MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by skydhash | 2025-10-14 10:29:53+00:00
I agree with tou that the issue is packaging. And to have developers trying to package software is the issue IMO. They will come up with the most complicated build system to handle all scenarios, and the end result will be brittle and unwieldy.

There’s also the overly restrictive dependency list, because each deps in turn is happy to break its api every 6 months.
by EmptyCoffeeCup | 2025-10-14 10:30:01+00:00
I also use an MVNO service.

I have a horrible feeling that 3 traffic is being prioritised over Vodafone MVNO traffic, leading to service deg.

End of the day, I was on Vodafone's network for a reason - it was the least congested in my area. 3 was crap. If I’m suddenly fighting for bandwidth with 3 customers because of this merger I will have to try EE (o2 is known garbage around here; 2 mbps at most thanks to traffic management).

Ofcom should never have allowed it - the UK does not need reduced competition in this space.
by arp242 | 2025-10-14 10:30:21+00:00
"You can't move a waste paper basket a metre without filling in three forms and getting approval of four managers" was already the running joke about Philips in the 90s.

In part this is a large organisation thing that happens everywhere. See 2001 Google vs. current Google for example. I don't know why Philips ended up being so bad in particular.

The break-up of Philips is not a bad thing. Many viable components have been spun off in various ways and the business is essentially fine, just not under the Philips name and management.
by potato3732842 | 2025-10-14 10:31:38+00:00
I mean it kind of makes sense if you squint. Over the past 20-40yr regulatory (often public, but also often private) developments have created an insane amount of value non-producing paper pushing busy work. A man who supplies bent steel troughs to a company that outfits food producing factories spends infinitely more time on overhead paper pushing than he did 20yr ago (pulling this example out of my own friend group). What we need isn't more stuff. What we need is cheaper clerical labor to cut through the BS mountain we've built for ourselves enabling us to spend more time doing the things that produce value.
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-10-14 10:31:46+00:00
I'm not even convinced that a random TLS library would get non-trivially more scrutiny than Wireguard does, and on top of that it would need more scrutiny because it's significantly more complicated which is a synonym for attack surface.

And the "more valuable targets" argument is self-defeating because if there aren't as many high value targets using something then there aren't as many attackers looking for vulnerabilities in it either. Moreover, if someone finds one in TLS (or anything) then they can launch exploits against multiple targets simultaneously rather than waiting to move on to the second target until after the first investigates the attack and publishes a patch for everyone else to use.
by disgruntledphd2 | 2025-10-14 10:31:56+00:00
> I don't know why I'm bothering to reply. Tether truthers are modern day financial luddites, willingly blind and ignorant of the sea change taking place in plain sight after the passing of GENIUS.

Well they must be regulated somewhere, right? Where are the reports from regulators that all is OK, or at the very least an audit.

And if you can't get one of the Big 4 to sign off on your finances, then you have big big problems. Even Wirecard and Enron managed that.
by bandie91 | 2025-10-14 10:32:24+00:00
i don't. and neither my perl-based softwares. there should not be the possibility whereas a given parameter can have both string or a numeric value too at the configuration level which the user interfaces with - as of the "real-world analogy" programming paradigm suggests. json and stuff still do have their place but in a lower, machine-to-machine layer.
by wkat4242 | 2025-10-14 10:32:31+00:00
At our place we have two types of users. One that is a deep evangelist, says it revolutionised their office work and has no idea that it might have accuracy problems. I guess those are the people that just create a lot of hot air.

The others tried it and ran into the obvious Achilles heels and are now pretty cautious. But use it for a thing or two.
by JonathanFly | 2025-10-14 10:33:10+00:00
Set nproc_per_node-1 instead of 8 (or run the training script directly instead of using torchrun) and set device_batch_size=4 instead of 32. You may be able to use 8 with a 5090, but it didn't work on my 4090. However it's way slower than expected, one H100 isn't 250x the 4090, so I'm not sure it's training correctly. I'll let it run overnight and see if the outputs make any sense, maybe the metrics are not accurate in this config.
by dotnet00 | 2025-10-14 10:33:11+00:00
The V100 is ~8 years old and AFAIK mostly not that common anymore, but the A100 is ~5.5 years old now and is still very commonly used, it's maybe the most common HPC cluster GPU. On the consumer side, 3090s are still very popular, representing a good balance between cost, performance and efficiency (this is mostly due to 4090s and 5090s being much more expensive).
by rs186 | 2025-10-14 10:33:45+00:00
Why don't you just answer that in the parent comment? Isn't that a simpler, clearer and better answer?

Or you mean "in theory yes, but actually no"? Maybe this thing has an ifixit score of 0 so that you'd better not bother?

> I would buy a dev board + build it yourself, you will get a much better experience then trying to reuse the existing thing.

Sounds like it. Dude you can be honest here.

Which is almost saying nobody on HN should buy this if they want to get anything more than 60 minutes out of this thing.
by gambiting | 2025-10-14 10:34:02+00:00
Ehhh let me put it in a different way - it's not impossible, of course. But it's about the fact that if someone is using a PS4 controller and they don't know about this, then they are going to have a bad time. And no dev wants their players to have a bad time, and neither does the platform holder. So they would rather just say no, you as a dev don't have to worry about this - every player will use a PS5 controller, done.

>>what about PS5-only games that happen to exist on other platforms that don't have such features? Can they be played with a PS4 controller?

Sure, Ratchet and Clank has a PC version now which can be played with any controller, including a PS4 or xbox controller. Obviously for this version it was remapped to make sense when using such controllers.

Again, it's not about actual literal impossibility - it's Sony's choice to say "look we want to promote features of the PS5, so code your gameplay features to make use of the adaptive triggers and we guarantee that every player will have a ps5 controller. You don't need to code your game to support older pads" - so devs don't. They obviously do on platforms like PC where the player might be using anything.
by Doxin | 2025-10-14 10:34:42+00:00
We've also currently got an outgoing cabinet, meaning they aren't really supposed to make major decisions outside of emergencies. That has always been one of those things where it's basically up to the honor of the politicians to actually not make major decisions as far as I can tell, so I'm unsure whether this is politicians politicianing or if there IS some emergency requiring intervention. I'm sure it'll all get more clear in the coming days.
by metalman | 2025-10-14 10:34:58+00:00
I think that the risk of anybody achiving a malicious outcome by accessingn these data streams is as spectacularly low as the effort required to get the signal and then figure out some context to the randomised transmissions and then weaponise that is high, very high. Presumably it is GB/sec by however many channels, 99% of it will dry your eyeballs out and quickly render even the most determined spook a quaking quivering mess huddled in the corner of an office screaming " make it stop" the researchers behind this are just showing off, but I will bet any money, nothing but nothing could keep them there going through the worlds slop, which a smart, counter spook would insure was a regular and tantilising portion of the signal to begin with. the issue is that these sattelites are just repeaters, and there is little ryme or reason to the content, and personel good enough to work it, can find much much more profitable things to do.
by moconnor | 2025-10-14 10:35:12+00:00
Genuinely interesting how divergent people's experiences of working with these models is.

I've been 5x more productive using codex-cli for weeks. I have no trouble getting it to convert a combination of unusually-structured source code and internal SVGs of execution traces to a custom internal JSON graph format - very clearly out-of-domain tasks compared to their training data. Or mining a large mixed python/C++ codebase including low-level kernels for our RISCV accelerators for ever-more accurate docs, to the level of documenting bugs as known issues that the team ran into the same day.

We are seeing wildly different outcomes from the same tools and I'm really curious about why.
by vinorathna-r | 2025-10-14 10:35:25+00:00
I agree that basic research like the discovery of GMR often has an unpredictable timeline and shouldn't be judged too early..

However, I still believe that a light-touch monitoring system is important. It's not about evaluating the usefulness of the discovery in the short term, but rather ensuring that:

Funds are being used for the stated research goals (fiscal responsibility).

The project is making scientific progress as defined by its own milestones (accountability).
by spaceman_2020 | 2025-10-14 10:35:26+00:00
> which makes everyone more efficient and productive

There is something bizarre about an economic system that pursues productivity for the sake of productivity even as it lays off the actual participants in the economic system

An echo of another commenter who said that its amazing that AI is now writing comments on the internet

Which is great, but it actively makes the internet a worse place for everyone and eventually causes people to simply stop using your site

Somewhat similar to AI making companies more productive - you can produce more than ever, but because you’re more productive, you don’t hire enough and ultimately there aren’t enough people to consume what you produce
by rubyfan | 2025-10-14 10:35:34+00:00
I don’t think you hold an unreasonable position on that issue. If everything is operating as it should then many would agree.

We’ve long ago entered a reality where almost everyone has a device on them that can track their exact location all the time and keeps a log of all their connections, interests and experiences. If a crime occurs at a location police can now theoretically see everyone who was in the vicinity, or who researched methods of committing a crime, etc. It’s hard to balance personal freedoms with justice, especially when those who execute on that balance have a monopoly on violence and can at times operate without public review. I think it’s the power differential that makes the debate and advocacy for clearer privacy protection more practical.
by howerj | 2025-10-14 10:36:38+00:00
The UK has an extremely entrepreneurial culture as well, which is shown in the data (number of businesses registered, number of startups, both per capita), it ranks very highly, along with other indicators of innovation, it might not be as entrepreneurial as the USA, but globally it ranks very highly. The fact that you mention the Soviet Union and its central planned economy and the (outdated and stereotyped view of the) British class system almost like they are equivalent really undermines your point as well.
by hansmayer | 2025-10-14 10:36:41+00:00
Fair enough. But why do I have to tell them that, should they not be able to figure it out themselves? If I show a 5-year kid once how to use colour pencils, I won't have to show them each time they want to make a drawing. This is the core weakness of the LLMs - you have to micromanage them so much, that it runs counter to the core promise that is being pushed since 3+ years now.
by exitb | 2025-10-14 10:36:50+00:00
I actually have a PS2 and don't use it much, as it's a pain to hook up to a modern TV. Most games don't support progressive scan, which forces your TV to deinterlace, which im my case adds enough latency to make it unpleasant to play. There's some boutique hardware that can deinterlace with less latency, but then it starts to get expensive really fast.

Ideally you'd have to buy a CRT TV along with it.
by mitthrowaway2 | 2025-10-14 10:37:08+00:00
This is tangential to your point about globalization, but the funny thing is that within a firm, especially a vertically integrated one, there really are commissars sending out orders from central offices, dictating production quotas and setting prices. Most companies resemble a command economy on the inside, much more than a market economy.

And almost all economic activity and production is mediated and coordinated by firms. Very few transactions happen between unaffiliated individuals independently making and trading goods according to direct market incentives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_the_firm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_People%27s_Republic_of_Wal...
by itopaloglu83 | 2025-10-14 10:39:27+00:00
We’re talking about transfer of critical technologies or knowhow, and how company relationships lead to such situations. Not Apple vs Android contents or how touch screen phone were already meant to be. A lot of industrial countries fail to manufacture good phones, not because they don’t have the capacity but they lack the knowhow.

Samsung was the original manufacturing partner for Apple, which allowed them to amass incredible amount of knowhow to create their own, and before that they were not even in the phone market much, yet alone launch their own phone.
by constantcrying | 2025-10-14 10:39:58+00:00
Airplanes do not receive OtA updates, nor does every system have a backup. Airplane software is developed to a very high safety standards, which mostly, but not always works. But this is not applicable here. A key part of airplane safety is constant monitoring and maintenance. If a component needs a software update, some technician will manually perform the update and do the required tests. This simply can not work in automotive.
by danielbln | 2025-10-14 10:40:04+00:00
A breadth and depth of training data is important, but modern models are excellent at in-context learning. Throw them documentation and outline the context for what they're supposed to do and they will be able to handle some out-of-distribution things just fine.

I would love to see some detailed failure cases of people who used agentic LLMs and didn't make it work. Everyone is asking for positive examples, but I want to see the other side.
by misja111 | 2025-10-14 10:40:25+00:00
The amount of what-about-ism in this thread is amazing. No, large companies with semi-monopolies using their power to influence government organizations is not part of a free market either. But OP never claimed that it was.

The whole point is that when in some market there is some nation trying to disturb the free market mechanism in its favor, other countries can't just be naïve and stand by doing nothing. They have to counter act and this is what happend in The Netherlands.
by magicalhippo | 2025-10-14 10:40:36+00:00
We’re already losing our ability to do the little things. Write an email, summarize an article you could read in 2 minutes, explore an idea independently… you see where I’m going with this?

No, no I don't. Am I weird that I'm not using AI to write an email? Or summarize an article with a few paragraphs?

As for exploring ideas, sure I use LLMs for that. But only because they fuel the fire. I don't ask them to solve my problem, I used them as an interactive knowledge bank of sorts.
by TheOtherHobbes | 2025-10-14 10:40:52+00:00
Core R&D, training, public education at all levels, health care, small businesses of all kinds, arts and entertainment, and many more.

Basically IP generation at all levels, and high-touch face-to-face service businesses.

The US already had the foundations for a post-industrial economy, but the cancer of extractive financialisation ate it alive. Instead of expanding into diversity it contracted into a startup culture that's always been a thin front for Wall St.

So the result is that it's very hard to start a mid-rank IP or service business. You have small-scale cottage-level producers like authors, musicians, video creators, and indie app developers relying on huge monopolies like Amazon, Spotify, Google, and Apple, and you have bigger projects playing the startup game and scrambling for funding rounds, where anyone who doesn't become a unicorn is a loser.

There's plenty of space for businesses between those extremes, but the economy isn't set up to support them. The space isn't dead yet, but it could be much, much bigger.

Universities and corporate R&D have similar issues. Metrics support conformist publishing and resume-development, not risky original talent and exploration.

Tariffs and brain drains are absolutely toxic and are going to nuke all of these spaces.
by Rochus | 2025-10-14 10:41:28+00:00
> These are all legitimate engineering tradeoffs

Agree, and we actually have both the standards and established methods to conduct representative tradeoff studies. But this knowledge is mostly ignored by CS and programming language designs. Even for Ada, there was little empirical evidence for specific design decision. A systematic survey discovered only 22 randomized controlled trials of textual programming language features conducted between the early 1950s through 2012, across six decades. This staggering scarcity explains why language designers rely heavily on intuition rather than evidence (see e.g. https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~NatProg/programminglanguageusability...).
by OnACoffeeBreak | 2025-10-14 10:44:43+00:00
From the Introduction: "Each satellite may carry traffic for dozens of independent networks through an array of on-board transponders, each covering a diameter of thousands of kilometers (at most a third of Earth’s surface)".

Can someone help me understand the use of "diameter" in this sentence. I am guessing it refers to the satellite's signal coverage of the Earth's surface. If that's the case, wouldn't something like arc degrees be a better measure? I just can't figure out how "diameter" can be used to describe a coverage arc or area.
by Sophira | 2025-10-14 10:45:08+00:00
While I understand (and agree with) the general sentiment of what you're saying, you are not correct in saying that this is end-to-end encryption, and HTTPS itself does not guarantee that end-to-end encryption is in use.

In this case, there's an explicit middle point - chatgpt.com resolves to a CloudFlare server, so CloudFlare is actually one of the ends here. It likely acts as a reverse proxy, meaning that it will forward your requests to a different, OpenAI-owned server. This might be over a new HTTPS connection, or it might be over an unencrypted HTTP connection.

It really is super important to emphasize this point. End-to-end encryption is not simply that your data is encrypted between you and the ultimate endpoint. It's that it can't be decrypted along the way - and decrypting your HTTPS requests is something that CloudFlare needs to do in order to work.

(To be clear, I'm not accusing CloudFlare of anything shady here. I'm just saying that people have forgotten what end-to-end encryption really means.)
by Nio1024 | 2025-10-14 10:45:45+00:00
Gotta thank AI — it’s keeping my portfolio from collapsing, at least for now . But yeah, I totally see the point: AI investment might be one of the few things holding up the U.S. economy, and it doesn’t even have to fail spectacularly to cause trouble. Even a “slightly disappointing” AI wave could ripple across markets and policy.
by ExoticPearTree | 2025-10-14 10:46:14+00:00
No one is clean in this. Now, the thing is that China did not allowed all companies in and after 10-20 years said: yeah, now you need a local partner. It was like this from the beginning (and it is not the only country in the world that required this, to have a local partner with 49 or 51 percent stake in the company). So all the companies that rushed into China were aware from day one that they need to share technology and know-how with the Chinese.

I think the question is: did China ever took over a foreign company because "national security" or whatever perceived risk?
by AnthonyMouse | 2025-10-14 10:47:14+00:00
Let's have a quick recap of two of the things we've already tried:

Isolationism sucks. You have a domestic industry but it's not allowed to sell to other countries in retaliation for you doing the same to them, so it's small and consolidated and when the domestic providers are correspondingly terrible the trade barriers inhibit you from using the foreign ones.

"Free Trade" (but not actually) is even worse, because you take down your own trade barriers nominally in exchange for others doing the same, and then some of them don't. They subsidize their industries so that the global industry consolidates into one country and then if that country sucks you're in even worse shape because it's also a single point of failure and subject to foreign political forces.

What we should be doing isn't going back to trade barriers, it's creating sufficient tax incentives to sustain a domestic industry for strategically important products and then letting other countries do the same and consumers choose which company they want to buy it from. Because then you don't have trade barriers but you do have both domestic production and competition.

The price is that companies in those industries would essentially be paying lower taxes than they currently do or receiving some subsidies in order to make them competitive with the other countries doing something equivalent. But maybe that's not the worst of the three options.
by discordance | 2025-10-14 10:47:24+00:00
We know Albanese is a loyal Qantas Frequent Flyer member [0], so this may be related to the recent Qantas breach -

“ Hackers release Qantas customers' data on dark web. The stolen data included some customers' names, email addresses, phone numbers, birth dates, and frequent flyer numbers.“ [1]

0: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/oct/28/anthony-alb...

1:https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-11/hackers-release-qanta...
by mschuster91 | 2025-10-14 10:47:42+00:00
> You're talking about it as if it was a bug, it was not. I'm pretty sure a generation of MBAs got raised and retired really rich shifting manufacturing jobs to China. The narrative about them not being open is just a way to cope with their rise now and get rid of any blame.

IMHO it's both. It did make sense to introduce China to the Western markets, even leaving the MBA BS aside, just out of moral fairness. It was the right thing to do ethically, the execution was just fucked up - in no small part as you say due to the rise of neoliberalism.

> Lol, when you have to convince people that working in services instead of manufacturing is the future, that's what you get.

Yup. The problem with anything manufacturing is the associated pollution, energy usage and the healthcare costs from dealing with old-aged former physical laborers... we shifted all of that to China.

> Europe is shifting to a continent of pensionists, highly educated people that live with their parents til their 40s

Not by choice though. The problem is that real estate markets are fucked over, in the hot markets where the jobs are, even as a gay DINK couple (aka landlord's dream - two full time incomes and a very low chance of them adopting a child which makes noise and causes complaints from other renters) you don't stand a chance.