MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by zackmorris | 2025-10-06 16:36:16+00:00
Well, synchronous blocking approaches (as opposed to asynchronous nonblocking) provide that stuff for free. It would basically be the functional programming and unix ecosystems. Arguably the Go language's goroutines strike a good balance between cooperate and preemptive threads/multitasking. Although that distinction is not fundamental, because if we had realtime unix runtimes, then spawning an isolated process would have no more overhead than spawning a thread (this is the towering failure of all mainstream OSs today IMHO):

https://kushallabs.com/understanding-concurrency-in-go-green...

So lots of concepts are worth learning like atomicity, ACID compliance, write ahead logs (WALs), statically detecting livelocks and deadlocks (or making them unreachable), consensus algorithms like Raft and Paxos, state transfer algorithms like software transaction memory (STM), connectionless state transfer like hash trees and Merkle trees, etc.

The key insight is that manual management of tasks is, for the most part, not tenable by humans. It's better to take a step back and work at a higher level of abstraction. For example, declarative programming works in terms of goals/specifications/tests, so that the runner has more freedom to cancel and restart/retry tasks arbitrarily. That way the user can fire off a workload and wait until all of the tasks match a success criteria, and even treat that process as idempotent so it can all be run again without harm. In this way, trees of success criteria can be composed to manage a task pool.

I'd probably point to CockroachDB as one of the best task-cancellers, since it doesn't have a shutdown procedure. Its process can simply be terminated by the user with control-c, then it reconciles any outstanding transactions the next time it's booted, which just adds some latency. If an entire database can do that, then "this is the way".
by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 | 2025-10-06 16:36:19+00:00
Eh, the problem has multiple layers:

1. The linked story has CBP and not ICE 2. The citizens in question are children of illegal immigrants 3. Optics and narratives are more important that facts

Bottom line is, from get go, this conversation is flawed, but we now act as if what OP posted is some sort of gospel. And he barely understands basic civics.

[1]https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/07/difference-betwe...
by myrmidon | 2025-10-06 16:36:29+00:00
Adding up the big "ad-based" companies (google, meta) gets into the double digit percentages of US GDP (and those companies also do some useful non-ad things, too).

That sounds like a lot considering it is mostly a zero-sum waste, but I think it is still somewhat reasonable, and the trend was clear even decades ago (just think newspaper, radio, TV ads).

I think it would be feasible for the ad industry to leach even more ressources, but not too much more; I would not expect the sector to be able to double in relative size.
by bruckie | 2025-10-06 16:36:35+00:00
> Adding a new browser will just increase the attack vector.

More potential ways to attack? Sure. More actual attacks in practice? Not necessarily.

Let's imagine we have a hypothetical 100% secure browser, and we can get people to use it 50% of the time on on iOS. Then 50% of potential attacks become impossible. It doesn't matter that vulnerable Safari is hanging out in another part of the OS if attackers can't actually get their code to run in that context.
by polski-g | 2025-10-06 16:36:55+00:00
I have about 3200 hours in EU4, a ten year old game. But I also have $400 in its DLC (all of them).

But the thought of paying $30/mo to play a game is just too much. I only buy 2-3 games+DLCs per year. Game Pass was fine when it was $5/mo, I could leave it on in the background and not care if it wasn't utilized.
by thomashabets2 | 2025-10-06 16:37:43+00:00
I wouldn't say it "took off", but at least two people use the spreadsheet I built.

I made a video rebuilding it from scratch, for those who like to nerd out about these things: https://youtu.be/H5Xqwlwew98

The sheet has been filled out and evolved for my use since 2011.
by giancarlostoro | 2025-10-06 16:37:58+00:00
Yeah, I heard about when ChatGPT removed I think it was O4? apparently there's an entire community devoted to "role playing" or rather dating a character powered by the model. GPT5 broke their entire relationship. Me and a few friends agreed it might have been worth spinning up a dating GPT O4 based service for those people to pay to migrate their AI 'companions' to. Azure still has these "abandoned" models.

On the other note, it also helps OpenAI because they don't have to manage setting up all that infrastructure just to let others use the model.
by Scea91 | 2025-10-06 16:38:04+00:00
> Only a well done mix makes you resiliant.

I agree on this point, me not being anti-Nuclear doesn't mean I am anti-wind or solar. Every country has different circumstances, I live in a landlocked country with mild mountains, temperate climate and modest rivers. In our case nuclear energy seems like the most reliable and scalable option. For countries with huge coastline off-shore wind absolutely makes sense, simialrly with solar.

> Besides, CO2eq are often wrongly measured with nuclear energy, ignoring building emissions.

I think this point is overestimated. Based on a brief search, studies show nuclear carbon intensity around 6-12g, and the building emissions just around 13% of total lifetime emissions [1].

> there are again and again longer periods where Germany exports energy to France because their reactors are often in maintenance.

Valid point but the 2022 French nuclear "disaster" hasn't repeated at that scale so far. In recent years France is a net exporter to Germany. I can imagine that as with many problems in renewables having technical solutions the water temperature problem is also solvable technically.

[1] https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/energy-research/article...
by toomuchtodo | 2025-10-06 16:38:27+00:00
Lots of residential batteries being installed, as mentioned in the link https://www.ess-news.com/2025/07/18/german-battery-storage-r... above.

> By the end of the first half of 2025, Germany’s official registry of energy installations recorded nearly two million battery storage systems in operation. This figure, now unofficially but safely surpassed into July , includes a gross power capacity of 14.535 gigawatts (GW) and a usable storage capacity of nearly 22.1 gigawatt-hours (GWh).

> Photovoltaic home storage systems constitute the majority of these installations, with 1.967 million small battery storage units (up to 20 kilowatts) accounting for 11.5 GW of gross power and almost 18.3 GWh of usable capacity.

> Small photovoltaic home storage units made up the bulk of new additions, with 251,948 systems providing 1.34 GW and almost 2.7 GWh. In the medium segment, 2,418 new systems added 117.7 MW of power and 160 MWh of capacity.

> The expansion of battery storage is driven by increasing demand, highlighted by 389 hours of negative wholesale electricity prices in the first half of the year. Germany has also significantly expanded its solar power generation, with approximately 107.4 GW of photovoltaic capacity installed and over 7 GW added in the first six months of 2025.

The future of electrification is distributed, broadly speaking. Distributed assets can be orchestrated to optimize for both cost and grid stability ("VPP" aka virtual power plants). Get generation and storage as close to the load as you can.
by grahac | 2025-10-06 16:38:34+00:00
If the software is doing complicated integrations, that may be a barrier as said in the article.

And to be clear, this is people using teams of Claude Code agents (either Sonnet 4.5 or Sonnet 5 and 5.5 in the future). Reliability/scale can be mitigated with a combination of a senior engineer or two, AI Coding tools like the latest Claude Code and the right language and frameworks. (Depending on the scale of course) It no longer takes a team senior and mid-level engineers many months. The barriers even for that have been reduced.

Completely agree that using Lovable, Bolt, etc aren't going to compete except as part of noise, but that's not what this article is saying.
by programjames | 2025-10-06 16:39:11+00:00
I find it funny how people say GPT-5 "bombed". I noticed a significant improvement in maths and coding with GPT-5. To quantify were I've found the models useful:

- GPT 3.5: Good for finding reference terms. I could not trust anything it said, but it could help me find some general terms in fields I was unfamiliar with.

- GPT 4: Good for cached, obscure knowledge. I generally could trust the stuff it said to be true, but none of its logic or conclusions.

- GPT 4.5: Good for reference proofs/code. I cannot trust its proofs or code, but I can get a decent outline for writing my own.

- GPT 5: Good for directed thinking. I cannot trust it to come up with the best solution on its own, but if I tell it what I'm working on, it's pretty decent at using all the tricks in its repertoire (across many fields) to get me a correct solution. I can trust its proofs or code to be about as correct as my own. My main issues are I cannot trust it to point out confusion or ask me, "is this actually the problem we should be solving here?" My guess is this is mostly a byproduct of shallow human feedback, rather than an actual issue with intelligence (as it will often ask me at the end of spending a bunch of computation if I want to try something mildly different).

For me, GPT 5 is way more useful than the previous models, because I don't have a lot of paper-pushing problems I'm trying to solve. My guess is the wider public may disagree because it's hard to tell the difference between something better at the task than you, and something much better.
by catigula | 2025-10-06 16:39:36+00:00
I made two basic arguments:

1. The exponential curve of AI progress

2. The lack of any mechanism that will immediately wall off AI progress at this specific exponential part of the curve

>I don't see how AI is going to replace, say, welders, in a year.

This article is about white-collar jobs. However, if human-level intelligence (let alone surpassing human-level intelligence) just becomes a matter of compute, robotics will quickly follow. That being said I'd expect this to be years, not a year.

> But bankers - as opposed to tellers - are about relationship with customers, and the AI isn't going to substitute there

Are you sure about that? Because even GPT-4o is an example of how people are very hungry for relationships presented by these AIs.
by kryptiskt | 2025-10-06 16:39:49+00:00
Java's package identifiers doesn't work at all, since organizations are far more transient than code (Like, even Sun doesn't exist anymore). And even if my organization still exists, one would think I should be able to hand over code to someone else, without them having to claim that they're me.

For extra bonus points, the Java directory structure being built around it is just silly, related code ends up far away in the directory tree, just because you went through a rebranding or a merger.
by Chris2048 | 2025-10-06 16:40:00+00:00
Hanlon's Razor appears to be a maxim of assuming good-faith; "They didn't mean to be cause this, they are just inept."

To me, it has no justification. People see malice easily, granted, but others feign ignorance all the time too.

I think a better principle is: Proven and documented testing for competence, making it clear what a persons duties and (liable) responsibilities are, then thereafter treating incompetence and malice the same. Also: any action need to be audited by a second entity who shares blame (to a measured and pre-decided degree) when they fail to do so.
by quodlibetor | 2025-10-06 16:40:18+00:00
Mise does do local-only Make-similar task caching, if you specify sources and outputs: https://mise.jdx.dev/tasks/task-configuration.html#sources

If you specify sources but not "outputs" then mise will auto-track whether sources have been modified.

I requested the auto-track feature to speed up Docker builds a pretty long time ago, and it's been fantastic.
by SeanAnderson | 2025-10-06 16:40:34+00:00
I dunno, maybe? It's tough to compare alternate realities. I had equity in the company that paid out well, had a base over 200k, 30% EOY bonus, was leading a team of 6, fully remote work, no on-call. Certainly there are areas I'm weaker in than I would be if I worked in a FAANG-style corporation (only doing minor work with microservices, not doing much with distributed computing), but the job was quite different than what I did when I was first hired out of college.

Frankly, I felt mentally and socially challenged enough while also being compensated more than fairly. If that means I've got a junior role while also avoiding toxic large-scale organizational dysfunction then I'm down to make that trade-off every day.
by busterarm | 2025-10-06 16:40:42+00:00
To take the maximally negative view of things:

- uv is a cool tool, but Astral has signaled their intention to have it tie in nicely to paid services. - that's a nice moat! - Andre & friends saw that in the Python community (and uv's success) and decided they could do the same for Ruby - Their collective announces rv and now wants to make us dependent on them & friends for Ruby Gems. - After Hashicorp and others, I'm extremely wary of orgs luring me in with free shit. Hashicorp is maybe the lightest example of this but they're very intentional about enterprise-walling business-essential features. - I don't want the Ruby ecosystem dependent on one party or even a tiny collective of people. This is just as bad to me as the Ruby Central situation right now.
by throw0101a | 2025-10-06 16:40:46+00:00
> If you’re building a phone app, make sure the progressive web app version has feature parity.

The problem in this specific case is privacy protections:

> Aaron told The Verge ICEBlock is built around a single database in iCloud. When a user taps on the map to report ICE sightings, the location data is added to that database, and users within five miles are automatically sent a push notification alerting them. Push notifications require developers to have some way of designating which devices receive them, and while Aaron declined to say precisely how the notifications function, he said alerts are sent through Apple’s system, not ICEBlock’s, letting him avoid keeping his own database of users or their devices. “We utilized iCloud in kind of a creative way,” Aaron said. [...]

* https://www.theverge.com/cyber-security/707116/iceblock-data...

The app developer does not want to keep a database of people on who to notify (and track their location for "near-by" locations).
by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 | 2025-10-06 16:41:08+00:00
Hm. Surely, you are not suggesting that the length of delay does not matter? If that was the case, one could be detained indefinitely.

Lets then compare it to other law enforcement actions and see where it differs. If we do that, maybe we can learn something new.

Based on what I do know, this law enforcement action was not different from other similar crackdowns. If true, this would suggest that the sacrosanct status does not exist or exists in name only. I would be curious to learn, which you think is true.
by gjsman-1000 | 2025-10-06 16:41:08+00:00
You're making the assumption that if you build the tech, people will then use the tech, and then the government can't shut it down, because people are using the tech.

An authoritarian government never cares about the widespread availability of anything. If anything, people using it, only becomes a greater impetus to shut it down before it gets larger. The government holds the cards for shutting it down at any time, regardless of size and popularity.

> We don’t yet live under a regime where technology is completely locked down and restricted; the point is to fight back now before that happens!

If we respond by adding duress PINs on GrapheneOS and encrypting the messaging to the 9s, and then bad actors use said technologies, the government has all the ammunition they need for public opinion. We made it easier to ban with a straight face, not harder.
by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF | 2025-10-06 16:41:16+00:00
> relatively mainstream

This doesn't preclude extreme. Not commenting on whether the community's is shooting themselves in the foot or not, just that the reason provided is not a good one for believing so.

> If I was being disingenuous I should really encourage this schism!

I do not think that you are necessarily being disingenuous but misunderstanding the difference of opinion in this way actually seems to encourage said schism.
by atmavatar | 2025-10-06 16:41:55+00:00
We are a frog in a pot of water placed upon a stove.

Every time the Republican party gains power, they turn up the burner.

When the Democratic party gains power, they don't turn the burner up any further, but the most we can give them credit for is they may occasionally toss an ice cube in the water.

They do not turn the burner down.

They do not remove the pot from the stove.

They do not take the frog out of the water.

The Democratic party isn't as bad as the Republican party, but they're still ultimately boiling the frog.

---

For all their crowing about how bad Republican policy is, how often do you really see them repealing bad laws passed by Republicans - especially the disastrous tax cuts and sabotage of government agencies? Biden couldn't even be bothered to replace all of Trump's appointees.

The last few decades have demonstrated that at the very least, we need a number of constitutional amendments to fix the cracks and gaping holes in our current governmental structure that allowed us to get here, and it'll probably take burning down both major political parties and starting with new ones to make that happen.
by lesuorac | 2025-10-06 16:42:30+00:00
The CEO of Tesla, Elon Musk, was sued over an extremely similar situation. So somebody will care.

That said, this is really about the principal. Sure, if I give you $10 and you give me a hamburger it's not like some illegal transaction. But to say the $10 comes from thin air is wrong. It doesn't come from thin air.

I would bet that if one day OpenAI decided to sell 10% of AMD the stock would crash from $600 to below $150. IIUC, there's 1.6B shares of AMD while only 54M shares trade daily so dumping 160M shares would tank their price [1]. If AMD gives OpenAI 10% of the company and OpenAI goes under, it's going to take AMD's share price with it.

[1]: https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/amd
by melenaboija | 2025-10-06 16:42:39+00:00
I don’t know, just intuition. Each crisis is different and impossible to predict, otherwise I’d be retired, which I’m not.

Completely agree, I’d expect all of those to take a big hit, and some more than others, but I don’t think Microsoft or Google would disappear. As for the SP issue, if this trend continues, people might start seeing the SP as the opposite of diversification (at least in the stocks market sense) and will have to start looking for something else.

BTW, I’m almost an all-in SP investor myself so I’ll have to navigate that dip too, lol
by eambutu | 2025-10-06 16:42:51+00:00
In terms of what businesses we're targeting: we wanted to provide either 1.) a turnkey solution for a company GPT for all the people who don't have it yet, or 2.) a higher quality company GPT for people who do have an internal solution.

Our sense is that ~70% knowledge companies at large still don't have a custom GPT yet, and that of the people who do, our system can be more performant because we're spending more effort than their internal team is. There's a lot of details we've solved on data ingestion and search algo that improved our accuracy dramatically, and things breadth of data connectors is the kind of thing that is expensive for an internal team but worth it if you're providing the service at large.

Not sure what you mean by "data seems to be stored outside of the customers control," but fortunately I think many SaaS apps that were trying to lock down customer data from themselves are walking that back a little bit.
by tylerrobinson | 2025-10-06 16:42:54+00:00
This article is based on vibes just like the trends it hypothesizes.

To pick just one claim:

“Big companies used to move slowly, but now a ragtag team of two developers at a large firm can whip up something that looks top-of-market to the untrained eye in a matter of weeks.”

This is just pure speculation with no consideration of success or longevity. Big companies are going faster now? Where? Which ones?

AI coding allows you to build prototypes quickly. All the reasons big companies are slow haven’t budged.
by sedawkgrep | 2025-10-06 16:43:06+00:00
Ok, lots of questions around 'why' and no answers, so let me take a stab.

I suspect that the purpose of this is to be able to ingest pf.conf files into a larger security tool. Something like an NDR/XDR/SOAR, or perhaps Splunk.

SecOps wants to know what the existing policies are (for compliance and validation), and to orchestrate enforcement when an IoC (or whatever) prompts investigation and action. Getting the format into JSON opens up the whole landscape for integration into existing tooling.
by Aurornis | 2025-10-06 16:43:08+00:00
> there's something that I'd call a "complexity cliff" in the software business: if you want to compete in certain spaces, you need to build very complex software (even if the software, to the user, is easy to use)

I recognized something similar when I first started interviewing candidates.

I try to interview promising resumes even if they don't have the perfect experience match. Something that becomes obvious when doing this is that many developers have only operated on relatively simple projects. They would repeat things like "Everything is just a CRUD app" or not understand that going from Python or JavaScript to C++ for embedded systems was more complicated than learning different syntax for your if blocks and for loops.

The new variant of this is the software developer who has only worked on projects where getting to production is a matter of prompting an LLM continuously for a few months. Do this once and it feels like any problem can be solved the same way. These people are in for a shock when they stray from the common path and enter territory that isn't represented in the training data.
by kakuri | 2025-10-06 16:43:50+00:00
Keep in mind that many (most? all?) LLMs are not trained strictly on factual data, and are probably not trained to differentiate between factual and non-factual information. If you ask an absurd question you will likely get a (delightfully) absurd answer. If you ask a question somewhere in the borders between reality and fiction... results may vary.
by soelost | 2025-10-06 16:44:00+00:00
It was trying to download the PWA then the domain started giving me issues. Its now at https://whichcard.info

Yes, theres more to that than the 30% rule.

The goal is to optimize your utilization: - start with the 30% rule for daily management - spending: dont use AMEX until tomorrow - use Chase instead - bills: move AXA car insurance to Discover card to save $10/mo - due date: move utility bill from 7th to 10th to drop utilization 9% * avoid spending between due and statement date because that could "undo" your payment and artificially spike your utilization