale and breadth of global investment dedicated to improving AI, presently, is truly unprecedented. Whether all this investment is driven by FOMO or by foresight, is irrelevant. The underlying assumption in all cases is the same: We will figure out, somehow, how to overcome all known and unknown challenges along the way. I have no idea what the odds of success may be, but they're not zero. We sure live in interesting times!

---

[a] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_are_unknown_unknowns
by burkaman | 2025-09-28 14:16:41+00:00
> Can somebody explain the psychology behind these beliefs?

They commonly arise when someone is getting paid by the coal company. Just boring human greed, not stupidity or insanity.

> Where does this 'clean coal' concept come from?

Here's a good overview of the marketing history behind the term: https://www.gem.wiki/Clean_Coal_Marketing_Campaign
by sowbug | 2025-09-28 14:16:54+00:00
I can imagine future solar panels sending spec data to the MPPT using Power Line Communication (PLC), allowing the system to shut itself down gracefully rather than dying. Rapid-shutdown systems already send keepalives using PLC today.

But then it goes all Black Mirror, with manufacturers restricting solar-panel operation to approved devices only, and UIDs being used to enhance shareholder value through recurring subscription revenue.
by entee | 2025-09-28 14:16:55+00:00
A lot of this post relies on the recent open ai result they call GDPval (link below). They note some limitations (lack of iteration in the tasks and others) which are key complaints and possibly fundamental limitations of current models.

But more interesting is the 50% win rate stat that represents expert human performance in the paper.

That seems absurdly low, most employees don’t have a 50% success rate on self contained tasks that take ~1 day of work. That means at least one of a few things could be true:

1. The tasks aren’t defined in a way that makes real world sense

2. The tasks require iteration, which wasn’t tested, for real world success (as many tasks do)

I think while interesting and a very worthy research avenue, this paper is only the first in a still early area of understanding how AI will affect with the real world, and it’s hard to project well from this one paper.

https://cdn.openai.com/pdf/d5eb7428-c4e9-4a33-bd86-86dd4bcf1...
by knome | 2025-09-28 14:16:57+00:00
>why not a protocol type

it was a sin that python's type system was initially released as a nominal type system. they should have been the target from day one.

being unable to just say "this takes anything that you can call .hello() and .world() on" was ridiculous, as that was part of the ethos of the dynamically typed python ecosystem. typechecking was generally frowned upon, with the idea that you should accept anything that fit the shape the receiving code required. it allowed you to trivially create resource wrappers and change behaviors by providing alternate objects to existing mechanisms. if you wanted to provide a fake file that read from memory instead of an actual file, it was simple and correct.

the lack of protocols made hell of these patterns for years.
by dragontamer | 2025-09-28 14:17:00+00:00
> Anyway I felt that my progress up to 5k was largely driven by a better understanding of principles of plays than tactical training.

Well yeah. But look at these tutorials. They're all local tactics. Nothing on early game or middle game strategy.

Despite dozens of tactical positions, I don't think a single one of these holds a one-point jump, two-point jump, horse move, diagonal move, 4-row move, 3-row move or similar pattern.

I'd say this stuff gets extremely important around 15kyu, where your tactical knowledge is passable (maybe not great, but passable). It becomes more important to move around the board with 2-point jumps, recognize sente vs gote and tenuki vs weak gote moves from your opponent.

Tactical knowledge will only get you maybe to 20kyu or 15kyu at the best IMO. Then you're forced to learn "squishy" and "opinionated" discussions that no one really knows how to teach. There's patterns (ie: 2-point jump or horse-move), but its not like there's any ground truth to knowing when these moves are appropriate.

----------

I guess people's point here is that if you choose a 2-point jump as a strategic connection when a horse-move was more appropriate, you might lose 1 or 2 points. But both of these moves are likely worth 5, 10, 15, or more points.

The more important bit is knowing when to play strong and connected (often because each move is strongly sente / has momentum and forces an opponent's response), vs when a sequence is gote and the opponent (or yourself) should consider a move elsewhere (ex: possibly start an invasion).
by gmuslera | 2025-09-28 14:17:02+00:00
I’m not meaning that ocasional/limited forest fires can or not be healthy for forest. Just that the mentioned ones were all record breaking, and had a significant contribution to long lasting CO2 in the atmosphere, all of them were in similar orders than the 2024 fires.

And that carbon capture through planting trees may be something fragile and short lived.
by spamizbad | 2025-09-28 14:17:29+00:00
While I agree minorities are going to feel the brunt of climate change I’m not sure in modern political contexts the motivation is racial.

There’s deep, growing resentment towards the entire so-called “Professional Managerial Class” - things like wind and solar power are a byproduct of their accomplishments. To kill these things off is a way to stick their finger in the eyes of undesirables; the fact that the externalities of this vengeful decision will mostly be felt by minorities is merely a convenient coincidence for the perpetrators