MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by athrowaway3z | 2025-09-23 10:51:29+00:00
Talking about a specific set-up they use isn't the goal of the post, so I don't think it's a cop out.

"How to harness it" is very clearly the difference between users right now, and I'd say we're currently bottom heavy with poor users stuck in a 'productivity illusion'.

But there is the question of "what is productivity?"

I'm finding myself (having AI) writing better structured docs and tests to make sure the AI can do what I ask it to.

I suspect that turns into compounding interests (or lack of technical debt).

For an industry where devs have complained, for decades, about productivity metrics being extremely hard or outright bullshit, I see way too many of the same people now waving around studies regarding productivity.
by orwin | 2025-09-23 10:51:39+00:00
I use AI for world and character-building in the RPG i DM, and this is for sure something an AI would write. AI i use professionally do like linked list, but when i ask it without a MCP, to "write" a character and its background, catchphrases and what he would do in 3-4 different situation, you'll get paragraph that suspiciously look like the first example.
by lo_zamoyski | 2025-09-23 10:52:00+00:00
What makes something weird?

Something is “weird” when it is absurd, which is to say something that is aimless or has an aim that is not in the service of an objective good. There’s a deviance from the nature of the thing, like intentionally growing a tumor on your forehead or having a tumor growing out of your forward and then happily refusing to have it removed.

Otherwise, what is said of things that are merely unconventional.

So in this case, is there not a purpose? Is the purpose not spiritual and instructive in some sense? Are you not imposing an inappropriate tacit goal onto this practice?

Or perhaps you find it weird because it is nowhere to be found within your conventions?
by m000 | 2025-09-23 10:52:25+00:00
You are just rationalizing a deeply undemocratic process. These are the exact self-serving arguments that the winners make to legitimize a fundamendally unpopular government.

Also, in practice, no, you cannot make a political party in Greece. There's a country-wide threshold of 3% that you need to exceed to get into the parliament. A lot of well-organized parties struggle (and often fail) to exceed it. So even if you get 100% in an electoral district, you won't get its respective parliament seats. In fact (IIRC the tidbits of the election law), you will be making the first party stronger (and I don't mean by depriving votes from the second party).

This is not unlike other Western democracies. But this is essentially a design to cull any grassroot movements. Not very democratic.
by rini17 | 2025-09-23 10:53:03+00:00
After first page I guessed it's obvious where it goes and stopped reading. The discussion confirmed it.

If it was not obvious to anyone, then they needed to read it all perhaps. Not having any big feelings for people who do or don't anymore, I have been avoiding all kinds of cat turds most of my life, not bad decision but it's very lonely.
by LandR | 2025-09-23 10:54:07+00:00
I don't justify the time spent in my life on a $/hr basis.

That's absurd. The point of my life isn't to maximise my $/hr return to some faceless corporation.

I started reading it, I liked the writing style, it resonated with me. I kept reading till I had finished it.

There, that's the entire justification, I need no more justification than that.

Work lost 5-10 minutes of productivity so I could indulge in reading something ? Sure. That's fine. I'm sure they will survive.

If not, then maybe they should just go out and hire a team of soulless robots.
by rmunn | 2025-09-23 10:54:50+00:00
All those things were done under Gates and Ballmer. When Nadella stood up on stage in his first year as CEO under a big banner that proclaimed "MS (heart) Linux", I said "I'll believe it when I see it." Well, over the next decade or so, I saw it, and now I believe it. Microsoft under Nadella just plain behaves differently (and much better) than they used to behave under Gates and Ballmer.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-09-23 10:55:03+00:00
And this is why partisanship is such an own-goal. Partisan Democrats want wind turbines instead of coal, but to get them they'd have to admit that the thing standing in their way is these excessive rules impeding the construction of anything, which is contrary to the precept that regulations are good and getting rid of regulations is bad.

Whereas if you put aside the dogma you might notice that giving the other team what they want in this case and getting rid of some regulations would actually be good and allow you to do the thing you want to do.
by x______________ | 2025-09-23 10:55:43+00:00
>I went on a binge a year or so ago

I did the same a few years ago and it was one of the few series that kept me hooked, trying to figure out how the contestants try to fool Penn and Teller. I'll need to revisit for some newer episodes that I may have missed..

A bit off topic but no one else brought up Penn's great acting as Hal the system admin in Hackers (1995), a classic movie that everyone should be familiar with (and if not, worth checking out!).
by DanielHB | 2025-09-23 10:56:48+00:00
I always thought the main goal of sanctions was to deprive the sanctioned governments of income which in turns makes it harder for them to cause problems externally and hold power internally.

And by "hold power internally" I don't mean population uprising, I mean to keep the factions within the government (especially the military) united under the leadership by buying them out.

I believe increased population unhappiness is more of a side-effect that can be both beneficial (if it incites anti-government sentiment) or detrimental (if it incites nationalism) to the country imposing sanctions.
by sesm | 2025-09-23 10:57:47+00:00
You can check prices for the largest gas station network here (table in the middle): https://lukoilazs.ru/category/stoimost-benzina-na-segodnya/

Prices are in RUB/L, 1 USD ~ 80 RUB, 1 EUR ~ 100 RUB.

Then make your own conclusion.
by spwa4 | 2025-09-23 10:58:30+00:00
It was a choice delaying maintenance to save a few bucks every time for years, dozens of times by now. Then they got into critical trouble in a number of places at the same time. Wait, sorry.

I say "they got into trouble", which is true, they caused the trouble. But not financially, of course, WE got into trouble there. Given that the CEO is an accountant I'd bet my firstborn this was not lost on him. But all of France is paying for their systematically wrong decisions over a long period (which still leaves the power pretty cheap tbh).
by lupusreal | 2025-09-23 10:58:49+00:00
That's why you tell claude code to write tests, and use them, use linting tools, etc. And then you test the code yourself. If you're still concerned, /clear then tell claude code that some other idiot wrote the code and it needs to tear it apart and critique it.

Hallucination is not an intractable problem, the stochastic nature of hallucinations makes it easy to use the same tools to catch them. I feel like hallucinations have become a cop out, an excuse, for people who don't want to learn how to use these new tools anyway.
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-09-23 10:59:06+00:00
> a reusable launch vehicle is not needed for a fast launch cadence

You're correct. But ESA isn't developing a mass-manufactured ELV, either. Themis is basically rebuilding Falcon 1, Prometheus a methalox Merlin.

Nothing ESA is doing generates launch independence from America (or China) in respect of LEO constellations or a war in space.

(That said, I think reusable super-heavy launch, e.g. Starship, will render both mass-manufactured ELVs and these Falcon 1/9 siblings obsolete.)
by JumpCrisscross | 2025-09-23 11:01:04+00:00
> Because?

I'm genuinely curious for the formal answer. But the simple one is European institutions seem to be built for consensus and around the assumption of a Pax Americana. They're a cross between a colony and confederation.

If you were rebuilding Europe for strategic autonomy, you'd rejigger several electoral and decision-making systems. (The historic handicap of multiple languages may actually be a case where technology (live translation) solves a social problem.)
by seec | 2025-09-23 11:02:08+00:00
There were some questions about some pipes condition indeed but it turned out to be a nothing burger.

The thing is that nuclear power is still a relatively new thing and we don't have historical experience to rely on. Since it is basically the first time reactors are this old and there are a lot of risks, it was decided to verify just to be sure.

But now we know they can run fine for much longer than was anticipated. That is something the anti-nuclear conveniently avoid, the reactors have cost a lot to build but they are still providing value and it's expected that their life will be extended by quite a lot.
by imiric | 2025-09-23 11:02:46+00:00
> I always wondered about companies/individuals who voluntarily [...] block their users by IPs coming from bad countries

The problem is not with "bad" countries.

The problem is when a large amount of abusive traffic comes from a handful of countries, it's technically easier to block entire IP ranges and ASNs, than to filter and allow the small amount of well-behaved clients while blocking the rest. This is especially the case when the company has no commercial presence in these countries.

To be fair, the scenario you describe where countries are blocked purely out of political or personal reasons does exist, and I agree that it's morally wrong, even if it's the prerogative of any individual or company who they want to provide service to. But in my experience the blocking is usually motivated by abuse.
by precompute | 2025-09-23 11:02:56+00:00
Okay, first, I haven't read that book. I'm going off the cherrypicked examples in the OP.

If a LLM was indeed used, the output was likely massaged to a degree that wouldn't be immediately obvious.

Now, my 2c: Writing is sometimes atrocious and sometimes authors jam in stupid things to maintain flow. If a person could make the connection between "Silk", "Spider", "weaving" and "grandmother" then another person could as well (even when one is "verifying" and another "proving"). And using those properly and in context and succinctly is far beyond most LLMs, and would require a fair amount of gambling, which would be out of character for someone whose writing prowess has been verified pre-LLMs.

As for what I mean by "directly reference the previous thing": LLMs can jam in well-known (to them) phrases and sentences and structures onto an idea/request. However, they are unable to loop upon the particulars of that idea/request in a coherent manner, which leads to slopification at large output sizes, and shows us the ceiling of the quality of writing a LLM can output.
by maverwa | 2025-09-23 11:04:15+00:00
To add some context: man kernel_lockdown[1] reads "Unencrypted hibernation/suspend to swap are disallowed as the kernel image is saved to a medium that can then be accessed.". And to my understanding there is currently no way to tell a (mainline) kernel that allows "encrypted hibernate", i.e. no way to tell the kernel that its hibernation disk is "secure".

So its not a direct "linux prevents hibernate on secure boot", its "linux recommends kernel_lockdown when secure booting", "kernel_lockdown prevents hibernate with unencrypted swap" and "theres no well to make the kernel believe the hibernation disk is encrypted", but the result is the same.

You can "just" run secure boot without lockdown. Its a cmdline, you can just omit it. You can run custom patch sets that add cmdline options so the kernel allows hibernation in lockdown (if you pinky-promise the swap is encrypted).

But neither of these are easily accessible to the average user.

1: https://manpages.debian.org/bullseye/manpages/kernel_lockdow...
by Neil44 | 2025-09-23 11:05:20+00:00
I agree. But there's different ways to respond to it. You can be fatalistic and say well I wasn't born rich or I'm no good at XYZ so why bother. Or you can do well and then say it wasn't luck I work hard every day. To me having had some people I've known a long time die or be debilitated by desease in recent years, I feel very lucky just to be alive and healthy with opportunities in front of me and people I love close to me. A lot of people don't have that and it's not their fault.
by philipwhiuk | 2025-09-23 11:05:43+00:00
> As someone who also sees this kind of messages fairly often, I always wondered about companies/individuals who voluntarily (not being forced by law, that's another story) block their users by IPs coming from bad countries...

As a service owner currently looking at adding widescale blocks based on location... it's not a global business, so the downside of blocking an entire country is functionally zero and the upside of easily removing a tonne of compromised machines from the 'can try to DDoS us' pool is noticeable.
by perching_aix | 2025-09-23 11:05:45+00:00
Which is still distinct from actively choosing something. Indifference is not the same active approval, precisely because it goes both ways. So it is still incorrect to state that "they chose that". They chose indifference.

One can still fault them of course, but it is a distinct category, and it is not at all a clear sign of consent, if even the active choice ever was.
by OJFord | 2025-09-23 11:06:12+00:00
'Embellishment' seems absolutely standard for a novel, some authors more than others, and it's exactly what you're taught to do clumsily in school.

The actions in the train scene didn't seem so bizarre to me, and even if they did we can still write bizarre events and characters? Similarly the spiderweb skin, where's the line between 'no human would ...' and writing a strange character?

I don't have anything like the OOP's experience with literature or even AI, but I'm not really convinced. It is nevertheless interesting that they believe they've identified it, and to think of the ramifications, aside from whether it's a correct analysis or not.
by Galanwe | 2025-09-23 11:06:16+00:00
I mean, Odin is admittedly vastly different from C in terms of syntax. It's not like you can pick it up knowing C, it feels like a different language.

The author even states that Odin started as a Pascal clone, and was more influenced by Pascal than C.

> The language began as a Pascal clone (with begin and end and more)

> The language borrows heavily from (in order of philosophy and impact): Pascal, C, Go, Oberon-2, Newsqueak, GLSL.
by hamburgererror | 2025-09-23 11:06:52+00:00
> There's no value to it in circumstances where you control all the hardware processing data

But what about the case where you don't have so much control about what runs next to your program? Could it be possible for an attacker to run a program in order to extract some data when your program is run?

Also, could FHE offer some protection against vulnerabilities like Meltdown and Spectre?

> It seems wildly unlikely that the performance characteristics will improve dramatically

Why? Are there some specific signs for this already? I had the impression that everytime people tend to believe that with technology they get proven wrong later.
by piva00 | 2025-09-23 11:07:44+00:00
I don't think you understood my comment, I will spell it out: data by itself just quantifies, doesn't qualify. It doesn't qualify why marrying before having children is better, it just states that, for some reason, the outcomes are better.

Now you need to do the qualitative research to understand what are the causes for it, it could be that marriage is a signal for stable relationships, in that case marrying doesn't matter but a stable relationship does (which is quite self-obvious, it's just an example). Marriage could also have tax implications in some countries, which in turn could help the average to better outcomes, so on and so forth.

The data on this is enveloping much more than just "marriage" as a virtue, or any other moral aspect of it, you are using the data to imply that marriage is virtuous and is the cause for better outcomes which doesn't hold by just quantification...

It's blindness by statistics, it's quite common when ascribing data as the sole truth. Data can guide you to investigate other aspects that will qualify why the data shows what it shows.
by danaris | 2025-09-23 11:08:07+00:00
> 1. people who very few employers would hire for remote work due to their criminal history.

Putting aside the widespread reflexive discrimination against "criminals", I would think that most people in prison who someone might think twice about hiring due to their criminal history would get a second look if it was for a remote job.

Someone working remotely can't rob or murder you, nor can they try to sell you drugs without a much more elaborate setup.

Seems to me the only kinds of people in prison that most employers might justly hesitate to hire for a remote job are white-collar criminals.
by potato3732842 | 2025-09-23 11:08:09+00:00
Nobody who hasn't very a) clearly done wrong or b) actually chooses to fight the feds in court actually going to prison though.

It's just a threat the fedcops get to use to force you to take a plea deal. It's basically a big boy version of how your local prosecutor behaves. Instead of filing BS charges that will never stick in an attempt to "mark it up to mark it down", the fedcops are more equal so they have

Every time you see someone on HN screeching about how we ought to have federal regulation and stiff penalties for whatever their pet issue is remember that this is what that looks like.
by jiggawatts | 2025-09-23 11:08:31+00:00
This is the right answer, and it's sad to see it so far down the list.

This is the precise realpolitik of international sanctions, it's just not spoken out loud that often.

Don't believe me, some random commenter. Listen to the Professor of History and Grand Strategy at the U.S. Naval War College explain it: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/B0k5ToABH7o
by evelant | 2025-09-23 11:09:27+00:00
I’ve been experimenting with this, it’s a very interesting problem space!

https://github.com/evelant/synchrotron

Idea is to sync business logic calls instead of state. Let business logic resolve all conflicts client side. Logical clocks give consistent ordering. RLS gives permissions and access control. No dedicated conflict resolution logic necessary but still guarantees semantic consistency and maximally preserves user intentions. That’s the idea at least, requires more thought and hacking.
by twelvechairs | 2025-09-23 11:10:19+00:00
Almost all of this is solved by basically putting quotes around strings.

Yaml has its uses cases where you want things json doesnt do like recursion or anchors/aliases/tags. Or at least it has had - perhaps cue/dhall/hcl solves things better. Jsonnet is another. I havent tried enough to test how much better they are.
by lyu07282 | 2025-09-23 11:10:51+00:00
With that in mind, most negative reviews seem to have this in common:

> If you want to read something very similar to The Hunger Games, this is your book. It goes reaping > dress-up > training > rating > games. The characters are different, but the plot is virtually the same.

> the book reads like a hunger games #1 rewrite

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/214331246-sunrise-on-the...

Although most fans seem to love it.
by kgwgk | 2025-09-23 11:10:55+00:00
You have never seen the slogan “from the river to the sea”?

https://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/HHP...

Do you think that the long-term answer to the Israel-Palestinian dispute is for Arab states to absorb the Palestinians, for there to be two states, Israel and Palestine, or for Israel to be ended and given to Hamas and the Palestinians?

51% in the 18-24 group chose the third option.
by lapcat | 2025-09-23 11:11:12+00:00
What I found more disturbing was this:

> It would be considered standard industry practice to hire a ghostwriter for these prequels

The use of ghostwriters is the main problem, I think. AI is just another ghostwriter.

I recently read a book that's 3rd in a trilogy. I loved the first 2 books but didn't like the 3rd at all and indeed stopped reading after about 100 pages. It felt like the 3rd book was just a perfunctory response to the publisher's request for another sequence in the series, a mere money grab. But now, suddenly, I'm starting to wonder whether the 3rd book was even written by the author...

I was aware that non-writers, e.g., politicians, use ghostwriters when they publish a book, but it would have never occurred to me that experienced, accomplished fiction writers would also use ghostwriters.
by ACCount37 | 2025-09-23 11:11:19+00:00
This. The point is, and always was, to exert economic pressure.

Some sanctions aim at military capabilities directly - but most just aim to throw a wrench into a country's economy overall. Which does hurt the population - but it also hurts a country's capabilities, which is the goal.

If North Korea wasn't sanctioned to shit, it would have had the resources to build not dozens but hundreds of ICBMs. This is undesirable, so North Korea remains sanctioned to shit.
by flanked-evergl | 2025-09-23 11:11:45+00:00
EU in practice serves no other function but to deindustrialize Europe and make it entirely dependent on the US, but even more so, China and Russia.

In 2024 European countries paid more to Russia for gas than to Ukraine for aid, and I think this is still the case in 2025. We shut down industry because it's not environmentally friendly and then import from the worst polluters in the world.

If I was China and Russia and I wanted to completely neutralize Europe as a rival there is no better way I could ever imagine to do it than what the EU is doing.

You could say that EU can be fixed, sure, in principle, but we know it won't be fixed. We know it will only get worse because the rot has become systemic.

If we were to objectively consider Europe, and say what could one do to prevent a war between Europe and other powers, there generally are two things. Prevent others from attacking Europe, and prevent Europe from resisting when others attack it. European politicians have chosen the second option. You can see it from how many people are willing to fight, you can see it from Europe's response to Russian aggression. Europe may be stronger than Russia on paper, but it pains me dearly to say that we have already surrendered to Russia.
by precompute | 2025-09-23 11:12:21+00:00
That's a broad statement that's untrue for most genres, at least right now. However, it is true for the YA lit / chic-lit and the smut-disguised-as-fantasy genres. These already have authors pumping out a book every few months with different characters jammed into similar situations. And people have personalized these kinds of interactions already (CharacterAI and others). Literature is literature, whether human or LLM-generated and will sell like hot cakes if it caters to the common denominator well enough.

It can also be seen in newer fanfics. If you visit AO3 you might get to see a few that are completely written with LLMs and the authors sometimes don't even bother reading it themselves before publishing it. The lower quality is almost always apparent from the get-go.

LLMs can be very useful for writing, but I don't see serious writers using LLMs except for maybe checking facts / as a knowledgebase. The lowest tier of readers was already one-shot by LLMs over a year ago.
by scandox | 2025-09-23 11:12:24+00:00
All the groups I mentioned are distinct groups of people some of whose members overlap and some not, so the size of the actual trans community doesn't really matter. I would say it is indeed their misfortune to have been made the subject of tribal disagreements.

But it is also disingenuous to say it's just about a group of people who want to be left alone as in the original comment I responded to.

Your elaboration of the stages as I stated them has some pithy truth in it but really just confirms its accuracy. You can read all you want into how I describe the stages but description is not advocacy. I'm not advocating anything really.