MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by KoolKat23 | 2025-09-03 14:13:25+00:00
Agree with this.

I mean the guy assembling a thingymajig in the factory, after a few years, can put it together with his hands 10x faster than the actual thingymajig designer. He'll tell you apply some more glue here and less glue there (it's probably slightly better, but immaterial really). However, he probably couldn't tell you what the fault tolerance of the item is, the designer can do that. We still outsource manufacturing to the guy in the factory regardless.

We just have to get better at identifying risks with using the LLMs doing the grunt work and get better in mitigating them. As you say, abstracted.
by codyb | 2025-09-03 14:13:43+00:00
Really? No signs of slowing down?

A year or two ago when LLMs popped on the scene my coworkers would say "Look at how great this is, I can generate test cases".

Now my coworkers are saying "I can still generate test cases! And if I'm _really pacificcccc_, I can get it to generate small functions too!".

It seems to have slowed down considerably, but maybe that's just me.
by CuriouslyC | 2025-09-03 14:13:49+00:00
We're just moving up the abstraction ladder, like we did with compilers. I don't care about the individual lines of code, I care about architecture, code structure, rigorous automated e2e tests, contracts with comprehensive validation, etc. Rather than waste a bunch of time pouring over agent PRs I just make them jump over extremely high static/analytic hurdles that guarantee functionality, then my only job is to identify places where the current spec and the intended functionality differ and create a new spec to mitigate.
by vincent_builds | 2025-09-03 14:13:57+00:00
Author here, quick clarification on pricing: the $1000-1500/month is for Teams/Enterprise with higher rate limits, not the consumer MAX plans. Consumer MAX ($200/month) works for lighter usage but hits limits quickly with parallel agents and large codebases.

For context: that's 1-2% of a senior engineer's fully loaded cost. The ROI is clear if it delivers even 10% productivity gain (we're seeing 2-3x on specific tasks).

You're right that many devs can start with MAX plans. The higher tier becomes necessary when running multiple parallel contexts and doing systematic exploration (the "3-attempt pattern" burns tokens fast).

I wouldn't be doing it if I didn't think it was value for money. I've always been a cost-conscious engineer who weighs cost/value, and with Claude, I am seeing the return.
by geye1234 | 2025-09-03 14:14:01+00:00
Interesting, thanks. Do you mean he would write the code out by hand on pen and paper? That has often struck me as a very good way of understanding things (granted, I don't code for my job).

Similar thing in the historian's profession (which I also don't do for my job but have some knowledge of). Historians who spend all day immersed in physical archives tend, over time, to be great at synthesizing ideas and building up an intuition about their subject. But those who just Google for quotes and documents on whatever they want to write about tend to have more a static and crude view of their topic; they are less likely to consider things from different angles, or see how one things affects another, or see the same phenomenon arising in different ways; they are more likely to become monomaniacal (exaggerated word but it gets the point across) about their own thesis.
by nickpsecurity | 2025-09-03 14:14:05+00:00
It's a careful way of running a business with potential users in highly-regulated markets. They don't know their regulations or laws. They don't want to invest labor in complying with them.

So, they reduced their liability by prohibiting usage of the model to show those jurisdictions' decision makers they were complying. I considered doing the same thing for EU. Although, I also considered one mught partner with an EU company if they are willing to make models legal in their jurisdiction. Just as a gift to Europeans mainly but maybe also a profit-sharing agreement.
by Cthulhu_ | 2025-09-03 14:14:10+00:00
I believe there's games that have that already. My concern is that it's all going to be sameish slop. Read ten AI generated stories and you've read them all.

It could work, but they would have to both write unique prompts for each NPC (instead of "generate me 100 NPC personality prompts") and limit the possible interactions and behaviours.

But, emergent / generative behaviour would be interesting to a point. There's plenty of roguelikes / roguelites where this could work in, given their generative behaviours.
by srean | 2025-09-03 14:14:17+00:00
All linear operators map origin to origin. But translation applied to the origin will shift it. So translation cannot be linear.

Let's take another approach.

Take a point p that's sum of vectors a and b, that is

p = a + b.

Now, if translation was a linear transformation, then translating p (say along x-axis by 1 unit) is equivalent to applying same translation to a and b separately and then summing them. But the latter ends up translating by twice the amount. Or in other words

p +t ≠ (a +t) + (b +t) = p + 2t.

So translation is not a linear operators in this vector space.
by iamleppert | 2025-09-03 14:14:27+00:00
The problem with A/B testing, and anyone who has ever done it at scale can tell you, beyond the banal basic stuff that people are already aware of like making things accessible and discoverable, once you get to a certain point, people just have no opinion. The default opinion is no opinion.

It's why every mass consumer product devolves into a feed or a list of content delivered by an algorithm. Once you reach a certain point, you come full circle and even that doesn't matter anymore: users will happily consume whatever you give them, within reason.

A/B testing platforms are mostly used by an odd collection of marketers and "data driven" people who love to run experiments and drag out every little change in the name of optimization. In the end, it all completely doesn't matter and doesn't tell you anything more than just talking to an average user will.

But, boy, are they sure a great way to look busy and dress up an underperforming product!
by jcranmer | 2025-09-03 14:14:42+00:00
> To your point the paper AFAIK wasn't debunked because someone read it carefully but because people tried to reproduce it.

Actually, from my recollection, it was debunked pretty quickly by people who read the paper because the paper was hot garbage. I saw someone point out that its graph of resistivity showed higher resistance than copper wire. It was no better than any of the other claimed room-temperature semiconductor papers that came out that year; it merely managed to catch virality on social media and therefore drove people to attempt to reproduce it.
by pas | 2025-09-03 14:15:07+00:00
well, Uber always faced the obvious problem of scaling (even after level 42 self-driving, because it's not possible to serve local demand with global supply, plus all the regulatory compliance issues - which they initially "conveniently" sidestepped by being bold/criminal, but cities are not going to play dumb forever)

of course these chat-AIs also started by "well maybe it's fair use", but at least the scaling problem seems easier than for taxi services
by flanked-evergl | 2025-09-03 14:16:22+00:00
This is a false dichotomy, you can have privacy and still be militarily and economically relevant.

But say that you were right, and you have to choose between privacy and relevance, if you choose privacy, then once you are entirely economically dependent on Russia (Europe is still paying more in energy money to Russia than in aid to Ukraine) and China — when Europe is a vassal — it won't be able to make its own laws anymore.
by card_zero | 2025-09-03 14:16:44+00:00
On the topic of social credit, I wonder if credit inequality bothers you more. Markets chase after desirable customers who are economically active. The super-rich with yachts aren't affecting me, because they're away being fleeced in Monte Carlo and not competing with me for the basic peasant stuff that I want. But the desirable customers/tenants/employees, who might have debts, and less money than me, but have great prospects and a drive to keeping moving up and circulating cash, and who tick boxes as reliable and enhance the general tone of the business or area and help promote it - those are monsters.
by ot | 2025-09-03 14:16:51+00:00
It is a linear percentage of the amount of time the CPU is not idle. It is not linear in the amount of useful work, but that's not what "utilization" means.

The lie is the assumption that CPU time is linear in useful work, but that has nothing to do with the definition of utilization, it's just something that people sometimes naively believe.

> CPU utilization isn't a lie, % CPU utilization is

What do you mean by this? Utilization is, by definition, a ratio. % just determines that the scale is in [0, 100].
by JustExAWS | 2025-09-03 14:17:01+00:00
Look up the concept of “luck surface area”.

https://modelthinkers.com/mental-model/surface-area-of-luck

It’s about doing the work and telling people you do the work. It was never my intention to land in BigTech at 46. I was actively opposed to it because I didn’t want to move from my big house in the burbs and we were fine. I had spent the last seven years at startups leading projects and “transformations”, learning AWS and updating my LinkedIn profile. AWS reached out to me in 2020 (as has GCP since I left but I rather get an anal probe with a cactus than go to BigTech again and I’m damn sure not going into an office) and I said why not interview?

While I was there, I was building a network with coworkers and clients, learning how strategic consulting works on the highest level, contributing to an official very popular open source “AWS Solution” in its niche. Releasing my own open source solutions in their official repository, did a couple of blog post that are still on their website, etc.

When Amazon started Amazoning, I waited for my severance offer and had multiple job offers within two weeks with a $40k+ severance in the bank just by reaching out to my industry contacts I had made.

It may be bullshit. I might think gravity is bullshit. But that doesn’t mean I’m going to jump off of a 25 story building out of defiance. I play the game because I have an addiction to food and shelter.
by chaps | 2025-09-03 14:17:03+00:00
> (1) people who are able to understand the concepts deeply, build a mental model of it and implement them in code at any level, and (2) people who outsource it to a machine and slowly, slowly loose that capability.

...is it really only going to be these two? No middle ground, gradient, or possibly even a trichotomous variation of your split?

> loose that capability

You mean "lose". ;)
by forrestthewoods | 2025-09-03 14:17:10+00:00
Spin the camera 1080 degrees in place you cowards!!

These clips are very short and don’t rotate the camera more than like 45 degrees. Genie3 also cheats and only rotate the camera 90 degrees.

It’s always important to pay attention to what models don’t do. And in this case it’s turn the bloody camera around.

I refuse to accept any model to be a “world model” if it can’t pass a simple “spin in place” test.

Bah hum bug.
by Cthulhu_ | 2025-09-03 14:17:14+00:00
Yeah, they have all the raw data (Google is a self-confessed data hoarder, after all), I'm sure they have research projects where they use AI and similar to stitch street view images together.

I also wouldn't be surprised if their Street View cars / people record video instead of stills these days. Assuming they started capturing stuff in 2007 (and it was probably a lot earlier), storage technology has improved at least tenfold in terms of storage (probably more), video processing too.
by el_benhameen | 2025-09-03 14:17:23+00:00
What about people who use the machines to augment their learning process? I find that being able to ask questions, particularly “dumb” questions that I don’t want to bother someone else with and niche questions that might not be answered well in the corpus, helps me better understand new concepts. If you just take the answers and move on, then sure, you’re going to have a bad time. But if you critically interrogate the answers and synthesize the information, I don’t see how this isn’t a _better_ era for people who want to develop a deep understanding of something.
by gilleain | 2025-09-03 14:17:32+00:00
Thinks : "What is an inactive form of a B-vitamin?". Some examples:

B1 - Thiamin [Inactive] vs Thiamine Diphosphate [Active]. B2 - Flavin Mononucleotide (FMN) vs Flavin Adenine Dinucleotide (FAD). B12 - Cyanocobalamine vs Methylcobalamin.

Interesting. So the idea is that an excess of (say) FMN would block conversion to FAD?
by Nevermark | 2025-09-03 14:17:34+00:00
That would be a different use of dimension.

The measurement of any one of those is a 0 dimensional tensor, a single number.

But then you are right, what. is being measured by that one sensor is 1 dimensional.

But all single sensors measure across a 1 dimensional variable. Whether it’s linear pressure, rotation, light intensity, audio volume at 1 frequency, etc.
by UncleMeat | 2025-09-03 14:17:51+00:00
This is an amazingly frightening comment. An ever expanding definition of "well it is better to just treat them as military targets" enabling the military to pursue unilateral mass death. And this follows decades of utterly disastrous strategy targeting terror organizations in this manner (who at least have an actual goal of killing civilians).

You are one small step away from "gangs in US cities strike me as similar to..." and the US military just murdering US citizens on US soil based on unreviewed designations and classified intelligence.
by MBCook | 2025-09-03 14:18:17+00:00
Yeah that was the big difference between it and DVDs.

LDs are just the NTSC signal on the disc, the same way a CD is just raw audio on a disc (wrong! See replies). That means no compression. And given they didn’t have the higher density discs we got with DVDs they had to be the size of LPs and flipped mid movie.

DVDs were digital so the video could be compressed.

Except LDs aren’t like CDs, it’s sort of the other way around! Laserdisc came out 5 years before audio CDs. That blew my mind when I first heard it. Came out in ‘78.
by blibble | 2025-09-03 14:18:40+00:00
I can count the amount of times in my 20 year career that I've had to look at compiler generated assembly on one finger

and I've never looked at the machine code produced by an assembler (other than when I wrote my own as a toy project)

is the same true of LLM usage? absolutely not

and it never will be, because it's not an abstraction
by devin | 2025-09-03 14:18:48+00:00
The link you posted has a great many very insignificant investments included in it, and nothing I've seen Google doing has felt quite like the desperation of Facebook in recent years.

I didn't really see it at first, but I think you are correct to point out that they kind of rhyme. However to me, I think the clear desperation of Facebook makes it feel rather different from what I've seen Google doing over the years. I'm not sure I agree that Google's core business is in jeopardy in the way that Facebook's aging social media platform is.
by nobleach | 2025-09-03 14:18:53+00:00
For a look at some of the amazing output from an "ancient" EOS, you can look at Magic Lantern's Discord. It's rather shocking how far this little camera could be pushed. It is definitely a fun hobby project to fool around with these things. After awhile I stopped having the time and moved over to Sony APS-C with vintage lenses. I was able to maintain some of the aesthetic without getting frustrated by stuttering video. Still it's really a cool project.
by indigodaddy | 2025-09-03 14:19:21+00:00
Personally, I cringe at paying more than 100-150 for a phone. Never spent more than that in my life! I've had a couple refurb iPhone 7's over the last 5-7 years, lol. My main phone currently is a 2024 Moto G Play, but it's a little lacking even for me (as I couldn't give two shits about even beginning to care about having a "nice" phone), so a decent shape Pixel 5 for cheap sounds kinda cool
by badlucklottery | 2025-09-03 14:19:33+00:00
Solid copper projectiles are the primary leadless solution on the market but they're much more expensive than the traditional copper jacket over lead core construction.

There's also solutions like Federal Syntech (https://www.federalpremium.com/handgun/syntech/) that doesn't get rid of the lead but fully encapsulates it to avoid the airborne lead problem.
by jaggs | 2025-09-03 14:19:41+00:00
I think what most commenters are missing is the fact that we now live in an age where it is trivially easy to heavily market to kids on social media like tiktok etc.

I think this is similar to why we ban sales of cigarettes to the under aged. It's just common sense no?

To those who advocate for zero drug prohibition, can we imagine a world where there was no drug prohibition and kids could be marketed fentanyl on TikTok at will?

Obviously this is an extreme, but it's an example of the kind of problems our society now faces?

(For some reason the catastrophic problems China had with opium in the late 1800s springs to mind).
by vincent_builds | 2025-09-03 14:19:58+00:00
Author here. It's fair enough. I didn't give real-world examples; that's partially down to what I typically work on. I usually work in brownfield backend logic in closed-source applications that don't showcase well.

Two recent production features:

1. *Quota crossing detection system* - Complex business logic for billing infrastructure - Detects when usage crosses configurable thresholds across multiple metric types - Time: 4 days parallel work vs ~10 days focused without AI

The 3-attempt pattern was clear here: - Attempt 1: DB trigger approach - wouldn't scale for our requirements - Attempt 2: SQL detection but wrong interfaces, misunderstood counter vs gauge metrics - Attempt 3: Correct abstraction after explaining how values are stored and consumed

2. *Sentry monitoring wrapper for cron jobs* - Reusable component wrapping all cron jobs with monitoring - Time: 1 day parallel vs 2 days focused

Nothing glamorous, but they are real-world examples of changes I've deployed to production quicker because of Claude.
by gilleain | 2025-09-03 14:20:03+00:00
Hmmm, even a small amount of rabbit-hole diving turns up some curious statements around this :

> Cyanocobalamin is also the most common form of vitamin B12 found in supplements. It is named because it contains a cyanide molecule. The amount of cyanide found in cyanocobalamin supplements tends to be small, but the body still has to do extra “work” to remove and eliminate the cyanide molecule. If your liver is already overworked, this added step can make activating this nutrient more challenging.

I'm sceptical that the extra 'work' here to convert CNCbl to MeCbl is significantly taxing for the liver. B12 is needed in very small amounts ("the upper limit of absorption per single oral dose is about 1.5 μg" - wikipedia).

More on this: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5312744/

> Numerous studies and reviews of B12 metabolism have shown that CNCbl, MeCbl, OHCbl, and AdCbl are reduced to the core cobalamin molecule inside the cytosol. It is important to note that the ligands specific to the ingested B12 form—methyl and adenosyl—are removed during that process and not used inside cells during the conversion of cobalamin to the 2 active forms of B12

Certainly that review suggests that taking one of the bioavailable forms (MeCbl, OHCbl, AdCbl) is _better_ than the usual CNCbl one, but I see no mention of CNCbl being more 'taxing' in some sense.
by fwipsy | 2025-09-03 14:20:05+00:00
You can find the answer this way if the query is simple enough, but in general, if you are asking for something specific or trying to retrieve a piece of information based on keywords it's not usually indexed by, AI will do better. For example, "how are large concrete piers supporting a roadway constructed on a 45 degree slope?" Claude gave me an answer immediately, most Google results for my first two queries weren't specific enough/didn't include all details. I'm sure Google could find the answer, but asking Claude is just easier.
by throw0101d | 2025-09-03 14:20:25+00:00
> He sold his own shitcoin in a scheme where the highest bidder got direct access to him at a dinner.

Mar-A-Lago initiation fees went from $100K to $1000K/$1M after he became President (again).

The New Yorker recently released a article/video "How Much Money Is Trump Profiting from the Presidency?":

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpOE3aAt8XU

* https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2025/08/18/the-number
by nicoche | 2025-09-03 14:21:03+00:00
Hey!

You got everything correctly. The advantages are: - For the end-user: not paying or paying less - For the hypervisor owner: a sleeping instance uses no CPU, so it reduces the load on the hypervisor

Other than that, it's still possible to oversubscribe, but you're right, we need to trump the scheduler. Another cool thing is that in the worst case scenario where an hypervisor gets full and it's over capacity, sleeping instances are great candidates for eviction.
by flanbiscuit | 2025-09-03 14:21:55+00:00
> and diminished sense of ownership over their own writing.

Anecdotally, this is how I felt when I tried out AI agents to help me write code (vibe coding). I always review the code and I ask it to break it down into smaller steps but because I didn't actually write and think of the code myself, I don't have it all in my brain. Sure, yes I can spend a lot of time really going through it and building my mental model but it's not the same (for me).

But this is also how I felt when I managed a small team once. When you start to manage more and code less, you have to let go of the fact that you have more intimate knowledge of the codebase and place that trust in your team. But at least you have a team of humans.

AI agentic coding is like shifting your job from developer to manager. Like the article that was posted yesterday said: 'treating AI like a "junior developer who doesn't learn"' [1,2].

One good thing I like about AI is that it's forcing people to write more documentation. No more complaining about that.

1. https://www.sanity.io/blog/first-attempt-will-be-95-garbage

2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45107962
by Ruphin | 2025-09-03 14:21:59+00:00
Nothing in Web Components is forcing you to use ShadowDOM. Lit also allows you to make components without ShadowDOM if you prefer, because there are certainly cases where it can be necessary to do so (like for ARIA reference id-matching). For full single application development, it can feel like it gets in the way a lot, and you can make a good argument to use components without ShadowDOM in those contexts too.

All frontend "frameworks" do have some sort of solution to scope CSS to individual components, and without a similar solution, a native component system would not be viable. The implementation has its quirks, but it is a core capability that is necessary for some use cases. For third-party widgets or cross-application components like design systems, the ability to isolate your component from the site it is embedded in is very useful.

Think of shadowDOM as the web component alternative to scoped styles in Vue components (as an example). You don't have to use it, but it would be incredibly inconvenient if it wasn't included in the framework.
by aprilthird2021 | 2025-09-03 14:22:18+00:00
> I don’t see how this isn’t a _better_ era for people who want to develop a deep understanding of something.

Same way a phone in your pocket gives you the world's compiled information available in a moment. But that's generally led to loneliness, isolation, social upheaval, polarization, and huge spread of wrong information.

If you can handle the negatives is a big if. Even the smartest of our professional class are addicted to doomscrolling these days. You think they will get the positives of AI use only and avoid the negatives?