MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
Ask HN: What is the most useful AI tool you use outside of Cursor/ChatGPT?
by break_the_bank | 2025-09-17 20:49:05+00:00
When I say Cursor/ChatGPT it includes everything in those categories including Cline/Claude Code/Claude/Gemini etc! I am really curious what tools are people using and getting the most value of, how do you use them, and how essential they have become to you!
by wahnfrieden | 2025-09-17 20:49:12+00:00
> Or you can just wait a couple more platform updates instead of always being on the bleeding edge.

So your advice is to use CoreData until 2028 or so until we can terminate iOS 17 users and start using WWDC24 SwiftData.

And then maybe a few years from now (meaning usable by 2032) Apple fills SwiftData's gaps that SQLiteData meets today (ability to use it in background fetch tasks, scalable performance, usage outside of SwiftUI views, fast JSONB storage & querying, FTS) or has the capability to meet in the near future (sharing, public database etc.).

That's neither compelling nor industry standard, and is why so many businesses haven't adopted SwiftData and have moved on from CoreData.

It's the same reason PSPDFKit built up to a 9 figures business - no one wants to wait around for years and years for Apple to maybe incrementally improve PDFKit and also not provide any support, developer relations, or ability to fix a bug yourself.
by whizzter | 2025-09-17 20:49:22+00:00
Sure, and that's why Asm.JS(regular JS with special semantics) and later Wasm(bytecode translateable to JS) was so brilliant. It already worked on Safari, they had the option of either:

A: look slow compared to other engines that supported it

B: implement it

Now, stuff like the exception handling stuff and tail calls probably aren't shimmable via JS, but at this point they don't gain much from being obstructionists.
by unsignedint | 2025-09-17 20:49:23+00:00
Having known him for decades—not in person, but through various email exchanges when I reached out to BF—I'd say it’s a bit more than “just recognizing the name.” I’ve followed his journey since well before the OSS crowdfunding days, and it’s honestly amazing to see everything he’s built. Thankfully, it sounds like he’s not stepping away completely, which is great news.

As for the new leadership, Francesco Siddi comes from an animation background and is already managing Blender Studio. I’m genuinely glad to see the organization will continue to be led by people who deeply understand the tool and its community.
by observationist | 2025-09-17 20:49:24+00:00
These vigorously held and loudly proclaimed opinions don't matter.

Don't waste the mental energy. They're more interested in performative ignorance and argument than anything productive. It's somewhere between trying to engage Luddites during the industrial revolution and having a reasonable discussion with /pol/ .

They'd rather cling to what they know than embrace change, or get in rhetorical zingers, and nothing will change that except a collision with reality.
by flohofwoe | 2025-09-17 20:49:35+00:00
Well that's what the WASM Component Model set out to solve, some sort of next-gen FFI standard that goes beyond C APIs:

https://component-model.bytecodealliance.org/

In my opinion it's an overengineered boondoggle, since "C APIs ought to be good enough for anything", but maybe something useful will eventually come out of it, so far it looks like it mostly replaces the idea of C-APIs as lingua-franca with "a random collection of Rust stdlib types" as lingua-france, which at least to me sounds utterly uninteresting.
by sjrd | 2025-09-17 20:49:35+00:00
Binaryen has a lot of baggage from Wasm early days, when it was still a strict AST. Many newer features are difficult to manipulate in its model.

In our compiler (featured in TFA), we chose to define our own data structure for an abstract representation of Wasm. We then wrote two emitters: one to .wasm (the default, for speed), and one to .wat (to debug our compiler when we get it wrong). It was pretty straightforward, so I think the instruction set is quite nice. [1]

[1] https://github.com/scala-js/scala-js/tree/main/linker/shared...
by Ductapemaster | 2025-09-17 20:49:43+00:00
It's not about the whole microcontroller having less than 64kB of memory - it's that each WASM module has a minimum memory size of 64kB, regardless of how much it actually requires. Also, if you need 65kB of memory, you now have to reserve 2 pages, meaning your app now needs 128kB of memory!

We're working on WASM for embedded over at atym.io if you're interested.
by ceckGrad | 2025-09-17 20:49:47+00:00
>some of these papers were successfully replicated, so juxtaposing them to the ones that have not been replicated at all given the title of the page feels a bit off. Not sure if fair.

I don't like Giancotti's claims. He wrote: >This post is a compact reference list of the most (in)famous cognitive science results that failed to replicate and should, for the time being, be considered false.

I don't agree with Giancotti's epistemological claims but today I will not bloviate at length about the epistemology of science. I will try to be brief.

If I understand Marco Giancotti correctly, one particular point is that Giancotti seems to be saying that Hagger et al. have impressively debunked Baumeister et al.

The ego depletion "debunking" is not really what I would call a refutation. It says, "Results from the current multilab registered replication of the ego-depletion effect provide evidence that, if there is any effect, it is close to zero. ... Although the current analysis provides robust evidence that questions the strength of the ego-depletion effect and its replicability, it may be premature to reject the ego-depletion effect altogether based on these data alone."

Maybe Baumeister's protocol was fundamentally flawed, but the counter-argument from Hagger et al. does not convince me. I wasn't thrilled with Baumeister's claims when they came out, but now I am somehow even less thrilled with the claims of Hagger et al., and I absolutely don't trust Giancotti's assessment. I could believe that Hagger executed Baumeister's protocol correctly, but I can't believe Giancotti has a grasp of what scientific claims "should" be "believed."
by geerlingguy | 2025-09-17 20:50:03+00:00
Two concerns I have in the long-term:

1. It seems views from Premium users who use adblock might also not get counted—and I'm not sure if the revenue from a Premium view in that circumstance would be counted or not (more research needed).

2. YouTube's recommendation engine weights views heavily in the system, which means channels with a more technical, traditional desktop viewing audience (probably a substantial portion of HN users) will be most impacted, and will not be able to grow an audience to help fund projects, yadda yadda.

YouTube creators with younger, mobile, less FOSS-y, and less tech-savvy audiences are therefore rewarded with more views/mindshare.

I know some here are like "go get a REAL job, influencers are scum", but I think that discounts the helpful work of many tech creators. Not only in direct contributions to open source projects, but also in being a voice to balance out the paid 'product showcase' style videos for many tech products that come to market.

In other words: if adblock users disincentivize creators like me from spending time and resources on YouTube, then video content will more quickly settle into the online magazine/news status quo, where 99% of the articles you read are just PR spin. Which you could argue would bring about YouTube's downfall earlier... or would lead us even more quickly to an Idiocracy-style society :D

I'm not saying adblock is bad or wrong or anything—I can't stand the YT ad spam, so I pay for Premium. To each their own. In any case, YouTube shoulders some of the burden, but will be the main entity to profit in any scenario.
by godelski | 2025-09-17 20:50:14+00:00
Yeah tbh I can see this happening unintentionally. Like DeepSeek trying to censor Falun Gong and getting these results. But tbh, I think it is concerning in either case. It is a difference between malice and unintended mistakes through trying to move too fast. Both present high risks, and neither is unique to China nor DeepSeek.

But most of all, I'm trying to get people to not just have knee-jerk reactions. We can do some vetting very quickly, right? So why not? I'm hoping better skilled people will reply to my main comment with evidence for or against the security claim, but at least I wanted to suppress this habit we have of just conjecturing out of nothing. The claims are testable, so let's test instead of falling victim to misinformation campaigns. Of all places, HN should be better
Show HN: Keplar – Voice AI for qualitative research at quantitative scale
by dgul994 | 2025-09-17 20:50:51+00:00
Hi HN! I'm Dhruv, co-founder of Keplar. After 2.5 years, countless late nights, and many pivots, we're launching Keplar Voice (https://keplar.io/voice).

The problem: Companies need to understand customers, but real research is painfully slow and expensive. A single moderated interview can cost hundreds of dollars and take weeks to schedule. So everyone defaults to surveys with LOW response rates and makes million-dollar decisions on shallow data.

Our solution: AI voice agents that conduct natural, dynamic conversations with hundreds of users simultaneously. Not scripted chatbots - these adapt based on responses, ask follow-ups, and dig deeper. Our analysis agents then code responses, surface patterns, and generate reports automatically.

Technical bits that might interest you: - Voice synthesis that actually sounds human and maintains context over 30+ minute conversations - Real-time conversation adaptation using LLMs to probe interesting threads - Parallel processing to handle hundreds of simultaneous interviews - Built in access to a panel of millions of respondents, with the ability to also recruit directly from your CRM via email - Study design led by an agent-first UI - Automated thematic analysis using coding and clustering

We're already working with Fortune 500s for concept testing, foundational research, and win-loss analysis. They're getting insights in hours that used to take months.

We just raised seed from Kleiner Perkins and SV Angel, and we're offering a free Keplar Voice study to anyone who wants to try it this week!

Would love feedback from this community. What's your biggest pain point with customer research?

Try it at keplar.io/voice - happy to answer any questions! AMA
by kkukshtel | 2025-09-17 20:51:06+00:00
As a small +1 — I built mood.site to be an easy way to share galleries of images with people. The idea being like "hey send me some photo inspiration for the party we're planning" and having a throwaway way to do that (kind of like a pastebin for images).

People definitely use it for this, but what has really surprised me is people's capactiy for expression inside of the bounds of the program I created, and how people are clearly using in as a sort of ad hoc social network of loosely collected boards and inspiration. There are no actual _social_ features in the app (no discovery, etc.), but what has been sort of inspriring is that The Will is just there for people to find ways of expression outside the idea of a "feed" and "posting".

I think those models have indeed become synonymous with "social media", but my only point here is to bring up a possibility of "social media" as something that can be much more expansive and look very different compared to the primary models we think of today.

Another person favorite of mine along the same lines is how the comments section of this Pilsburry recipe for "veggie pizza" has become it's own sort of ad-hoc social media for grandmas to share their own experiences with each other about the dish: https://www.pillsbury.com/recipes/veggie-pizza/4b2c60ae-69e5...
by NaOH | 2025-09-17 20:51:16+00:00
>...I assure you nobody who arrives in any of the nondescript white trucks with numbers on them regards the regulatory process as highly as you do.

I said nothing of how I regard the regulatory process. Don't be presumptuous; doing so disregards the site guidelines.

>Converse curiously

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
by HarHarVeryFunny | 2025-09-17 20:51:22+00:00
ICPC = The International Collegiate Programming Contest. These are college level programmers, not elite competitive programmers.

Apparently Gemini solved one problem (running on who knows what kind of cluster) by burning 30 min of "thinking" time on it, and at a cost that Google have declined to provide.

According to one prior competition paricipant, writing in the comments section of this ArsClasica coverage, each year they include one "time sink" problem that smart humans will avoid until they have tackled everything else.

https://arstechnica.com/google/2025/09/google-gemini-earns-g...

This would all seem to put a rather different spin on this. It's not a case of Google outwitting the worlds best programmers, but rather that by searching for solutions for 30 min on god knows what kind of cloud hardware, they were able to get something done that the college kids did not have time to complete, or deem worthwhile starting.
by atleastoptimal | 2025-09-17 20:51:36+00:00
People pattern match with a very low-resolution view of the world (web3/crypt/nfts were a bubble because there was hype, so there must be a bubble since AI is hyped! I am very smart) and fail to reckon with the very real ways in which AI is fundamentally different.

Also I think people do understand just how big of a deal AI is but don't want to accept it or at least publicly admit it because they are scared for a number of reasons, least of all being human irrelevance.
by PeterisP | 2025-09-17 20:51:48+00:00
It's just that out of these two claims only one is interesting and worth talking about (and that's the one mentioned in the title).

Thank you for your testing! That's a bunch of effort which I didn't do - but checking the other claim is much more difficult; a refusal is clearly visible, but saying whether out of two different codebases one is systematically slightly less secure is quite tricky - so that's why people are complaining about the lack of any description of the methodology of how they measure that, without which the claims actually are not testable.
by amluto | 2025-09-17 20:52:49+00:00
I've contemplated this a bit, and I think I have a bit of an unconventional take:

First, this is really impressive.

Second, with that out of the way, these models are not playing the same game as the human contestants, in at least two major regards. First, and quite obviously, they have massive amounts of compute power, which is kind of like giving a human team a week instead of five hours. But the models that are competing have absolutely massive memorization capacity, whereas the teams are allowed to bring a 25-page PDF with them and they need to manually transcribe anything from that PDF that they actually want to use in a submission.

I think that, if you gave me the ability to search the pre-contest Internet and a week to prepare my submissions, I would be kind of embarrassed if I didn't get gold, and I'd find the contest to be rather less interesting than I would find the real thing.
by michelpp | 2025-09-17 20:53:02+00:00
uuidv8 does not contain a timestamp or counter unless you put them in there, it only contains a version and variant field. It's a very broad format that lets you contain whatever bits you want.

This library converts a uuidv7 into a cryptographically random but deterministic uuidv4 recoverable with a shared key. For all intents and purposes the external view is a uuidv4, the internal representation is a v7, which has better index block locality and orderability.
by bogtog | 2025-09-17 20:53:29+00:00
Little of this is considered cognitive psychology. The vast majority would be viewed as "social psychology"

Setting that aside, among any scientific field I'm aware of, psychology has taken the replication crisis most seriously. Rigor across all areas of psychology is steadily increasing: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/25152459251323...
by blibble | 2025-09-17 20:53:42+00:00
the AI isn't malevolent (... yet)

but the companies operating it certainly are

they have no concept of consent

they take anything and everything, regardless of copyright or license, with no compensation to the authors

and then use it to directly compete with those they ripped off

not to mention shoving their poor quality generated slop everywhere they can possibly manage, regardless of ethics, consent or potential consequences

children should not be supplied a sycophantic source of partial truths that has been instructed to pretend to be their friend

this is text book malevolence
by sys32768 | 2025-09-17 20:54:03+00:00
We need an open-source AGI governed like a public utility whose purpose is to process news and media content with a centrist, evidence-based, logical lens.

People will stop reading the NY Times or FOX articles and instead will read the AGI versions of them, which will also store all instances of bias, error, and propaganda into a publicly accessible database that will rank sources on several scores.

This database will also allow discovery of patterns and narratives.

I firmly believe this would be so successful that its datacenters would be under constant threat.
by thot_experiment | 2025-09-17 20:55:24+00:00
To all the people in the comments popping off about how "it just works". I have a Makerbot 2 running Sailfish, it's "just worked" for 12 years. I haven't replaced a single part on it. Ever since I started using the Prusa Slicer I've got dimensionally accurate parts every time I hit print. At least from my PoV "the printer just working" is a solved problem and has been for a long time now. PLA, PETG, PCTG, TPU. No issues with anything and I've been able to drive it at about 150% the speed I could with the original firmware/software.
by cookiengineer | 2025-09-17 20:56:59+00:00
The problem with that rhetoric is that at some point you need social media to prove legitimacy of your identity.

It already happens at border controls and TSA checks.

Guess when that "you can just not use TikTok" argument will expand to "you can just not use the internet" and effectively be punished monetarily or socially for not wanting to use it.
by paxys | 2025-09-17 20:57:05+00:00
My response simply is that performance in coding competitions such as ICPC is a very different skillset than what is required in a regular software engineering job. GPT-5 still cannot make sense of my company's legacy codebase even if asked to do the most basic tasks that a new grad out of college can figure out in a day or two. I recently asked it to fix a broken test (I had messed with it by changing one single assertion) and it declared "success" by deleting the entire test suite.
by dang | 2025-09-17 20:57:25+00:00
See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43162211 and the links back from there and let us know if you still have a question.

(p.s. @dang is pretty much a no-op - for more reliable message delivery you need to email hn@ycombinator.com - see https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
by Dylan16807 | 2025-09-17 20:58:32+00:00
Do they usually use the same ones? I don't know, I just went based on some diagrams in a paper comparing techs.

I found something more useful though: https://www.panasonic.com/business/plasma/pdf/evaluationplas...

"Professional CRTs were manufactured to the SMPTE‐C standard gamut, which closely matches the NTSC standard and slightly exceeds the EBU (PAL/SECAM) standard. Any limitations on the reproduction of certain color shades were due to the maximum saturated levels of red, green, and blue phosphor compounds used in these monitors. While coverage of SMPTE‐C and BT.709 color spaces isn’t difficult to accomplish with a CRT, coverage of new, extended color gamuts such as xvYCC and the digital cinema P3 minimum standard gamut is problematic for CRT phosphor imaging. At best, a well‐designed CRT monitor could expect to cover about 60% ‐ 70% of these wider spaces, which typically push deeper into the green section of the 1931 CIE “tongue” color diagram."

This shows plasma as a little bit better than CRT, and again lists the limits of CRT gamut.

Lots of modern screens can do P3 and beyond. Some even get within a few percent of Rec.2020 https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b3/CI...

Maybe better phosphors are possible? Or you could put a quantum dot layer on top of CRT if you really wanted to? But I'm okay with dropping CRTs.
by godelski | 2025-09-17 20:58:32+00:00
One is more concerning, yes, but I'm asking for help vetting.

In either case, just blindly accepting or blindly rejecting the claim is unhelpful. Clearly the OP is blindly rejecting, as well as many other comments. These are unhelpful and just perpetuate misinformation campaigns (who's goals are to create chaos, more than they are to create a specific point of view).

So I want to ask, what are your comments contributing to? Why are you passionately attacking my comment? What is your vested interest here? Because I don't see this, or the similar comments, contributing much. Can we try to not be so quick to make conclusions and try to figure out the truth? Why are we arguing instead of trying to verify? I do value your opinions, but let's also make sure we know if they are pure conjecture of there's some evidence (even if minor). We can verify the claims, so let's try.
by spogbiper | 2025-09-17 20:59:18+00:00
I grew up pre-internet in the middle of nowhere, more than a mile from the nearest neighbor and 20 miles from anything you could call a town. and we had a somewhat oddball home computer that noone else had at school. Computer magazines were literally my only source of information for my system. I remember checking the mailbox every day and then spending hours reading every word in each new issue. typing in programs, dreaming of owning the fancy upgrades and new hardware.

I love being able to access almost anything instantly, but it kind of reduces my appreciation of everything at the same time
by foxfired | 2025-09-17 20:59:25+00:00
Blender went from being the least impressive 3d software when I first downloaded it in ~2003, to disrupting the industry. In the 2010s, you could still hear people would say in forums, "but no company uses blender in the industry". That's not the case anymore. The only limitation with blender now is your own creativity. I worked with several 3D artists, and they wouldn't have had their career without starting with that blender donut tutorial.

A big thanks to Ton. And don't forget that you can support the blender foundation.
by orwin | 2025-09-17 20:59:48+00:00
Look, i checked the first 20 seconds, it's called a "spun metaphor", even if poorly done. Basically, this guy (with a grating voice tbh), calls democrats to "show some gut" then "you need to be gutting them" and "shank them and let their intestine drop on stage".

It's obviously cut to look inflamatory, but be honest, do you really think he calls for democrats to _literally_ gut republicans? Or, and i don't know about eitehr this long-hair guy or the context, he was talking about a US debate democrats just lost because they showed no heart and refused to reach for the jugular after a successful initial attack, on a debate show?

Because, and again, not a native speaker, not from the US, don't know about it, i might be too charitable, it looks to be to be missing a lot of context. Was it recent? was it during the election cycle? To me its very, very suspicious that an editing like this comes out just now, it seems like a hit job.