MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by fragmede | 2025-10-28 10:11:12+00:00
If you have 2000 hecatares land, there is no way you're buying the exact right amount of seeds. You overbuy seeds by as little as you can, but seeds get loaded via tractor bucket, which is fairly messy. You're going to lose a decent amount of seeds. Thus, a lb or kilo of seeds or < 1% in the scheme of things isn't even going to be noticed, much less cause the demise of your farm

For fuel, similarly, you're going to lose militers to evaporation on a hot day, so similarly, being off my ml isn't material.

If you tax a company, fine, sure, the company is going to want it to be right, but 1 or two tons in a 10,000 ton order is again, < 1%. There is some threshold below which precision is extra unnecessary work, though if you have problems with thieves and corruption, you're going to want additional precision that isn't necessary elsewhere.

As to where in my comment I'm anthropomorphizing LLMs, you're going to have to point out where I did that, as the word LLM doesn't appear anywhere in my comment, so it feels like you're projecting claims my comment does not make, as it is LLM neutral and merely point of that 100% exact precision doesn't come without a cost.
by lynx97 | 2025-10-28 10:12:15+00:00
From my POV, you are pissed that your people lost, and can't get over it. Remember that democracy is a pendulum. Swinging from side to side is a necessary ingredient of democracy. You can't always win, and, you shouldn't. But I guess you are unable to listen to this simple principle, because you and your people railed yourself up so much that you are unable to calm down. That is weird to me, as I believe that is a skill we all learn when moving from childhood to adulthood. Throwing tantrums isn't very useful.
by AstroNutt | 2025-10-28 10:12:17+00:00
Yeah, melatonin makes me feel like crap after a few days of use and it's hit or miss.

One thing I've done for years is focus on breathing. Get in a comfortable position and totally relax your body. Slowly take a deep breath. Then exhale until you can't no more. Repeat this 10 or 15 times.

For whatever reason, this works for me probably 75% of the time. The other 25%, forget it.

On a side note, I'm sure most of us here can relate to this song. https://youtu.be/vaG4vGsIFMQ
by swiftcoder | 2025-10-28 10:12:23+00:00
> How tf else did you honestly expect black-boxes to get built, by self-mangling machine code spit out by a sentient AI god?

I'm not quite sure why everyone seems to want the AIs to be writing typescript - that's a language designed for human capabilities, with all the associated downsides.

Why not Prolog? APL? Something with richer primitives and tighter guardrails that is intrinsically hard for humans to wrangle with.
by wafflemaker | 2025-10-28 10:13:25+00:00
There are really good psychologists out there that can do much more. It's a little luck and a little of good fit, but it can happen.

>AI companies are partly responsible for promoting these tools as something more than statistical models,[...]

This might be exactly the issue. Just today I've read people complaining that newest ChatGPT can't solve letter counting riddles. Companies just don't speak loud enough about LLM based AI shortcomings that result from their architecture and are bound to happen.
by matheusmoreira | 2025-10-28 10:13:52+00:00
Why? Everyone knows about rubber-hose cryptanalysis. The whole point of cryptography is to reduce them to this.

If they want our information, they should have to become literal tyrants, send armed men after us and violate human rights in order to get it. Not push a button on a computer to tap into their warrantless global dragnet surveilance networks and suddenly have our entire private lives revealed to them on a computer screen.

Yes, people will fold if they are kidnapped and tortured. That's not news. Forcing them to stoop to that is the entire design. Once the situation has escalated to that level, you are justified in killing them in self-defense. Torturers don't make a habit of allowing their victims to live and testify about it.
by michalsustr | 2025-10-28 10:14:32+00:00
The tournament measures the cumulative winnings. However, those can be far from the statistical expectation due to the variance of card distribution in poker.

To establish a real winner, you need to play many games:

> As seen in the Claudico match (20), even 80,000 games may not be enough to statistically significantly separate players whose skill differs by a considerable margin [1]

It is possible to reduce the number of required games thanks to variance reduction techniques [1], but I don't think this is what the website does.

To answer the question - "which 'quality' of the LLMs this tournament then actually measures" - since we can't tell the winner reliably, I don't think we can even make particular claims about the LLMs.

However, it could be interesting to analyze the play from a "psychology profile perspective" of dark triad (psychopaths / machiavellians / narcissists). Essentially, these personality types have been observed to prefer some strategies and this can be quantified [2].

[1] DeepStack, https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58a75073e6f2e1c1d5b36...

[2] Generation of Games for Opponent Model Differentiation https://arxiv.org/pdf/2311.16781
by lan321 | 2025-10-28 10:14:47+00:00
If you can get the specific documentation for it. Sadly many companies don't want you using the API so they just give you a generic payload and the methods and leave you to it. LLMs are good in the sense that they can tell what type StartDate, EndDate is (str MSDate), maybe it also somehow catches on that ActualDuration is an int.. It also manages to guess correctly a lot of the fields in that payload that are not necessary for the particular call/get overridden anyway.
by stackbutterflow | 2025-10-28 10:14:56+00:00
Every single time. You look into the source and realize that there's nothing behind the claims.

It's like some people really want to feel angry and accept the most vague or fabricated statements as real facts.

But anytime you sit down and try to go the root of the issue in good faith you realize they really was nothing. Best you can find is someone on Twitter that said something stupid and then they use it as if that means there's a whole apparatus enforcing national wide policy based on that person's tweet.
by croon | 2025-10-28 10:15:37+00:00
> there is no compounding in wide spread infection where you're guaranteed to meet a carrier several times a day, and thus there is no practical difference between 25% and 38%. You'll get it either way - say you meet 10 carriers, each time probability 25% or 38% - the end result is indistinguishably similar.

Is your argument: "I can come up with a scenario where the real-world-measured statistics are not relevant?"

> yep. Unvaccinated is sitting at home, feeling ill, shedding, yet not transmitting. While vaccinated is out and about, no symptoms, shedding and transmitting during that "reduced duration".

You're making up scenarios not reflected in real-world data.

> That is another propagandistic BS. I've been to ER in the summer 2020 for a non-covid related issue - it was empty.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.16.20248366v...

https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/112217/cdc_112217_DS1.pdf

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7046a5.htm
by b3lvedere | 2025-10-28 10:15:45+00:00
"One may think that something is better than nothing, but a bot enabling your destructive impulses is indeed worse than nothing."

And how would a layman know the difference?

If i desperately need help with mental item x and i have no clue how to get help, am very very ashamed for even mentioning to ask for help about mental item x or there are actually no resources available, i will turn to anything else than nothing. Because item x still exists and is making me suffer 24/7.

At least the bot pretends to listen, some humans cannot even do that.
by potato3732842 | 2025-10-28 10:15:56+00:00
>Benjamin Franklin wrote a somewhat famous screed about how Germans and Swedes weren't white, they were inferior, and they were "darken[ing America]'s people"

I am going to use the crap out of that reference whenever I see people on HN creatively redefining Europe to exclude parts in order to dishonestly back up some point.
by alexey-salmin | 2025-10-28 10:16:23+00:00
> This book is also notable for me in that I fundamentally disagree with one of the author’s main idea - that humans need religion as a source of morality.

I think in Dostoyevsky's world it's not just religion that is necessary but specifically God: "If there is no God, everything is permitted". Which is a different question, e.g. I agree with you on the part where one can get by without God, but I also think that religion is necessary in a sense that any set of beliefs complex enough to guide you through life is indistinguishable from one.

> Lastly, if anyone can explain to me - why do they call Agrafena Alexandrovna Grushenka? Is this a standard nickname for Agrafena, like Alyosha is for Alexei? I feel like everyone in the novel just took the name for granted, like it was normal to call someone a little pear.

Apparently so, it's hard to tell for sure because the name had completely fallen out of fashion. I was about to write you that I never met anyone who come by that name, however I started reading about it and was quite surprised to learn that Grunya is another short name for Agrafena and one of my great-grandmothers had that name. Never heard anyone call her Grushenka though.
by wafflemaker | 2025-10-28 10:16:35+00:00
There are really good psychologists out there that can do much more. It's a little luck and a little of good fit, but it can happen.

>AI companies are partly responsible for promoting these tools as something more than statistical models,[...]

This might be exactly the issue. Just today I've read people complaining that newest ChatGPT can't solve letter counting riddles. Companies just don't speak loud enough about LLM-based-AI shortcomings that result from their architecture and are bound to happen.
by davydm | 2025-10-28 10:16:45+00:00
lol, someone needs to go read Fooled By Randomness

1. currency predictions are all more affected by randomness than anything else - this is why only people who want to lose their money invest it in, say, pesos or roubles (many have done it, many have "blown up" as per the author) 2. LLMs "predict" by following past trends, which are going to be fallible to randomness.

So, it may come to pass, or likely will not, as the odds against currency valuation predictions are enormous and random.
by Yizahi | 2025-10-28 10:16:52+00:00
Dots doesn't disappear from Earth's shadow, there are just little bit less of them statistically. And she can't explain that in her paper at all, if those are supposedly objects and not plate defects, then why are they in a place, where objects shouldn't appear.

Also, assuming her hypothesis is correct and she didn't made factual mistakes - to be presented as dots and not streaks, all of these thousands of objects should be in a tiny narrow band in GEO spread out all across the orbit envelope. Where did they disappear in between 50 minutes from red plate to blue plate? And then this somehow repeated every single time in that particular order? An alien armada sitting precisely in a single orbit and then vanishes on a cue from a some lone observatory on Earth, when technician changes plates there? Then again appears all strictly in GEO, then again disappears in 50 minutes after?

Doesn't it look absurd to you?
by AvAn12 | 2025-10-28 10:16:53+00:00
No belligerence intended! Yes, processes are faulty today even with maker-checker and other QA procedures. To me it seems the main value of LLMs in a spreadsheet-heavy process is acceleration - which is great! What is harder is quality assurance - like the example someone gave regarding deciding when and how to include or exclude certain tables, date ranges, calc, etc. Properly recording expert judgment and then consistently applying that judgement over time is key. I’m not sure that is the kind of thing LLMs are great at, even ignoring their stochastic nature. Let’s figure out how to get best use out of the new kit - and like everything else, focus on achieving continuously improving outcomes.
by ChrisMarshallNY | 2025-10-28 10:18:12+00:00
I write native apps (see "not my bailiwick," above).

It's fairly difficult, for me. The app can do a lot, but sometimes, the data needs to be fresh. Making the decision to run an update can be difficult.

Also, I write free software, for nonprofits, so the hosting can sometimes be a bit dodgy.
by cimnine | 2025-10-28 10:18:19+00:00
I'm thinking similarly, but not via PCIe, but via USB: There are plenty of USB->VGA and USB->HDMI adapters that contain a dumb graphics card. So, embedd one of these and grab the video signal internally.

Thereby, plugging in just a single USB cable would deliver the power needed, keyboard, video and mouse. And bonus for an emulated USB-Stick/DVD drive.

What I don't know if these USB video cards are initialized during early boot and usable during the UEFI/BIOS phase. Is that why they grab the HDMI?
by npodbielski | 2025-10-28 10:18:54+00:00
Which would be fine, if AGI would be real. It is not yet and even if this would be around the corner it would be rather like in some movies: giant computer with tones of equipment, security and personnel making it work. Ah and giant nuclear reactor powering it too. Till we will be having autonomous robots that have intelligence built-in into it, does not require constant connection to some server and can run for few days on internal power... I do not see it happening.
by noduerme | 2025-10-28 10:19:35+00:00
In the context of gambling, random numbers or prngs can't have any unknown possible frequencies or tendencies. There can't be any doubt as to whether the number could be distorted or hallucinated. A pseudo random number that might or might not be from some algorithm picked by GPT is wayyyy worse than a mersenne twister, because it's open to distortion. Worse, there's no paper trail. MT is not the way to run a casino, or at least not sufficient, but at least you know it's pseudorandom based on a seed. With GPT you cannot know that, which means it doesn't fit the definition of "random" in any way. And if you find yourself watching a player getting blackjack 10 times in a row for $2k per bet, you will ask yourself where those numbers came from.
by gambiting | 2025-10-28 10:20:11+00:00
They have(in just this one example) - 35 turbines at 16MW each - that's half a gigawatt of power. Having the kind of battery storage that could provide this amount of power for more than a few minutes is.....well, not impossible, but extremely expensive, especially for something that will just sit there unused(hopefully). Gas generators are comparatively very cheap, easily available, and if fuel is being fed into the system can operate for days on end.

And you'd need an insane amount of solar panels to actually recharge those batteries in any kind of reasonable time too, so you expose yourself to a massive risk if you had two out of power events within say 12 hours. So you'd probably build all of those batteries and solar panels but you'd still need to have emergency generators ready to go anyway.
by t00 | 2025-10-28 10:20:27+00:00
As much as I agree with app deployment headaches, apps provide something a website cannot (except PWA) - ability to do stuff offline, log and register data which can be uploaded when connection is re-established. When talking about user experience - launching the app, selecting new -> quote -> entering details -> save -> locking the phone without worrying or waiting, knowing that it will eventually get uploaded, is much more convenient than walking with the phone around the property to get better reception to even load the new quote page.

UX matters, and user does not care if the native wrapper or 500kB of js is there or not, as long as the job is done conveniently and fast.
by kace91 | 2025-10-28 10:20:58+00:00
>Yes. Otherwise we're accepting "OpenAI wants to do this so we should quietly get out of the way".

I think it’s fair to demand that they label/warn about the intended usage, but policing it is distopic. Do car manufacturers immediately call the police when the speed limit is surpassed? Should phone manufacturers stop calls when the conversation deals with illegal topics?

I’d much rather regulation went the exact opposite way, seriously limiting the amount of analysis they can run over conversations, particularly when content is not deanonimised.

If there’s something we don’t want is OpenAI storing data about mental issues and potentially selling it to insurers for example. The fact that they could be doing this right now is IMO much more dangerous than tool misuse.
by nothrabannosir | 2025-10-28 10:21:14+00:00
crucial jq insight which unlocked the tool for me: it's jsonl, not json.

it's a pipeline operating on a stream of independent json terms. The filter is reapplied to every element from the stream. Streams != lists; the latter are just a data type. `.` always points at the current element of the stream. Functions like `select` operate on separate items of the stream, while `map` operates on individual elements of a list. If you want a `map` over all elements of the stream: that's just what jq is, naturally :)

stream of a single element which is a list:

echo '[1,2,3,4]' | jq . # [1,2,3,4]

unpack the list into a stream of separate elements:

echo '[1,2,3,4]' | jq '.[]' # 1 # 2 # 3 # 4 echo '[1,2,3,4]' | jq '.[] | .' # same: piping into `.` is a NOP:

only keep elements 2 and 4 from the stream, not from the array--there is no array left after .[] :

echo '[1,2,3,4]' | jq '.[] | select(. % 2 == 0)' # 2 # 4

keep the array:

echo '[1,2,3,4]' | jq 'map(. * 2)' # [2,4,6,8]

map over individual elements of a stream instead:

echo '[1,2,3,4]' | jq '.[] | . * 2' # 2 # 4 # 6 # 8 printf '1\n2\n3\n4\n' | jq '. * 2' # same

This is how you can do things like

printf '{"a":{"b":1}}\n{"a":{"b":2}}\n{"a":{"b":3}}\n' | jq 'select(.a.b % 2 == 0) | .a' # {"b": 2}

select creates a nested "scope" for the current element in its parens, but restores the outer scope when it exits.

Hope this helps someone else!
by in_a_hole | 2025-10-28 10:22:42+00:00
> And to get back to what I assume is your real conundrum (why do we extremize something to begin with), I just don't think there's any true answer as to why nature behaves this way.

Having read about some of the history of this idea, it seems to have been originally built on philosophical grounds, the idea that nature chooses the most harmonious path, as opposed to Newton's laws which seem to come from intuition based on observation of the world. If you keep asking "why?" in either framework you will eventually run up against an epistomological barrier which is unlikely to ever be crossed but in the case of Newton's laws, their basis in physical intuition makes them much easier (for me at least) to accept as given and take as a starting point for constructing a world model. With this being the case I think an acceptable result for me would be to find a proof of equivalence between the Newtonian and Lagrangian pictures. From my reading it seems like the derivation from D'Alambert's principle may be part of the journey.
by fxtentacle | 2025-10-28 10:25:22+00:00
2D Editor, Object-based, deploy to web, geared towards visual novels ... how is your "Play Maker" different from the existing "Game Maker"?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_hqY-7rT0c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwlvT-L9vFg
by qcnguy | 2025-10-28 10:25:42+00:00
You can tell that Whittaker isn't an engineer.

WhatsApp grew to much larger scale than Signal: self hosted, not on cloud. Running Erlang and FreeBSD.

Telegram grew to much larger scale than Signal: self hosted, not on cloud (dc IPs here: https://docs.pyrogram.org/faq/what-are-the-ip-addresses-of-t...). They set up their datacenters carefully to make it hard for governments to access data via legal mechanisms, something Signal didn't bother with.

Threema, similar concept to Signal: self hosted, not on cloud.

Every other messaging app before these bunch? AIM, ICQ, MSN Messenger, iMessage... self hosted, not on cloud.

The idea there is no choice should be hyperbole but it seems she might really believe that. It says a lot that Signal is run by such a person.
by cb321 | 2025-10-28 10:25:53+00:00
Being truly unordered like a set is not something you can do in a physical computer program unlike a mathematical abstraction. Anything stored is "ordered" in some way, either explicitly by virtual (or physical) memory addresses or implicitly by some kind of storage map equation (like a bitmap/bitvector or N-D C/Fortran array). It just might not be a useful ordering. (I.e., you may have to loop and compare.)

One might qualify such as "system-ordered", or in the Python insert-ordered dict, qualify with "insertion-ordered", though hash tables in general are sort of a melange of hash-ordering. The same container may also support efficient iteration in multiple orders (e.g., trees often support key order as well as another order, like VM/node pool slot number order).

So, in this context (where things are obviously elements of a computer program), it isn't obvious that hair-splitting over ordered vs. sorted in their purest senses is very helpful when what is really missing is qualification.

Of course, like in many things, people tend to name computer program elements after their abstractions. This is where confusion often comes from (and not just in computing!) .. borrowing the names without all the properties (or maybe with more properties, as in this case, though that is all probably a bit iffy with the frailty of how you enumerate/decompose properties).

EDIT: In a similar way, in a realized computer, almost any "set" representation can also be a "map". You just add satellite data. Even a bit-vector can have a "parallel vector" with satellite data you access after the bits (which could even be pointful in terms of cache access). This can cause similar confusions to the "ordered" vs. "sorted" stuff.
by alex-moon | 2025-10-28 10:26:17+00:00
I greatly appreciated this article and have found the data very useful - I have shared this with my business partner and we will use this information down the road when we (eventually) get around to migrating our app from Angular to something else. Neither of us were surprised to see Angular at the bottom of the league tables here.

Now, let's talk about the comments, particularly the top comment. I have to say I find the kneejerk backlash against "AI style" incredibly counter-productive. These comments are creating noise on HN that greatly degrades the reading experience, and, in my humble opinion, these comments are in direct violation of all of the "In Comments" guidelines for HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html#comments

Happy to change my mind on this if anyone can explain to me why these comments are useful or informative at all.
by RobotToaster | 2025-10-28 10:27:03+00:00
> "A 2015 study in Environmental Sciences Europe found that farmer suicide rates in India's rainfed areas were "directly related to increases in Bt cotton adoption." Factors leading to suicide included "high costs of BT cotton" and "ecological disruption and crop loss after the introduction of Bt cotton.""

The contradicting studies were mostly produced by "International Food Policy Research Institute, an agriculture policy think tank formed to promote the adoption of innovations in agricultural technology, based in Washington, D.C." which seems like an obvious conflict of interest.
by zelphirkalt | 2025-10-28 10:28:07+00:00
Non-functional core tends to become a buggy mess, with workarounds in the shell to account for those bugs, and then one needs to know about the nature of the core to correctly use the shell and so on. Functional core will lend itself very well to unit tests. Writing them will almost be trivial, when functional core is done right. Imperative shell is then less of an issue, because the blast radius of bugs is reduced to one usage of the core. The imperative shell should be kept as small as reasonably possible of course.