MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by mallowdram | 2025-09-02 14:33:56+00:00
The units themselves are meaningless without context. The point of existence, action, tasks is to solve the arbitrariness in language. Tasks refute language, not the other way around. This may be incoherent as the explanation is scientific, based in the latest conceptualization of linguistics.

CS never solved the incoherence of language, conduit metaphor paradox. It's stuck behind language's bottleneck, and it do so willingly blind-eyed.
by bluGill | 2025-09-02 14:34:04+00:00
The university of Minnesota has a lot of tunnels. they were put into place because there is a central steam place and maintenance needs to inspect those pipes, but they are also open to anyone to use (or were when I went there year ago). When it was very cold it was nice to be able to get around - but often the tunnels were not very direct so I didn't use them much.
by tseropian | 2025-09-02 14:34:06+00:00
Senior / Lead software engineer specialized in web technologies - 15+ years of eperience

Location: Netherlands or Remote Europe Remote: Yes Willing to relocate: No Technologies: Typescript, Node.js, AWS, Serverless, Postgresql, Docker, AWS, React, GraphQL, pen and paper Résumé/CV: https://seropian.io Email: thomas@seropian.io
by epiccoleman | 2025-09-02 14:34:22+00:00
> So just because we feel conscious—just because strong feelings of consciousness, of "me-being-here"-ness, are written into the substrate of our brains—why should that tell us anything?

It's a fact about the universe that it feels a certain way to have a certain "brain state" - just like it's a fact about the universe that certain arrangements of ink and cellulose molecules comprise a piece of paper with a message written on it.

That fits perfectly well into a fully materialistic view of the universe. Where it starts to feel spooky to me is the question of whether thoughts themselves could have some sort of causal effect on the brain. Could a person with a healthy brain be lying safely in bed and "think themselves" into something "unhealthy?" Could I have a "realization" that somehow destabilizes my mind? It seems at least plausible that this can and does happen.

Maybe the conscious experience is pure side-effect - not causal at all. But even if the ultimate "truth" of that series of events is "a series of chemical reactions occurred which caused a long term destabilization of that individual's conscious experience," it feels incomplete somehow to try to describe that event without reference to the experiential component of it.

Whether we posit spooky downward causation or stick to pure materialism, there still seems to be a series of experiential phenomena in our universe which our current scientific approach seems unable to touch. That's not to say that we never could understand consciousness in purely material terms or that we could never devise experiments that help us describe it - it just seems like a big gap in our understanding of nature to me.
by sjsdaiuasgdia | 2025-09-02 14:34:54+00:00
Having a screen displaying your order is something many drive-through restaurants implemented long ago. It's a useful error detection mechanism regardless of what is interpreting the customer's speech.

We can also say, having observed those implementations for the last few decades, that the system is not always working for one reason or another. In my own experience, when the capability appears to be there, I see my order details about half the time. Some of that is probably humans not pushing buttons they're supposed to, but likely also includes a bunch of technical failure conditions.

When I'm already talking to another human and I don't have a way to visually inspect the order as it's being built, I can ask for confirmation of items and modifiers. I can focus this on areas where there might be more confusion - "did you catch the extra mayo for that?" and so forth.

If the order display system isn't working and an AI is doing the speech interpretation, I have less confidence on where errors might be made or the types of errors that are likely to be made. I wouldn't be able to confidently move forward without getting the AI to read back my entire order (taking a lot of time) or transferring to a human (also taking a lot of time, and now I'm burning the human's time).

From the customer perspective, the happy path is not improved by AI order takers. In the best case, you have basically the same experience as you would with a human order taker. The failure paths are made worse. Responsibility for verifying the AI's accuracy is placed on the customer, and the customer also has to be the one saying "I need a human to intervene." As many errors will eventually require human intervention, the time taken to resolve an error will tend to be longer than without AI as the customer has to get past whatever guardrails are in place to prevent immediate transfer out of the AI flow. The error rate is likely to be higher with AI order takers in general, meaning customers encounter these failure paths more often.

IMO that's a common theme with a lot of AI customer service 'solutions' out there today...from the customer perspective, happy paths are minimally (or not at all) improved, and failure paths shift cognitive load and responsibility from the business to the customer.
by ModernMech | 2025-09-02 14:35:25+00:00
> So you have an idiosyncratic definition of compiler that no one else uses.

My definition is supported by your links, so I don't think it's idiosyncratic at all.

> "In computing, a compiler is software that translates computer code written in one programming language (the source language) into another language (the target language)."

That's exactly what I said:

"My working definition is a compiler is a program that turns code from one form into another"

> LLVM... is a target-independent optimizer and code generator.

Code generators are a kind of compiler. The input language is IR, and the output language is machine code. Thus it fits the definition of a compiler you proffered.

> As I correctly said, LLVM is not a compiler, it is a backend target of Rust, C++, etc. compilers.

These things are not mutually exclusive. It can be a target of Rust, C++, etc., but that doesn't make it not a compiler. LLVM being a compiler is supported by both of your wiki links. Your first link lists LLVM under "Notable Compilers and Toolchains". In the second link in the LLVM infobox it reads "Type: Compiler". Nuff said.
by whstl | 2025-09-02 14:36:13+00:00
It was interesting handling frontend interviews recently.

We do a 30-min tops exercise where you create a React project to show how to use useState and useEffect, etc. I help with whatever command they want to use and allow Google/ChatGPT.

More than half of the candidates had no idea how to use React without Next.js, and some argued it was impossible, even after I told them the opposite.
by kube-system | 2025-09-02 14:36:17+00:00
Apple revoked notarization -- which is delivered as a service from their computers.

If you don't like that the phone connects to Apple's servers and uses the data delivered, then you shouldn't have bought a product that works that way. Or alternatively, you can take it apart and change it. Nobody is stopping you.

But Apple doesn't owe you an ongoing service that works exactly the way you like just because you bought one of their devices.
by dukeyukey | 2025-09-02 14:36:22+00:00
Apple's natural home is hardware, and the consume software integrated with that hardware. Off the top of my head I can't think of any "hard" software created by Apple, it's all about the UX and the integrations.

So unless Apple thinks it can outcompete it's BigTech competitors in something it historically hasn't done much of, best leave it to them.
by stego-tech | 2025-09-02 14:36:22+00:00
True, but in that case we call it “errors” or “propaganda”, depending on the context and source. Plus the steep costs of traditional encyclopedias, the need to refresh collections with new data periodically, and the role of librarians, all acted as a deterrent against lying (since they’re reference material).

Wikipedia can also lie, obviously, but it at least requires sources to be cited, and I can dig deeper into topics at my leisure or need in order to improve my knowledge.

I cannot do either with an LLM. It is not obligated to cite sources, and even if it is it can just make shit up that’s impossible to follow or leads back to AI-generated slop - self-referencing, in other words. It also doesn’t teach you (by default, and my opinions of its teaching skills are an entirely different topic), but instead gives you an authoritative answer in tone, but not in practice.

Normalizing LLMs as “lossy encyclopedias” is a dangerous trend in my opinion, because it effectively handwaves the need for critical thinking skills associated with research and complex task execution, something in sore supply in the modern, Western world.
by torginus | 2025-09-02 14:36:26+00:00
If scientific consensus is that he's wrong why is he being constantly brought up and defended - am I not right to call them out then?

Nobody brings up that light travels through the aether, that diseases are caused by bad humors etc. - is it not right to call out people for stating theory that's believed to be false?

>The randomness stuff is very straw man,

And a direct response to what armada651 wrote:

>I think it's entirely valid to question whether a computer can form an understanding through deterministically processing instructions, whether that be through programming language or language training data.

> He’s arguing that biology has mechanisms that binary electronic circuitry doesn’t; not human brains, simply physical chemical and biological processes.

Once again the argument here changed from 'computers which only manipulate symbols cannot create consciousness' to 'we don't have the algorithm for consiousness yet'.

He might have successfully argued against the expert systems of his time - and true, mechanistic attempts at language translation have largely failed - but that doesn't extend to modern LLMs (and pre LLM AI) or even statistical methods.
by tripletpeaks | 2025-09-02 14:36:28+00:00
It’s fine to like trash.

It’s best to be able to tell it’s trash, because if you can’t then it means you’re missing what you need to fully appreciate really good things, which is less than ideal.

But it’s totally fine to like it. Zero shame.

And it doesn’t make people bad who can’t tell the difference between trash and good stuff, they’ve just prioritized different (and, maybe, less, but who cares) stuff than you have. Though when they try to make recommendations it’s fair to totally ignore them. Even if you are looking for a particular kind of trash, you need a critic who can tell good from bad (but appreciates that even bad things have an audience) if you want a good hit-rate. And when those sorts start to opine that actually good things are bad (because they haven’t developed the ability to appreciate them) it’s fine to regard that behavior as boorish, because it is. It’s basically the inverse of snobbery, and yeah, it’s also shitty.
by wafflemaker | 2025-09-02 14:36:29+00:00
ChatGPT app is annoyingly triggering it with every prompt reply.

But there is this escooter app in Norway called Ryde, that blocks itself from even being seen on Play Store. They are otherwise very good, excellent support, responded positively to some UI feature requests. They also have a living wage policy for their battery maintenance mechanics.

How would I approach them about changing how they verify phones? I'm no dev really and feel like it's a little above me.
by msabalau | 2025-09-02 14:36:41+00:00
Yeah, and Google has cared deeply about AI as a long term play since before they were public. And have been continuously invested there over the long haul.

The small stuff that they kill is just that--small stuff that was never important to them strategically.

I mean, sure, don't heavily invest (your attention, time, business focus, whatever) in something that is likely to be small to Google, unless you want to learn from their prototypes, while they do.

But to pretend that Google isn't capable of sustained intense strategic focus is to ignore what's clearly visible.
by svaigstu | 2025-09-02 14:36:42+00:00
Modash.io | Multiple Roles | Remote (EU) | Full-time

• Modash is an end-to-end influencer marketing platform for Shopify stores.

• We help every creator earn a living.

• Headquartered in Tallinn, Estonia, with engineering distributed across Europe.

• 60 person team, raised €11M in Series A funding, ARR growing 2x YoY.

—

Remote, Europe

Senior Product Engineers https://apply.workable.com/modash/j/C1507B65C3/ (€60k-100k)

Senior Data Engineers https://www.modash.io/careers/senior-data-engineer (€60k-140k)

Senior Backend Engineer https://apply.workable.com/modash/j/D4FA5BA3E6/

Senior Product Designer https://apply.workable.com/modash/j/5C9A805E59/ (€50k-80k)

Senior Marketing Designer https://apply.workable.com/modash/j/48D2B2DCBE/ (€55k-80k)

—

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Technical Customer Success Manager, API https://apply.workable.com/modash/j/96C4941FE6/

—

More roles: https://www.modash.io/careers
by righthand | 2025-09-02 14:37:14+00:00
> For users in the United States, article recommendations on your New Tab page are now grouped into topic sections like Sports, Food, and Entertainment to make stories more organized and easier to scan. You can also follow topics you’re interested in and block ones you’d prefer not to see, giving you more control over what shows up when you open a new tab.

Ladybird cannot come fast enough…
by perihelions | 2025-09-02 14:37:34+00:00
It's also easy to draw type graphs like these dynamically: DO-EXTERNAL-SYMBOLS + FIND-CLASS yields you list of types—and CLASS-DIRECT-SUPERCLASSES, from MOP, gives you the edge relations between them. In my personal SLIME setup I render graphs like this through graphviz and into an Emacs buffer.
by mothballed | 2025-09-02 14:37:38+00:00
a) Let's not be coy, I'm using the word as Cornell Law/LII and many lawyers use []. Illegal as they are here unlawfully. It's well understood in a legal context.

b) A chart does not trump law, and that chart appears to be for people older than 26, who don't need evidence they signed up for the draft. Or people who entered before 26 and have a reason why they'd be excluded. That chart isn't for evidence needed to submit to the draft, it's a way to show you didn't have to sign up.

I'm not talking about all undocumented immigrants (for instance, instances of foreign born perhaps female or otherwise draft exempt children that are born US citizens but never documented as such and enter the US without documentation), that's why I used illegal rather than undocumented which could be legal presence.

[] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/illegal_immigrant
by scotty79 | 2025-09-02 14:37:40+00:00
Yeah, probably but I know exactly the environment I'm living in. And changing it for more southern and warmer, possibly wetter doesn't sound like a healthy move.

To be honest all southern countries have this risk. When I lived to Italy I was suddenly introduced to domestic scorpions. So while all of Europe is roughly similar there are some things you might be not aware of and those are more abundant in the south.

Politics mostly is why I'm singling Turkey out though.
by zigzag312 | 2025-09-02 14:38:26+00:00
Look at non-tech related warnings targeted to laymen. Do you or your parents have trouble understanding most of these warnings?

I'm not saying better UX would help in all cases, but there's a huge heap of issues with security warnings from operating systems which, I think, are largely responsible for effects you're observing. If a warning requires that a user is tech competent, it's a bad warning.
by jeffbee | 2025-09-02 14:38:28+00:00
There's some sleight of hand being perpetrated here through the use of an inappropriate scale to trick the reader into thinking that NVMe latency is roughly zero when it's not. Let's just stipulate that you have an unreleased, hypothetical NVMe device with consistent 10µs read latency. The same device will have a write latency 10-100x higher, which it hides, under transient conditions, with DRAM. It's a very poor mental model to assume that "I/O" latency has gone to zero. It only looks that way if you're polluting your chart with disk access times from 1980, and it assumes a false symmetry between "I" and "O".
by janalsncm | 2025-09-02 14:39:08+00:00
Which is not a good comparison because the LLMs are products not companies. If they are companies, they are competing against each other for revenue.

If I switch from Gemini Pro to Opus, that is good for Anthropic. If I switch from Opus 4 to 4.1, that’s not as good for Anthropic.

Sad that these CEOs can get away with this level of sophistry.
by anais9 | 2025-09-02 14:39:13+00:00
Hearst | New York City - Hybrid or Remote | Full-time | Senior Engineer, Generative AI & Senior Program Manager, Generative AI

Hearst's corporate team is looking to fill two roles (in Engineering & Program Management) on its Generative AI Team, working to empower businesses across our diversified portfolio spanning publishing, health, transportation, and financial services. Our team's purview includes evaluating and benchmarking new releases, experimenting with the best ways to apply them to existing business problems, piloting POCs that demonstrate new ways of doing things, and accelerating the entire process on our team and within our various businesses through AI driven development tools & tactics.

Do you enjoy actively learning and experimenting with new tools & processes? Do you like solving problems across a wide range of domains and disciplines? Are you excited by the potential and application of emergent generative capabilities and agentic autonomous systems? Check out one of our open postings or feel free to reach out to me directly (https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexandria-redmon-5078865/):

Sr Engineer: https://eevd.fa.us6.oraclecloud.com/hcmUI/CandidateExperienc...

Sr Program Manager: https://eevd.fa.us6.oraclecloud.com/hcmUI/CandidateExperienc...
by mfrye0 | 2025-09-02 14:39:25+00:00
Adding on to the other comments here about Next.js vs Remix.js.

We had to choose a framework for our new app last year and were researching the current state of things. Next.js was / is by far the most popular, but also had some of the worst feedback and caution to stay away. Remix isn't perfect, but I appreciate less abstractions and working with simple request / response structures.

Also, a warning for those hiring for frontend / fullstack roles:

Over the years when hiring for roles for X frontend framework, we would constantly find "experts" in framework X that would really impress us. Whether it was React, Angular, Vue, Remix, etc. Then after moving forward, we found they didn't know core JS fundamentals and were basically useless beyond the framework.
by stego-tech | 2025-09-02 14:39:28+00:00
To be fair, most people aren’t even critical of Wikipedia. They read an article, consume its content, and believe themselves competent experts without digging into the sources, the papers, or the talk pages for discourse and dissent.

Giving LLMs credibility as “lossless encyclopedias” is tacit approval of further dumbing-down of humanity through answer engines instead of building critical thinking skills.
by lotsofpulp | 2025-09-02 14:40:01+00:00
>(2) Stock price: if you bought MSFT in October the year the iphone came out in 2007, you would take 6 years to break even. If you bought at the top in 2000 you wouldn't break even until 2016. This is a company that was limping along. During the mobile phone boom you'd have been better off putting your money in treasuries than in MSFT.

Using equity returns to claim a business is limping along is bizarre. They were earning $10B profit per year in the early 2000s with 20%+ profit margins, something most businesses can only dream of doing, even today.

https://www.helgilibrary.com/charts/microsoft-corporation-pr...

If that business is limping along, then pretty much all other businesses are on life support.
by kxrm | 2025-09-02 14:40:32+00:00
JWP Connatix | AI Software Engineer | REMOTE (EU) | Full-Time

JWP Connatix is the most comprehensive independent video technology and monetization platform, helping broadcasters, publishers, and advertisers deliver premium streaming and online video experiences while maximizing video revenue across all screens. The company offers an end-to-end platform that streamlines live and on-demand video with hybrid monetization models, unique data and insights, unmatched customer service, and the largest independent premium video marketplace, providing the entire media ecosystem with enhanced scale, transparency, and revenue.

We are looking for a skilled and adaptable AI Engineer to join our AI Proof of Concepts team at JWP Connatix. You'll be responsible for implementing AI-First development methodologies, integrating sophisticated AI tools into our software pipeline, and rapidly building MVP prototypes that demonstrate innovative solutions. This role offers the opportunity to work at the cutting edge of AI-integrated development while delivering high-impact prototypes in a fast-paced, iterative environment. The ideal candidate thrives in rapid prototyping environments, has hands-on experience with AI tool integration, and enjoys the challenge of quickly turning concepts into working demonstrations for stakeholder validation.

If this sounds like something you'd be interested in please apply!

https://jwpconnatix.com/careers/job-posting/?gh_jid=7128853
by mechanicum | 2025-09-02 14:41:27+00:00
It’s common niggle but, as far as I know, nobody is sure of the precise rationale for placing every key, only the broad explanations of the layout that Dvorak published and promoted. The layout wasn’t based only on letter frequency but they attempted to account also for bigram frequency, frequency of repetition within words, frequency with which words are used, and with an objective of rhythmic alternation between hands.

Consider also that it was developed in the 20s and 30s. Nowadays you could throw some moderately hefty compute at almost everything of note written in the English language and come back to an error-free analysis after lunch, but who knows how representative was the corpus they analysed, painstakingly and manually. It might have made perfect sense with their data set.

Ultimately, the English language didn’t evolve to be easy to type, there will always be compromises somewhere, and the English of today isn’t the English of a century ago anyway. I imagine you’d get quite a different layout if you based it on Gen Z text messages or something.

Personally, I can’t help but note that Dvorak’s first name was August.
by pessimizer | 2025-09-02 14:41:29+00:00
Bigger processors with more RAM have always been available. The question has always been whether you're going to use a $20 processor when you could do the job with a 50¢ one. It's the difference between your product being cheap and disposable, and you getting to choose your margin based on your strategy; and not being able to move a unit without losing money, hoping to sell yourself to someone who knows how to do more with less.

I'm an Erlang fanatic, and have been since forever, paid for classes when it was Erlang Training & Consulting at the center of things, flew cross-country to take them, have the t-shirt, hosted Erlang meetups myself in downtown Chicago. I'm not prototyping a microcontroller application in Erlang if I can get it done any other way. It's committing to losing from the outset.

edit: I've always been hopeful for some bare-metal implementation that would at least almost work for cheap µcs, and there have been promising attempts in the past, but they seem to have gone nowhere.