MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by rapind | 2025-09-29 18:00:17+00:00
> it went ahead and decided to `git reset --hard` even after I twice pushed back on that idea

So this is something I've noticed with GPT (Codex). It really loves to use git. If you have it do something and then later change your mind and ask it to undo the changes it just made, there's a decent chance it's going to revert to the previous git commit, regardless of whether that includes reverting whole chunks of code it shouldn't.

It also likes to occasionally notice changes it didn't make and decide they were unintended side effects and revert them to the last commit. Like if you made some tweaks and didn't tell it, there's a chance it will rip them out.

Claude Code doesn't do this, or at least I never noticed it doing this. However, it has it's own medley of problems of course.

When I work with Codex, I really lean into a git workflow. Everything is on a branch and commit often. It's not how I'd normally do things, but doesn't really cost me anything to adopt it.

These agents have their own pseudo personalities, and I've found that fighting against it is like swimming upstream. I'm far more productive when I find a way to work "with" the model. I don't think you need a bunch of MCPs or boilerplate instructions that just fill up their context. Just adapt your workflow instead.
by ethbr1 | 2025-09-29 18:01:10+00:00
Exactly. It makes little sense to fund development that few players will ever see. A developer/publisher could instead cut that content and keep the money as profit.

That's why I think novelty and 'old AAA game' richness has a ceiling development_cost : unit_of_content ratio.

There are things that were feasible for Fallout 1 to do that accountants would lose their shit over today, precisely because they were relatively cheap then and astronomically expensive now.

... the real travesty is the corollary of that though: that gameplay/difficulty must ensure a maximum number of players see all the content.

Which has led to the 'impossible to fail' gimmicks that make modern AAA games feel less satisfying.

Honestly, it feels like Rockstar and Valve are the only ones making truly great AAA games these days...

(But mostly because they're on stable financial footing and willing to take as long as it takes)
by WorldMaker | 2025-09-29 18:03:13+00:00
The debt buyers are the same people that created that debt (the people doing the LBO in the first place). They force the company they just bought to pay them loan terms they set for the privilege of buying the company they just bought. That's why LBOs are pretty much a corporate Ponzi scheme. It's just too bad it is a currently legal Ponzi scheme. It might be nice to have legislation to prevent it.
by BizarroLand | 2025-09-29 18:03:40+00:00
What are the chances that successful white supremacists have learned how to espouse their ideals while avoiding triggering language that could affect their income or popularity?

There are many people who won't get it unless it is explicit, and this has been an understood issue for a long time.

Look at these lyrics:

"He's the one who likes all our pretty songs, and he Likes to sing along and he likes to shoot his gun, but he Knows not what it means" -Nirvana "In Bloom"

People who follow right wing white supremacist influencers and fail to understand that they are being influenced to support right wing white supremacist causes are the people Kurt Cobain was singing about.

They think they are just there for fun, to own the libs, to protect their future or their country or occasionally to protect the "purity of their bloodlines", whatever catch phrase is going around, and then the people they support do bad things their supporters say, "It's not my fault X did Y" but keep supporting the general causes and content of those influencers.

Sure, maybe they drop Andrew Tate for being a rapist, but then they just find someone else to take his place.
by Ameo | 2025-09-29 18:05:03+00:00
The main takeaway from this for me is that SQLite’s query planner seems to be pretty limited. It’s reliant on stuff like the order in which WHERE conditions are specified, isn’t able to use multiple indexes in queries in many cases, bails out to scans when a variety of different operations show up in queries, etc.

It might be the case that SQLite has a simpler or less sophisticated query planner than other databases like Postgres or MariaDB, but in my experience those DBs struggle a lot with good querying planning as well. I’ve spent many hours in the past with issues like Postgres suddenly starting to ignore an index entirely because its computed table data distribution statistics got out of balance, or having to add manual annotations to MariaDB queries like STRAIGHT_JOIN in order to get a query to run faster.

I’m guessing that this is a really hard problem since it doesn’t seem to be really “solved” by any major DB vendor I’ve seen. A lot of modern DB engines like Clickhouse tend to just work around this problem by being so fast at full table scans that they don’t even need any sophisticated indexing set up at all.
by baobun | 2025-09-29 18:05:06+00:00
> Even while local officials tripped over themselves to venerate the Hulk, one going so far as to inaugurate “Hogan Day,” he seemed uninterested.

In case this is refering to Florida, that was after Hogan's death. Or was there another? Hard to take the rest seriously if the fudge such facts to fit a narrative.
by reddit_clone | 2025-09-29 18:05:11+00:00
Lol yes.

I almost had a panic attack driving an _automatic_ up Lombard. (Sadly an old minivan with bad-lish tires).

In stop and go traffic (is there any other traffic in SFO?) it moved so much backwards and spun so hard every time I tried to move forward/upward.. I swore never to return. I haven't been back on that road since.
by sethhochberg | 2025-09-29 18:05:11+00:00
I think you've actually buried a much broader commentary on tolerances and complexity and interoperability in here, too.

The mechanical-averaging voltage regulator worked for the design because it only had to work in the context of the specific model of car it was going into. It didn't have to produce 5v for any application that needs 5v; it just had to produce "5v" for the instruments in the '72 Dodge Challenger. That makes it a pretty terrible 5v regulator, but a pretty great part for the system it was designed to fit into if the mechanical-averaging version is more reliable or cheaper or more robust than the fancy electronic versions.

But if I'm designing a 5v regulator to be sold as a 5v regulator, well... I don't know what system its getting installed into so I won't have much luck selling one that, over a long enough time span, averages out to supplying 5v of power when its supplying power. So I have to design in tight tolerances, and everyone integrating my regulator has to design for tight tolerances, etc.

The good news is that now anyone can buy my regulator and get a reliable 5v - interchangeable parts! But the bad news is now every system on both sides has additional complexity for the sake of complying with our standard.

We see this _all the time_ in software, especially comparing old software to new. Why is Roller Coaster Tycoon so much more elegant and efficient than a modern game written on Unity? Sure, good tastes probably factor in - but that taste from the author was allowed to shine because it was designed as a complete system, not a bunch of component subsystems from different teams and vendors stitched together.
by peterdstallion | 2025-09-29 18:05:13+00:00
This test was done on a small dev laptop with 16GB of RAM, scanning a 500M row (record) 23GB Parquet file. DuckDB proved to be 5x faster.

A bit of an obvious one - small data tech is faster at small data. It serves more of a lower bound reminder of what "small data" is nowadays.

The article rightly starts with:

> Processing power on laptops has increased dramatically over the last twenty years. This allows single laptops to accomplish what we needed multi-node Spark clusters to do ten years ago.
by Mouvelie | 2025-09-29 18:05:19+00:00
I always say that time is the best filter.

In the moment, you can be easily mistaken that something is good, or the best even if the marketing team of that something is really going hard at your wallet. But the only way, and they know it too well, to assess quality is to simply...wait and see later.

If you need a proof, here's one : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bookshop_Memories The "it was better before" is not a recent phenomenon, I think.
by WarcrimeActual | 2025-09-29 18:05:33+00:00
>There is no expectation of privacy in any place that is considered public.

I had a guy at Walmart yesterday call the cops on me because I took a picture of the strip mall it was in on a small point and shoot and he assumed I was for some reason taking a picture of him, his wife, and kid. He was literally just a random car in the middle of a public parking lot. The officer talked to him and asked that I stepped away and then she came to me. The conversation went exactly like this.

Before she could even start to talk I told her I assumed that she knew that there was no expectation of privacy in public and that I could take a thousand pictures and there would be nothing that she could do about it. She agreed. She then asked if I'd like to give her my name (because she had no right to demand I do), and I said no I wouldn't like that. Then came the kicker. Would you like to just show me you don't have a picture of him. I said no I won't because I did nothing wrong and there's no reason for you to see my pictures. All of these were phrased as requests to bypass illegal search because she knew she was in the wrong even questioning me about it. People seem to really be the main character in the most boring story ever, at least in their minds. I have a healthy disregard for feigned authority anyway and was so indignant that I almost took some pictures of them while they talked. Trampling rights because Jim Bob is upset that someone dared take a picture in his direction rubs me the wrong way.
by aliljet | 2025-09-29 18:05:35+00:00
These benchmarks in real world work remain remarkably weak. If you're using this for day-to-day work, the eval that really matters is how the model handles a ten step action. Context and focus are absolutely king in real world work. To be fair, Sonnet has tended to be very good at that...

I wonder if the 1m token context length is coming for this ride too?
by srkdaniel | 2025-09-29 18:05:41+00:00
I kept running into the same problem: AI design tools are good at making one-off visuals, but terrible at keeping a consistent brand vibe. My landing page, pitch deck, and social posts all looked like they came from different companies.

So I started experimenting and ended up with something I call Vibe-Designing.

Instead of re-prompting from scratch every time, the AI learns a brand’s “DNA” (colors, fonts, vibe, typography) and then applies it automatically to whatever you ask for. Example from a recent demo:

Start with “create merchandise” → got a branded hoodie, tumblers, and mug in the exact style of the brand.

Refine conversationally:

“Add logo top right”

“Add title NEW MERCH DROP at the bottom”

“Change font to be more futuristic”

“Swap background to a futuristic city with flying cars”

Each step stayed perfectly on-brand — consistent colors, typography, and mood — while evolving the design in seconds.

I built this into an app called Brandiseer, but I’m more curious about the concept itself:

Do you think “Vibe-Designing” is a real category worth exploring, or just a rebrand of AI design tools?

Would you trust AI to keep your branding consistent, or only as a starting point before handing it off to a designer?

What would make you actually adopt something like this in your workflow?
by patmcc | 2025-09-29 18:06:09+00:00
Historically at least, it's not that weddings are in public places, but that they're inherently a performance for the community. Like the reason for having a wedding is to make a commitment publicly in front of your friends and family. That doesn't mean it needs to be open to all who want to wander in, but it's strange to think of it as a secret event.

I feel like it's pretty strange (and mildly rude) to insist no one take/post photos of a wedding, and also very rude to take/post photos when asked not to.
by marckrn | 2025-09-29 18:06:51+00:00
I'm using Anthropic's pay-as-you-go API, since it was easier to set up on the server than CC's CLI/web login method. Running the bot costs me ~$1.8 per month.

The bot is based on Mario Zechner's excellent work[1] - so all credit goes to him!

[1] https://mariozechner.at/posts/2025-08-03-cchistory/
by mixmastamyk | 2025-09-29 18:06:53+00:00
Python doesn’t have “no types,” in fact it is strict about types. You just don’t have to waste time reading and writing them early on.

While a boon during prototyping, a project may need more structural support as the design solidifies, it grows, or a varied, growing team takes responsibility.

At some point those factors dominate, to the extent “may need” support approaches “must have.”
by peterdstallion | 2025-09-29 18:06:57+00:00
I am a paying subscriber to Gemini, Claude and OpenAI.

I don't know if it's me, but over the last few weeks I've got to the conclusion ChatGPT is very strongly leading the race. Every answer it gives me is better - it's more concise and more informative.

I look forward to testing this further, but out of the few runs I just did after reading about this - it isn't looking much better
by scottlamb | 2025-09-29 18:08:14+00:00
Are you quoting suckless.org? Or paraphrasing? In a skim, I see some philosophy stuff there but not exactly this.

I think those are platitudes: they sound good but aren't specific enough that anyone disagrees with them, so they're not saying anything. Imagine:

> - software should do one thing and do it well

No one ever says "let's do a bit of everything, badly".

And there's tons of wiggle room in "one thing". Imagine a few, very different huge codebases. Let's say Linux, Photoshop, Rust. I think their proponents would say they're each focused on one thing (kernely-stuff, photo editing, foundational software). Their detractors would disagree: use a microkernel instead, separate out the filters or something, people are using it for scripting. Who's right?

> - code should be understandable, easy to build, easy to port > - dependencies should not be a problem > - the chosen language must not be a burden

Again, no one ever says differently, even if the result they end up with is none of these things.

> - resources are scarce: if you say "unused memory is wasted memory" you are part of the problem

I think this is the most interesting one, because it's contrasted with something I have actually heard people say (maybe even said myself on occasion). But still, I generally haven't heard people say it for no reason. There's some other attribute they're getting for that RAM, whether it's a compute-vs-RAM trade-off or the ability to use a (believed-to-be) simpler programming language or some such. This one might be more interesting if prioritized relative to "code should be understandable".
by carlosjobim | 2025-09-29 18:08:34+00:00
Your comment is confused as to you believing that people would want to come to events with strange rules and not follow those rules. What happens in real life is that people decline to go to those events. Everybody knows how to behave at a wedding and what is proper conduct.

> Are you genuinely suggesting that there is a basic social rule that says no other rules can be impressed on guests at an event?

Absolutely, in the case of strange, unusual rules. If you're invited for dinner to somebody and they ask that you oblige to things which are outside of the norm, would you be very keen to go? Or would you make up an excuse and do something else?

It seems you are trying to say "You're not welcome here!" to people who already declined an invite?
by rapind | 2025-09-29 18:08:39+00:00
> Have you heard of that study that shows AI actually makes developers less productive, but they think it makes them more productive??

Have you looked into that study? There's a lot wrong with it, and it's been discussed ad nauseam.

Also, what a great catch 22, where we can't trust our own experiences! In fact, I just did a study and my findings are that everyone would be happier if they each sent me $100. What's crazy is that those who thought it wouldn't make them happier, did in fact end up happier, so ignore those naysayers!
by theamk | 2025-09-29 18:09:00+00:00
Simplifying Uber's story to "pricing or more drivers" misses the most important part.

Uber was undercutting traditional taxis because, at least in the US, the traditional taxis was horrible user experience. No phone app, no way to give feedback on driver, horrible cars, unpredictable charges... This was because taxis had monopoly in most cities, so they really did not care about customers.

The times when Uber was super-cheap have long passed, but I still never plan to ride regular taxis. It's Waymo (when availiable) or Lyft for me.
by perihelions | 2025-09-29 18:09:01+00:00
The idea with cesium-137 is that it didn't exist naturally in significant quantities prior to 1945. An airtight container, sealed from the atmosphere prior to 1945, should not contain any.

It's not like some other radioisotopes using in dating, such as carbon-14, which are continuously produced naturally (i.e. by cosmic rays initiating nuclear reactions in the high atmosphere). In that case, an airtight container had a known concentration at the time of its sequestration, and radioisotope dating (to oversimplify) counts the number of half-lives that elapsed since that point. (Or with the example of organic matter—the number of half-lives since a tree was felled into lumber—since it ceased metabolizing atmospheric gases).
by nerdsniper | 2025-09-29 18:09:05+00:00
I strongly disagree with the personified way you interact with LLMs from a standpoint of “I’ve rarely gotten the best output from the LLM when I interact casually with them”.

However, it’s the early days of learning this new interface, and there’s a lot to learn - certainly some amount of personification has been proven to help the LLM by giving it a “role”, so I’d only criticize the degree rather than the entire concept.

It reminds me of the early days of search engines when everyone had a different knack for which search engine to use for what and precisely what to type to get good search results.

Hopefully eventually we’ll all mostly figure it out.
by sipjca | 2025-09-29 18:09:24+00:00
Maybe this is true? But it's not clear to me this methodology will ever be quite as good as native tool calling. Or maybe I don't know the benchmark well enough, I just assume it's vision based

Perhaps Tesla FSD is a similar example where in practice self driving with vision should be possible (humans), but is fundamentally harder and more error prone than having better data. It seems to me very error prone and expensive in tokens to use computer screens as a fundamental unit.

But at the same rate, I'm sure there are many tasks which could be automated as well, so shrug
by 1dontnkow_ | 2025-09-29 18:09:43+00:00
"something that could offend someone" thats too simplified.

You can freely express your opinions regarding any political party or head of state and so, but not directly and specifically offend them. You can say "their performance this year wasn't good due to that or this". But cant say "They should eat shit!" or "deserve to be shot" which kinda is also OK because the former doesn't contribute to anything and the latter we all agree is highly immoral or inhumane.

PS: I'm talking from the perspective of Germany, not entirely sure about other countries.
by Implicated | 2025-09-29 18:10:26+00:00
I'd imagine that the proportion of "legit" conversations around these topics and those that they're intending to not allow is large enough that it doesn't make sense for them to even entertain the idea of supporting those conversations.

As a rather hilarious and really annoying related issue - I have a real use where the application I'm working on is partially monitoring/analyzing the bloodlines of some rather specific/ancient mammals used in competition and... well.. it doesn't like terms like "breeders" and "breeding"
by kazinator | 2025-09-29 18:10:28+00:00
Principled engineering should be taken for granted. You can exercise it whether you are dealing with good taste or bad taste.

The reverse is not true; you cannot really exercise good taste whether you have good engineering or shitty engineering.

Bad taste can hamper engineering but not make it impossible; bad engineering renders taste moot.

Engineering serves taste, mainly.

Consider that something well-engineered can be entirely unnecessary and unwelcome.
by fooker | 2025-09-29 18:10:40+00:00
C++ is surprisingly close to being a usable functional language.

The two missing pieces are -

* structural pattern matching

* uniform function call syntax that is : a.foo(b) vs foo(a, b) being interchangeable.

With the kitchen sink approach of design I’d not be surprised if these get into the language eventually. These ideas have been proposed a few times but haven’t been seriously considered as far as I know.
by RyanOD | 2025-09-29 18:10:54+00:00
Yes, this is all goal dependent. I can agree with that.

The trouble with the "learn just this one thing" approach is that one is forced to learn said thing at the most basic level because anything beyond that requires all sorts of skills and techniques that are difficult to teach in lesson format. Rather, they're just absorbed as one explores the topic. It's the sort of subconscious / muscle memory stuff a person doesn't even realize they're learning.

So, yes, for the most basic of topics, I can see how removing the effort can make sense. For anything beyond that I feel there is tremendous value in the struggle.
by gaoshan | 2025-09-29 18:11:19+00:00
The person she spent her life with died. She could have just been sad and lonely over that, not some lack of "identity".

I've been married for over 30 years and we both have our own independent identities and successes (as well as shared ones). We are still very close and loving. Neither needs the other to live but after so long our emotional involvement with each other is as deep and foundational as the roots of a great tree. Losing her (or her me) would be utterly devastating and how we identify ourselves has nothing to do with it.
by Bjorkbat | 2025-09-29 18:11:21+00:00
> Practically speaking, we’ve observed it maintaining focus for more than 30 hours on complex, multi-step tasks.

Really curious about this since people keep bringing it up on Twitter. They mention it pretty much off-handedly in their press release and doesn't show up at all in their system card. It's only through an article on The Verge that we get more context. Apparently they told it to build a Slack clone and left it unattended for 30 hours, and it built a Slack clone using 11,000 lines of code (https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/787524/a...)

I have very low expectations around what would happen if you took an LLM and let it run unattended for 30 hours on a task, so I have a lot of questions as to the quality of the output
by zie | 2025-09-29 18:11:24+00:00
Ya, mine is an original UHK60 v1 from years and years ago. It still holds up great.

I hope they make a UHK 110 key. I want all the keys.

Right now it's not worth the upgrade to me from the 60 to the 80. but I'd totally upgrade for a 101/110/120 or whatever keys.

Modes and multiple keys to do one thing is fine, but it's not as nice as just having a dedicated key. Which is why I want all the keys.