MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by echelon | 2025-09-03 13:44:13+00:00
This is close to SOTA emotional performance, at least the female voices.

I trust the human scores in the paper. At least my ear aligns with that figure.

With stuff like this coming out in the open, I wonder if ElevenLabs will maintain its huge ARR lead in the field. I really don't see how they can continue to maintain a lead when their offering is getting trounced by open models.
by JohnnyRebel | 2025-09-03 13:44:24+00:00
Fair, QuickBooks does market their software towards every small business owner not just accountants. But even so, small business owners still spend hours on entry and categorization. It's enough that most community colleges teach QuickBooks courses. We want to go further: let owners ask questions in plain language and get answers instantly, no menus or reports needed. Our upcoming versions will include agentic capabilities to send invoices, and do much more all from one AI UI.
by jandrewrogers | 2025-09-03 13:44:32+00:00
Unlikely laziness, since they went to the effort of writing a custom license in the first place.

A more plausible explanation is the requirements and obligations of those markets are ambiguous or open-ended in such a way that they cannot be meaningfully limited by a license, per the lawyers they retain to create things like licenses. Lawyers don’t like vague and uncertain risk, so they advised the company to reduce their risk exposure by opting out of those markets.
by rocketman919 | 2025-09-03 13:44:40+00:00
ROCKETS transforms basic AI requests into professional prompts that work across ChatGPT, Claude, and other platforms. Most people don't know that AI tools need specific instructions (prompting) to deliver quality results. Instead of learning different techniques for each platform, users input WHO + WHAT + NEED and get optimized prompts instantly. 5-day free trial.
by cj | 2025-09-03 13:44:59+00:00
I don’t think I’ve ever seen ChatGPT 5 refuse to answer any prompt I’ve ever given it. I’m doing 20+ chats a day.

What’s an example prompt where it will say “idk”?

Edit: Just tried a silly one, asking it to tell me about the 8th continent on earth, which doesn’t exist. How difficult is it for the model to just say “sorry, there are only 7 continents”. I think we should expect more from LLMs and stop blaming things on technical limitations. “It’s hard” is getting to be an old excuse considering the amount of money flowing into building these systems.
by AnimalMuppet | 2025-09-03 13:45:29+00:00
> "Studies" like this bite at the ankles of every change in information technology. Victorians thought women reading too many magazines would rot their minds.

If the Victorians had scientific studies showing that, you might have a point. Instead, you just have a flawed analogy.

And, why the scare quotes? If you can point to some actual flaws in the study, do so. If not, you're just dismissing a study that you don't agree with, but you have no actual basis for doing so. Whereas the study does give us a basis for accepting its conclusions.
by InfamousRece | 2025-09-03 13:46:15+00:00
My server stays powered off but will boot on receiving wol packet. It’s not a sophisticated set up but works for me. I have an always on Rpi running tailscale. I can ssh to it and send a wol from there. Once my server boots I can ssh to it and run the script to mount its data disks - they are encrypted so I need to type a passphrase. Quite a bit of work but I don’t have to do it often.
by bapak | 2025-09-03 13:46:25+00:00
> it's interesting how we moralize harms to kids while enabling them for adults

I don't find that interesting. It applies to anything that adults do, even things as basic and "positive" as having a job.

Working 8 hours at 8? Absolutely not.

Working 8 hours at 18? Double it and give it to the next person.
by jbstack | 2025-09-03 13:46:34+00:00
> I've experienced cognitive decline when using AI tools a bit too much to help solve programming-related problems. When dealing with an unfamiliar programming ecosystem it feels so easy and magical to just keep copy / pasting error outputs until the problem is resolved. Previously solving the problem would've taken me longer but I would've also learned a lot more.

I've had the opposite experience, but my approach is different. I don't just copy/paste errors, accept the AI's answer when it works, and move on. I ask follow up questions to make sure I understand why the AI's answer works. For example, if it suggests running a particular command, I'll ask it to break down the command and all the flags and explain what each part is doing. Only when I'm satisfied that I can see why the suggestion solves the problem do I accept it and move on to the next thing.

The tradeoff for me ends up being that I spend less time learning individual units of knowledge than if I had to figure things out entirely myself e.g. by reading the manual (which perhaps leads to less retention), but I learn a greater quantity of things because I can more rapidly move on to the next problem that needs solving.
by dahart | 2025-09-03 13:46:50+00:00
This comment reminds me of the so called Dunning Kruger Effect. That paper had pretty close to the same participation size, and participants were pulled from a single school (Cornell). It also has major methodology problems, and has had an uphill battle for replication and generalizability, actually losing the battle in some cases. And yet, we have a famous term for it that people love to use, often and incorrectly, even when you take the paper at face value!

The problem is that a headline that people want to believe is a very powerful force that can override replication and sample size and methodology problems. AI rots your brain follows behind social media rots your brain, which came after video games rot your brain, which preceded TV rots your brain. I’m sure TV wasn’t even the first. There’s a long tradition of publicly worrying about machines making us stupider.
by ferfumarma | 2025-09-03 13:47:06+00:00
Can you elaborate on your point that translation is not linear? The OP agrees with you, so clearly your point is correct, but I personally just don't understand it. Isn't it true that translation is linear within the coordinate space of your model, even if the final distance traveled within a projected camera view is not?

edit to add: (I think your point relates only to the projection system, and not a pure, unprojected model; I just want to make sure I understand because it seems like an important point)
by antonvs | 2025-09-03 13:47:10+00:00
I'm happy for you as a privileged US citizen, enjoying your privilege as someone who's at least currently on the right side of the line, but anyone who's a legal immigrant doesn't feel anywhere near the same degree of security that you do.

The administration recently announced that it will review the visas of 55 million immigrants, and factors like political opinion are on the table when it comes to their choice of who to go after.

"First They Came"[1] was written to try to wake up people like you, whose privilege blinded them to the significance of the events around them. You need to start paying attention before you lose the country you thought you knew.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_They_Came
by physarum_salad | 2025-09-03 13:47:30+00:00
That paper was debunked as a result of the open peer review enabled by preprints! Its astonishing how many people miss that and assume that closed peer review even performs that function well in the first place. For the absolute top journals or those with really motivated editors closed peer review is good. However, often it's worse...way worse (i.e. reams of correct seeming and surface level research without proper methods or review of protocols).

The only advantage to closed peer review is it saves slight scientific embarrassment. However, this is a natural part of taking risks ofc and risky science is great.

P.s. in this case I really don't like the paper or methods. However, open peer review is good for science.
by sudosteph | 2025-09-03 13:47:31+00:00
The asking people part was the hard thing for me, always has been. That honestly was the missing piece for me. I absolutely agree that written docs and online content are sufficient for some people, that's how I learned Linux and sysadmin stuff, but I tried on and off to get into electronics for years that way and never got anywhere.

I think the problem was all of the getting started guides didn't really solve problems I cared about, they're just like "see, a light! isn't that neat?" and then I get bored and impatient and don't internalize anything. The textbooks had theory but so much of it I would forget most of it before I could use it and actually learn. Then when I tried to build something actually interesting to me, I didn't actually understand the fundamentals, it always fails, Google doesn't help me find out why because it could be a million things and no human in my life understands this stuff either, so I would just go back to software.

It could be LLMs are at least possibly better for certain people to learn certain things in certain situations.
by Amezarak | 2025-09-03 13:48:04+00:00
None of the tweets meet the “imminent lawless action” standard and so they are all completely legal in the US.

Unfortunately, journalists and social media experts have been attempting to water down 1A rights by declaring basically everything incitement and equating words with violence, but a very strong legal standard is still in place.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

In the US, it is perfectly legal to make social media posts like “all x should be killed.” Laws against promoting violence are specifically unconstitutional and have been struck down.
by copelandr | 2025-09-03 13:48:11+00:00
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: Python, TypeScript, AWS, GCP, Kubernetes, Docker, Terraform, Pulumi, Ansible, Go, GitOps (FluxCD, GitHub Actions, YAML!)

Résumé/CV: https://copey.dev/copeland-royall.pdf

Email: copeland [at] copey.dev

---

Passionate about infrastructure, homelabs and cycling! Engineering experience at multinationals, pre-seed startups and in between – excited to work in a fast-paced team in a DevOps/infra/backend capacity.
by misswaterfairy | 2025-09-03 13:48:31+00:00
I can't say I'm surprised by this. The brain is, figuratively speaking, a muscle. Learning through successes and (especially) failures is hard work, though not without benefit, in that the trials and exercises your brain works through exercises the 'muscle', making it stronger.

Using LLMs to do replace the effort we would've otherwise endured to complete a task short-circuits that exercising function, and I would suggest is potentially addictive because it's a near-instant reward for little work.

It would be interesting to see a longitudinal study on the affect of LLMs, collective attention spans, and academic scores where testing is conducted on pen and paper.
by lexandstuff | 2025-09-03 13:48:42+00:00
I find it useful. A nice little tool in the toolkit: saves a bunch of typing, helps to over come inertia, helps me find things in unfamiliar parts of the codebase, amongst other things.

But for it to be useful, you have to already know what you're doing. You need to tell it where to look. Review what it does carefully. Also, sometimes I find particular hairy bits of code need to be written completely by hand, so I can fully internalise the problem. Only once I've internalised hard parts of codebase can I effectively guide CC. Plus there's so many other things in my day-to-day where next token predictors are just not useful.

In short, its useful but no one's losing a job because it exists. Also, the idea of having non-experts manage software systems at any moderate and above level of complexity is still laughable.
by jagermo | 2025-09-03 13:50:12+00:00
I find it fascinating that renewables always have to have a ROI.

nobody cares about his car loosing value as soon as you drive off the parking lot. Or any other appliance - a fridge will never have a ROI, a washing machine will not and neither will a stove, a macbook or a fancy smart home system. They are part of our live, loose value and we accept that.

But solar or batteries (granted, mostly with home-solutions)? Better make money, otherwise why even bother.
by tomrod | 2025-09-03 13:50:25+00:00
Ever read books in the Bobiverse? They provide an pretty functional cognitive model for how human interfaces with tooling like AI will probably work (even though it is fiction) -- lower level actions are pushed into autonomous regions until a certain deviancy threshold is achieved. Much like breathing -- you don't typically think about breathing until it becomes a problem (choking, underwater, etc.) and then it very much hits the high level of the brain.

What is reported as cognitive decline in the paper might very well be cognitive decline. It could also be alternative routing focused on higher abstractions, which we interpret as cognitive decline because the effect is new.

I share your concern, for the record, that people become too attached to LLMs for generation of creative work. However, I will say it can absolutely be used to unblock and push more through. The quality versus quantity balance definitely needs consideration (which I think they are actually capturing vs. cognitive decline) -- the real question to me is whether an individual's production possibility frontier is increased (which means more value per person -- a win!), partially negative in impact (use with caution), or decreased overall (a major loss). Cognitive decline points to the latter.
by sigbottle | 2025-09-03 13:51:47+00:00
obviously obvious caveats like, intentional use is good, lazy use is bad, etc.

I've found it both helpful and dangerous, it's great for expanding scope obviously, greater search engine.

But I've also significantly noticed further some of the "harmful patterns" I guess that I would not have noticed about... myself? For example, AI is way too eager to "solve things" when given a prompt, even if you give it an abstract one. It's unable to take a step back and just.... think?

And hey, I notice that I do that too! Lol.

It's helped me realize more refined "stages" of thinking I guess, even beyond just "plan" and "solve".

But for sure a lot of the time I'm just lazy and ask AI to just "go do it" and turn off critical thinking, hoping that it can just 1 shot the problem instead of me breaking it down. Sometimes it genuinely works. Often it doesn't.

I think if I stay way more intentional with my thinking, I can use it to good use. Which will probably reduce AI usage - but it's the first principles of real critical thinking, not the usage of AI.

---

These kinds of studies remind me of when my parents told me "stop getting addicted to games" as a kid. Sure, anyone can observe effects, it takes real brains to really try and understand the first principles effects. Addiction went away in a flash once I understood the principles, lol.
by whatamidoingyo | 2025-09-03 13:52:03+00:00
I've been seeing people use LLMs to reply to people on Facebook. Like, they'll just be having a general discussion, and then reply as ChatGPT. I don't know if they think it makes them look smart; I think it has the complete opposite effect.

Not many people can perform mental arithmetic beyond single-digit numbers. Just plug it into a calculator...

We're at the point of people plugging their thoughts into an LLM and having it do the work for them... what's going to happen to thinking?
by jijijijij | 2025-09-03 13:53:12+00:00
Apart from need, have newly build data centers at scale bought their GPUs for a reasonable price, or did they pay FOMO money? Because from what I can see on the consumer side, crypto and AI pushed GPU prices into funny realms.

I imagine, if the AI opulencia actually massively over-payed for their toys, there is probably no recovering. In time, before the tech becomes obsolete, I see no application on the horizon, except for the one thing even worse than AI: crypto. So, a push for crypto, fitted to these GPUs, may be the signal to brace for impact. The music stops, billionaires eat the last chair, and all we get is tough love and a new aesthetic:

Hypepunk, the dawn of Silicon Gothic.
by alexisread | 2025-09-03 13:53:15+00:00
Thought I'd add an example:

https://github.com/SaleCar/Quasar-UMD-Template

You can do sophisticated things as well eg. Stream half a million Kafka records into the browser- anything available from unpkg or other cdns.

A good cdn UI lib turns out to be https://quasar.dev/
by jodrellblank | 2025-09-03 13:53:48+00:00
> "what would have you done if he were to tell you that he can write your code way better (without any pointers) and that concludes the conversation?"

Depends on my mood; maybe go to the Odin Reddit, Discord or CodeReview StackExchange and say "GingerBill has rejected my PR for 'many problems' can I get some hints what, so I can make a better PR?" and then take my better PR back and update the original making it as clear as I can that I have made a good faith effort to improve it.

Or wait a couple of days (weeks?) and review my code with fresh eyes (and wait for the reviewer's mood to change).

Or reply "I'd be happy for you to rewrite it better, I just want the feature it doesn't have to be my code"

Or ask "Many problems, but how many of them are dealbreakers? Is there a route to a minimally viable commit which settles on a good enough interface, and the rest of the implementation can be improved later?"

Or ask "I'd hope you can write it better, you've been Odinning a lot longer than I have, can you point out some of the problems so I can learn more?"

Or if I was giving up on getting it committed, "You say you can write it better, so are you going to?"

> "Would you not have expected at least SOMETHING as to what is wrong with it?"

I have been on the internet long enough to be on both sides of "it's nice to be nice" and "where to start it's not even wrong" and to expect busy, capable, computer people to be time crunched and terse/blunt. There's a difference between "many problems" and "many problems, Get The Fuck Out". A difference between what Linus Torvalds and Erik Naggum used to do and a 3 second glance "too many problems to commit, rejected". Have you seen the accusations of what goes on behind closed doors in the C++ standards committee? Or Scheme world?[1] Does that put you off the languages or is that fine because it only happens to other people?

Progressive disclosure could say that if you cared and wanted to fix up the PR you would have engaged and asked, and if you didn't ask that suggests you weren't interested and that saved Bill's time writing a longer comment. I guess I expect that the Thing_I_Want is not something others care about and if I want to 'change the world' I will have to push some boulders up hill to get there, or push some people to drag their attention to my thing instead of whatever they are doing, and Thing_I_Want generally is not world changing enough to warrant that.

[1] I could go and find them and link them here, but I'm not going to because you might a) know, b) not care, and if I do then I'll get dragged into HN arguments about those accusations which isn't really relevant, but your grudge would be stronger if you had many documented examples showing a pattern of rude, cruel, damaging behaviour, rather than one example which you remember as being unfairly rude but can't find.
by wltr | 2025-09-03 13:53:56+00:00
I think about battery being the very dangerous thing to leave on 24/7, especially if that’s some remote location (like attic), or at home, but when you do not work from home. It may be dangerous, plus the battery may die pretty quickly.

My first idea, to mitigate risk of fire, it’s possible to locate some hand made sand bag above the phone, so in case there’s fire, the sand would neutralise it. Also, I’d try to emulate charge-discharge cycles by enabling and disabling smart socket. I wonder if that’s possible to automate using the phone itself. E.g. when it reaches 20% it enables smart charger, and disables it upon reaching 80%. So it can do it in perpetuity. Since the screen would be off all the time, I guess one charging cycle would be once a few days. Which is twice or thrice better than average user who charges their phone once or even twice a day. So, theoretically, a Pixel with a new battery might survive a few years, if not 5 years, off one battery. Then a user might replace the battery. So, theoretically, rubbing it a server is entirely possible, I guess. Otherwise, super cool. I’d love to try this myself now. I guess that may be a perfect solar-powered server. For it, maybe one doesn’t want a smart charger. Just let the sun charge the thing whenever there’s a sunny day.
by mikepurvis | 2025-09-03 13:53:56+00:00
I don't know if modern cameras are better for this, but a big one historically was getting a clean, realtime HDMI output so that high quality cameras can be used with a capture card for broadcast purposes as a replacement for a webcam. Manufacturers understand that that's a "pro" level need/feature and have intentionally segmented the market so that lower-tier devices can't do it even though the hardware is obviously all present.
by mooxie | 2025-09-03 13:53:57+00:00
Agreed. I work for a tiny startup where I wear multiple hats, and one of them is DevOps. I manage our cloud infra with Terraform, and anyone who's scaled cloud infrastructure out of the <10 head count company to a successful 500+ company knows how critical it can be to get a wrangle on the infrastructure early. It's basically now or never.

It used to take me days or even multiple sprints to complete large-scale infrastructure projects, largely because of having to repeatedly reference Terraform cloud provider docs for every step along the way.

Now I use Claude Code daily. I use an .md to describe what I want in as much detail as possible and with whatever idiosyncrasies or caveats I know are important from a career of doing this stuff, and then I go make coffee and come back to 99% working code (sometimes there are syntax errors due to provider / API updates).

I love learning, and I love coding. But I am hired to get things done, and to succeed (both personally and in my role, which is directly tied to our organization's security, compliance, and scalability) I can't spend two weeks on my pet projects for self-edification. I also have to worry about the million things that Claude CAN'T do for me yet, so whatever it can take off of my plate is priceless.

I say the same things to my non-tech friends: don't worry about it 'coming for your job' yet - just consider that your output and perceived worth as an employee could benefit greatly from it. If it comes down to two awesome people but one can produce even 2x the amount of work using AI, the choice is obvious.
by perrygeo | 2025-09-03 13:54:07+00:00
There's two questions at play. First, does the research pass the most rigorous criteria to become widely-accepted scientific fact? Second, does the research present enough evidence to tip your priors and change your personal decisions?

So it's possible to be both skeptical of how well these results generalize (and call for further research), but also heed the warning: AI usage does appear to change something fundamental about our congnitive processes, enough to give any reasonable person pause.
by Ruphin | 2025-09-03 13:54:08+00:00
Re-implementing Lit from fundamentals is a great way to learn how it works! The core functionality is surprisingly simple, because it mostly relies on platform APIs to do the heavy lifting, like parsing templates.

I made this alternative implementation of lit-html to use as a research bed a long time ago when I was actively contributing to lit: https://github.com/ruphin/lite-html

Judging from this thread, many people have their own implementations, which is great to hear. I think there's a lot of value in solutions that are so simple that anyone can reproduce them.