MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by godelski | 2025-10-10 21:23:22+00:00
https://archive.is/vAiuH

Don't worry guys, FSD is just 2 years away

- Elon 2015, 2016, 2017

Sorry, I mean next year

- Elon 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020

Sorry, I mean this year

- Elon 2021, 2022

https://motherfrunker.ca/fsd/
by nomel | 2025-10-10 21:24:14+00:00
I quickly edited that out but you saw it. I don't want to dox myself, which is why I removed it. You would trust our legal team. It's an opinion shared by every company I've ever worked for, except a startup, where they didn't know wtf they were doing, and there was no training at all: no personal questions that persuades/compels protected info. It's trivial to find this online.

To stop focusing on this last point...

> I'm not asking "Tell me what you do in your free time." I'm asking them if they have anything outside of work that they'd like to share that would help their case.

You are asking them that, in a practically indistinguishable way. Again, because of the power dynamic you don't seem to be aware of, they must give you an answer that explains why, if not. The legally appropriate response would be "I prefer not to answer what I do in my free time outside of work", which people would be uncomfortable, so they're going to be compelled to reveal to you why they don't have anything interesting, if they don't.
by pfdietz | 2025-10-10 21:24:17+00:00
> It's not a subsidy to be allowed to sell a thing you produce at market price.

It certainly is in this case. The market price includes transmission and distribution costs, as well as fixed costs of the generators.

Domestic PV is really gaming the rate system, avoiding costs while still benefiting from the things those costs support. If enough people do it the grid falls apart. See Pakistan where they may be getting close to this.
by breadislove | 2025-10-10 21:25:03+00:00
It is powered by Mixedbread Search which is powered by our model Omni. Omni is multimodal (text, video, audio, images) and multi vector, which helps us to capture more information.

The search is in beta and we improving the model. Thank you for reporting the queries which are not working well.

Edit: Re the otter, I just checked and I did not found otters in the dataset. We should not return any results if the model is not sure to reduce confusion.
by kjksf | 2025-10-10 21:25:48+00:00
Your "I don't know what words mean" is very selective.

So you don't know what "hostile to US" means.

Do you know what "Unwelcome verbal, nonverbal, or physical conduct based on protected characteristics" means? This is one of the many vague prescriptions in MIT code of conduct.

If I make a sour face at a gay person, is it "unwelcome nonverbal conduct"? Should I be punished for that? But not punished for shouting "from the river to the sea" i.e. demanding annihilation of Israel?

Is your argument that we should just scrap all code of conducts because it is by nature open to interpretation?

Or you just object to those that tickle your politics?
by bjourne | 2025-10-10 21:26:57+00:00
Eh, you are rationalizing. The phrase "traumatically over-X" is extremely rare. Any problem is easy after you've seen the solution. :) The solution "traumatically over-trained LLM" to the problem "What description best fits karpathy's description?" is certainly not easy to find. Connecting RL, poor LLMs, extreme fear, and welfare to excess training and severe lasting emotional pain is pretty darn impressive. E.g., I know exactly what situation karpathy describes is, but I couldn't in a million years put it into writing as succinctly and as precisely as the LLM.
by CaliforniaKarl | 2025-10-10 21:27:08+00:00
Unfortunately, no.

From what I've seen, CrowdStrike Falcon installations contain both the BPF components and the kernel module. (I think you can tell which one you're using: if falcon-sensor is running, it's the kernel module; if falcon-sensor-bpf is running, it's BPF.)

I manage systems running Debian, Ubuntu, RHEL, and Rocky. Newer and older, kernel and BPF. And unfortunately, this issue is present across all of them.
by jones1618 | 2025-10-10 21:27:10+00:00
Love this idea!

This could also be a way for social discovery that studios could promote:

Imagine a rack of album cards at Target where each costs a $1 and lets you play samples of all the tracks on the album (read lyrics and liner notes, etc) and puts $1 in your online wallet. So, kids (or anyone) could sample different albums and then save up to buy whole albums they like. Also, already redeemed ("used") cards would still play samples so kids could share/trade them as a way to say "check this music out!"

Can you imagine Billboard charts of Top Album Cards (Sampled and Bought) which would be so much more impactful than a lame count of streams or whatever. The charts would represent music kids are actually trading and talking about.
by tim333 | 2025-10-10 21:27:45+00:00
I don't think he fundamentally gets what's going on with AI on the tech level and how the Moore's law type improvements in compute have driven this and will keep doing so. He just kind of sees that LLM chatbots are not much good and assumes things will stay like that. If that were so investing $1tn would make no sense. But it's not true.
by fragmede | 2025-10-10 21:28:00+00:00
Every website operator employee worth their salary in this area would have told the site's operator this beforehand, and could have avoided this incident. Hell, even ChatGPT could tell you that by now. The word that comes to mind is incompetence on someone's part, but I don't know of the details on particularly who was the incompetent one in this situation. Thankfully, they've learned a lesson about the situation and ideally won't make the same mistake again going forwards.
by saurik | 2025-10-10 21:28:01+00:00
> ...but let's pretend like it isn't...

You can't just do this. If you assume 1=2 all of math falls apart, and the same is true when you assume obviously un-true facts: the reason all of this matters at all is only because Apple wants to ban this kind of software from being native AT ALL, not merely because they don't want to themselves distribute something they dislike. I'd happily stand up to defend their right to do the latter if-and-only-if they stop doing the former, and you can't separate these two issues.

> ...the anti-ICE app wants in the App Store because of the marketing and ease of distribution it enables...

And so like, here: I don't care if the app doesn't get to be in the App Store, and I don't care if it gets "marketing" or "ease of distribution" from Apple. I do care that it gets to be a native app. I deeply deeply care about that.

(BTW, the App Store in fact DOES NOT provide marketing, and if you ever go to any developer conference that focuses on mobile apps that's extremely common knowledge. Except in extremely narrow circumstances, users do not discover apps inside the App Store: they discover apps from advertisements, word of mouth / viral features, and searching for things on Google. The search engine inside of the App Store is pitiful and, to the extent to which it works at all, often surfaces your competitor's app before yours.)

> Why is this situation better for the anti-ICE app than just being a web app? This should be a web app, right? It shouldn't really rely on any native capabilities.

I mean, in a perfect world, this app wouldn't be a web app, because a web app makes it really easy to go to the servers and shut it down, allows for a network choke-point to discover its users by traffic analysis, and generally harass (whether legally or illegally) the people who are paying for the service to exist.

What you want here is a peer-to-peer service, which requires a native app that you can download from numerous sources, one that is published anonymously, one which uses DHTs to store information and which builds on a platform capable of hidden services... and yet you also want to have things like push notifications (possible from native apps using local notifications that are surfaced after background updates).

Like, I dunno: this entire discussion is always so broken as it relies on so many assumptions made by people about what actually should happen... but every single one of these assumptions is buying into a narrative frame that Apple themselves have set through the years by choosing what to cripple in their quest to own app distribution.
by Rohansi | 2025-10-10 21:28:09+00:00
I disagree. Yes, it's less time vs. C but still a long time.

There are plenty of games built with Lua that run very well such as Balatro and Don't Starve. And games are far more sensitive to hitches than GUI projects because they are constantly animating. Your users will not only easily see lag - it can ruin the game for them.

If a basic GUI is performing poorly then the blame almost certainly lies on whoever developed it. Don't blame the language or runtime.
by llbbdd | 2025-10-10 21:28:43+00:00
I don't know what wealth distribution means in this context, or why it's relevant at all, but food grows fast and doctors take like 20 years to grow no matter how much money you throw at it or where you get the money. And the context above was more specifically "fully pay health care costs" which is a comical fantasy the moment you try to actually define what that means, because the limit is not the price.
by jeroenhd | 2025-10-10 21:29:13+00:00
Political ads definitely do sway people. Especially the shit-flinging ads are effective.

The ones where a political figure lays out the bare basics of their programmes don't make a lot of impact, but the shittier the party and the more manipulative their advertising, the more these ads have an effect.

The influencer problem is even bigger, of course.
by ionwake | 2025-10-10 21:29:29+00:00
Story time, from my past.

Waiting on full flight in Europe, good airport, for take off. Pilot says over speaker : " We are delayed becuase FUEL guy got UPSET on tarmac and has QUIT. We know need someone ELSE to fill the plane with FUEL. " Said in a COMPLETELY nonchalant voice.

Immediately I get concerned, try not to think what cause a FUEL TECH to QUIT regarding THIS PLANE and fuel issue. Just close my eyes, relax.

2 minutes later pilot comes on intercom again "For some WEIRD reason, someone wants to get off the plane. Now we have to wait for ground crew to find his suitcasebecause of rules. How annoying.."

Plane waits for an hour on tarmac for BOTH passenger to get off and for FUEL to be finally "resolved".

Arrive eventually at destination.

Most of the trouble would have been avoided if the pilot had not sounded nonchalant about a "NON ISSUE about FUEL that a technician just QUIT OVER". I swear i even rememebr saying the statement with a hint of humour, like what on earth is the problem.

This is a true story, and the fact this incompetence happened to me, well I wouldnt have believed it otherwise.
by nostrademons | 2025-10-10 21:29:36+00:00
No, you're responding to what I said. There are multiple people calling you out here: please try to keep the usernames straight when responding.

The point of an interview is to ask questions, and particularly in the more freewheeling environment of a startup, "what sort of stuff do you like working on?" is very much relevant to whether they'd be a fit. Sergey Brin would famously ask early applicants to Google "Teach me something that I don't know already, about any topic." YCombinator's application form, for a long time, had the question "Tell us about a time you successfully hacked some (non-computer) system to your advantage", and the answers were explicitly supposed to be naughty if not illegal.

Not everybody works for a big company with a big HR department. The tech industry is a broad place.
by skydhash | 2025-10-10 21:29:52+00:00
Not GP, but I can add my two cents.

The trick is to avoid idle browsing of the code. Be intentional about what you need to do.

I use tools like grep/ripgrep to get a more focused of the code. Then with the line number, I can jump directly to where I need to be. Same with tools like linters and compilers.

In the same file, I often use search instead of line/character movement. You search for a symbols and you just cycle through their location.

I don't think it leads to a better code. But badly organized code will make this harder, so you tend to think about organization.
by omnimus | 2025-10-10 21:30:17+00:00
Hopefully new independent voice in the questions of platform features, development and future.

Google could do pretty much anything with the platform if it were not for Apple and iOS. And that's a big if because if they align on something it will get to the platform.

Firefox unfortunately seems to be infected by Silicon Valley people that seem to be quite obedient to the status quo.

Ladybird is at least developed by people from all around the world.
by g9yuayon | 2025-10-10 21:30:32+00:00
My own experience: https://www.quora.com/Could-online-coding-programs-and-codin...

And my wife's experience: https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-like-to-learn-computer-scie...

In short, the training that we got from our universities was invaluable, and I always feel fortunate and grateful to my CS department.
by runako | 2025-10-10 21:31:14+00:00
I'll make it simple in a few steps:

1. Many people have an aversion to harming children. This aversion is not universally shared, but it is a very common stance nonetheless. Children, especially, tend to have an aversion to being harmed.

2. Universities need to recruit children to leave their families and be governed by them (e.g. housing, food, etc.).

3. Parents of children are required to get approval for those children to go to the universities, so that the universities can function.

4. It is harder to recruit children to a university that has agreed that in vague circumstances it is ready to harm them. Note here that everyone already knows that there are sanctions for breaking the law, and that the university is advertising that it is willing to go above and beyond normal law enforcement procedures in hurting children.

Does that clarify?
by AgentK20 | 2025-10-10 21:31:14+00:00
I don’t think most people are arguing against the concept, or even implementation, of the system as developed. Obviously it’s both a publicity stunt and beta test as they learn how to build and operate a tunnel system like this. The concern is that much of the environmental harm that’s being done (according to the EPA) is repetitive, and that The Boring Company (TBC) actively pledged to hire an environmental inspector three years ago and is now being fined for having not done so. Given that, who knows how many violations that don’t leave a permanent mark are going unnoticed.

Do you think that they are going to ignore environmental laws for JUST this project, or do you think that is their modus operandi? I’d be happy to have a tunnel system installed near my home, even if there’s temporary disruption during the construction process. What I wouldn’t tolerate is active, and unmonitored (by TBC’s insistence on “self-monitoring”), pollution occurring near my home. Fines only cover so much, and un-polluting something after the fact costs far more than the fines that are being levied and, when it comes to pollutants that harm humans (like improper disposal of chemicals from digging, as they have been fined for), you can’t just “undo” the human harm with a fine.
by martinald | 2025-10-10 21:31:44+00:00
Because the weather is very changeable. You may get a lull in the wind for a couple of mins, enough to land.

I've been on a couple of flights like that. Once where we did two attempts and landed on the 2nd, the other where we did 3 but the had to divert. Other planes were just managing to land in the winds before and after our attempts.

The other problem is (as I found out on that flight) that mass diversions are not good. The airport I diverted to in the UK had dozens of unexpected arrivals, late at night. There wasn't the ground staff to manage this so it took forever to get people off. It then was too full to accept any more landings, so further flights had to get diverted further and further away.

So, if you did a blanket must divert you'd end up with all the diversion airports full (even to flights that could have landed at their original airport) and a much more dangerous situation as your diversions are now in different countries.
by AtlasBarfed | 2025-10-10 21:31:49+00:00
Well, it's the rich's money, dedicated to replacing as many people as possible in the Great war on labor.

I easily see the rich betting a trillion dollars especially if it's not their money and they start employing government funds in the name of a fictitious AI arms race.

They smell blood in the water. Reducing everyone to as minimum wage as possible.

Capital is already concentrated, aligned along monopolies and cartels, oligarchical control, and AI is the final key to total control to whatever degree they desire.
by gwbas1c | 2025-10-10 21:32:20+00:00
> I think we're unintentionally teaching our children to consume music passively. My goal with this project was to teach them to discover it actively, to own it, to care about it at the album level. I think it kinda worked!

Some people also say that about prerecorded music and whine about when families had to gather around the piano to sing.
by nemothekid | 2025-10-10 21:33:01+00:00
Wether or not OpenAI is sustainable or not is only a question that can be answered in hindsight. If OpenAI is still around in 10 years, in the same sort of capacity, does OP become retroactively wrong?

My point is, you can agree that OpenAI is unsustainable, but it's not clear to me that is a decided fact, rather than an open conjecture. And if someone is making that decision from a place of ego, I have greater reason to believe that they didn't reason themselves into that position.
by deafpolygon | 2025-10-10 21:33:13+00:00
The plateau you speak of is just inevitable human evolution. There will come a point where we will start to edit our genome and see what's capable of. Before we get there, though -

In time, AI and VR/AR will converge to allow us to evolve new ways to educate/entertain new generations, to distill knowledge in a faster and much more reliable way. We will experience societal upheavals before the "plateau". Our current world order will probably experience major changes.

AGI will probably be a long, long way ahead of us -- in its current state, LLMs are not going to spontaneously develop sentience. There is a massive scale (power, resources, space, etc) issue to contend with.
by impossiblefork | 2025-10-10 21:34:10+00:00
It's reasonable to question it, but there's a fun Chinese paper (https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.15855) where they attempt to create a system of prompts that can be used with commercial LLMs to solve hard maths problems.

It turns out that they can use the same prompt system for all of them, with no changes and still solve 5/6 IMO problems. I think this is possibly iffy, since people might have updated the models etc., but it's pretty obvious that this kind of thing is how OpenAI are doing their multi-stage thinking thing for maths internally.

Consequently if prompt systems are this transferable for these hard problems, why wouldn't both they and individual prompts, be highly transferable in general?
by andersmurphy | 2025-10-10 21:34:11+00:00
It's the high performance way to use Datastar and personally I think it's the best DX.

1. It's much better in terms of compression and latency. As with brotli/zstd you get compression over the entire duration of the connection. So you keep one connection open and push all updates down it. All requests return 204 response. Because everything comes down the same connection brotli/zstd can give you 1000-8000x compression ratios. So in my demos for example, one check is 13-20bytes over the wire even though it's 140k of HTML uncompressed. Keeping the packet size around 1k or less is great for latency. Redirect also has to do more trips.

2. The server is in control. I can batch updates. The reason these demo's easily survive HN is because the updates are batched every 100ms. That means at most a new view gets pushed to you every 100ms, regardless of the number of users interacting with your view. In the case of the GoL demo the render is actually shared between all users, so it's only rendering once per 100ms regardless of the number of concurrent users.

3. The DX is nice and simple good old View = f (state), like react just over the network.
by shadowgovt | 2025-10-10 21:34:29+00:00
I don't mean social as in social network. I mean that people have always been a key aspect of the technology and how it it practically works.

Yes, yes, IE6 shipped by default shipped by default on Windows. And therefore if you wanted a website that worked, you tested against IE6. Otherwise people would try and use your website and it wouldn't work and they wouldn't blame the browser, they would blame your website.

Those social aspects introduce a bunch of not necessarily written rules that you just have to know and learn as you develop for the web.
by philipkglass | 2025-10-10 21:35:05+00:00
There's at least a little bit of otter in the data. The one relevant result I saw was "Plate 40: Two Otters and a Beaver" by Joris Hoefnagel.

I also expected semantic search to return similar results for "fireworks" and "pyrotechnics," since the latter is a less common synonym for the former. But I got many results for fireworks and just one result for pyrotechnics.

This is still impressive. My impulse is to poke at it with harder cases to try to reason about how it could be implemented. Thanks for your Show HN and for replying to me!
by hintymad | 2025-10-10 21:35:40+00:00
> Even today, at the best CS programs in the country, it's possible to get a degree and still not be better than a very junior engineer at a software company (and quite a few graduates are worse).

I think it's important to differentiate the personal achievement of students and the training offered by their universities. For instance, the courses offered by CMU and MIT are super useful - insightful, practical, intense, and sufficiently deep. That said, it does not mean that every MIT/CMU graduate will reap the benefit of the courses, even though many will.

It goes without saying that it does NOT mean people can't teach themselves. I'm just saying universities offer a compelling alternative to training next gen of engineers.
by pornel | 2025-10-10 21:35:46+00:00
It's also a communication problem, because labels like "100-year/1000-year event" are easily misunderstood.

* they're derived from an estimated probability of the event (independently) happening each year. It doesn't mean that it won't happen for n years. The probability is the same every year.

* the probabilities are estimates, trying to predict extreme outliers. Usually from less than 100s of years of data, using sparse records that may have never recorded a single outlier.

* years = 1/annual_probability ends up giving large time spans for small probabilities. It means that uncertainty between 0.00001% and 0.00002% looks "off by 500 years".

https://practical.engineering/blog/2025/9/16/an-engineers-pe...
by fragmede | 2025-10-10 21:35:50+00:00
How does Google get money out of people in that case? As a corporation, Google contributes greatly to the education sector and also profits greatly, so it seems like they're pro-education to me, and are merely making the best of a bad situation, but I'd love to hear how Google extracts money from the people they've protected from phishing schemes in some secret way that I haven't considered. I do happen to have Google stock in my portfolio though, so maybe that indight's my entire comment for you though.