MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by port11 | 2025-10-28 13:30:52+00:00
It's a good total aside, my analogy was not great.

I went on Sunday, and she announced what she was playing. Otherwise from the initial notes it's easy to spot what's coming. Of course you end up with an imperfect recording, but it's good enough for the memories, I guess.

(I actually wanted to record the 10-minute jam session via Apple's Voice Memos but didn't notice it wasn't recording, because there's no feedback to when you press the button, and red-on-dark is easy to miss.)
by notarobot123 | 2025-10-28 13:30:57+00:00
> Situated software isn't a technological strategy so much as an attitude about closeness of fit between software and its group of users, and a refusal to embrace scale, generality or completeness as unqualified virtues.

I read a paper about social media being the way it is because of it's scale above other factors[0]. There's something to be said for small, purpose built software networks that never intend on eating the world.

I wonder if the barriers to entry for building stuff like this is going down. Maybe there's still hope for a network of networks that looks more like this.

[0] - https://arxiv.org/pdf/2508.03385
by pinnochio | 2025-10-28 13:31:32+00:00
I think it's a bit late for that.

Also, you have to consider the size of Microsoft relative to its ownership of OpenAI, future dilution, and how Microsoft itself will fare in the future. If, say, Microsoft is on a path towards decreasing relevance/marketshare/profitability, any gains from its stake in OpenAI may be offset by its diminishing fortunes.
by creddit | 2025-10-28 13:32:11+00:00
Can anyone point me to whether or not the OAI non-profit holds voting control or not after the recapitalization?

I've read this but it's extremely vague: https://openai.com/index/built-to-benefit-everyone/

As is this: https://openai.com/our-structure/

Especially so if the Non-profit foundation doesn't retain voting control, this remains the greatest theft of all time. I still can't quite understand how it should at all be possible.

Looking at the changes for MSFT, I also mostly don't understand why they did it!
by mdale | 2025-10-28 13:32:26+00:00
As the OP outlined 10x is common place now; where as my best day pre-AI may have been 500 LOC now 5K LOC per day is routine. So a few months on a solo project has produced ~500k lines of code.

The code base is disproportionally testing automation, telemetry and monitoring systems but a lot code none the less ;) So even in a solo/small team project depend on architecture, procedures, test suites etc. over knowing every line of code.
by giancarlostoro | 2025-10-28 13:32:42+00:00
In a high quality setup you have a staging server that is a carbon copy of PROD. Bonus points if you make it so staging and PROD are 100% interchangeable, to the level that you can point PROD to staging, and then turn PROD into staging, and do the same next deployment. If you can do that, you have a stronger change of at least reproducing production issues.

Dev, UAT / QA, Staging, PROD. This is the ideal setup in my eyes. It lets QA / UAT hold changes that are maybe not 100% ready, while not blocking testing that is mean to go into PROD ASAP because it can sit in staging.
by zug_zug | 2025-10-28 13:32:47+00:00
To be clear -- the data centers aren't even a slight cause of the high incomes in loudoun county, that long predate the datacenters and the data-center salaries likely bring that number down.

Also the county west of loudoun (Clarke), which has no data centers, has even lower taxes than loudoun. If you compare tax rate in loudoun in 2006 versus 2025 it's 1 percentage point lower now.
by lan321 | 2025-10-28 13:32:49+00:00
I had girl friends who did it to get attention from their parents/boyfriends/classmates. They acknowledged it back then. It wasn't some secret. It was essentially for attention, aesthetics and the light headed feeling. I still have an A4 page somewhere with a big ass heart drawn on it by an ex with her own blood. Kids are just weird when the hormones hit. The cute/creepy ratio of that painting has definitely gotten worse with time.
by jalapenos | 2025-10-28 13:33:00+00:00
Yes I assumed you were Brazilian, which is where most of the "off duty cop" shooting videos come from - sounds like a Mad Max state. But in other countries, people don't get executed for standing up to crooks.

Of course, if you ever get a Bukele in power all the leftists will be out in force crying about the poor criminal's human rights etc - always a good reminder that these situations are intentionally inflicted from above.
by lotsofpulp | 2025-10-28 13:33:06+00:00
This is a little exaggerated, considering ZIRP was 2009 to 2022, 13 years, and came well after Amazon had established its trajectory.

And they did kind of successfully roll out a global logistics network, at a time when no one thought anyone could compete with Walmart. And they became leaders in the cloud computing space.

These aren't trivial accomplishments solely enabled by ZIRP.
by JustExAWS | 2025-10-28 13:34:40+00:00
Then don’t do that? In 2020, when I had the “opportunity” to work at Amazon in a role that would eventually require relocating after COVID, there was no way in hell I was going to uproot my life to work for Amazon and that was after my youngest had graduated. I instead interviewed for a “permanently remote role” [sic]. If that hadn’t been available, I would have kept working local jobs for less money.

Anyone with any familiarity about tech knew or should have known what kind of shitty company Amazon was. At 46, I went in with my eyes wide open. I made my money in stock and cash and severance and kept it moving when Amazon Amazoned me. It was just my 8th job out of now 10 in 30 years.
by KurSix | 2025-10-28 13:34:53+00:00
This whole situation painfully reminds me of the low-code/no-code boom from like 5–10 years ago.

Back then everyone was saying developers would become obsolete and business analysts would just “click together” enterprise solutions. In the end, we got a mess of clunky non-scalable systems that still had to be fixed and integrated by the same engineers.

LLMs are basically low-code on steroids - they make it easier to build a prototype, but exponentially harder to turn it into something actually reliable.
by Forgeties79 | 2025-10-28 13:34:59+00:00
Yeah for sure. Unfortunately in the US it’s not uncommon for companies to find “a pattern of behavior” or “less than stellar work” that is enough to justify not giving you your severance, but also not too severe that they can’t be blamed for never bringing it up and putting you on a PIP (performance improvement plan, not sure if that’s a term in other countries).
by respondo2134 | 2025-10-28 13:35:07+00:00
this would be an incredibly tough play. We've seen few success stories, and even when the product is good building the business around them has often failed. Most of the consumer plays are terrible products with weak execution and no real market. I have no doubt they could supplement lots of consumer experiences but I'm not sure how they are more than a commodity component in that model. I'm a die-hard engineer, but equating the success of the iphone to Ive's design is like saying the reason there were so many Apple II's in 80's homes and classrooms was because of Woz's amazing design.
Show HN: CloudNetDraw – Generate Azure network diagrams (SaaS and self-hosted)
by cloudnet-draw | 2025-10-28 13:35:08+00:00
Hi HN,

I’m a cloud security architect. Earlier this year I posted CloudNetDraw, a tool that automatically generates Azure network diagrams (hubs, spokes, peerings, subnets, NSGs, UDRs, etc).

It connects to your Azure tenant (via user login or service principal), queries the environment, and exports editable .drawio files for both HLD and MLD views.

Since that first post, I’ve added:

• Hosted SaaS version: generate diagrams directly from the browser, no setup needed • Self-hosting: still fully open source for those who prefer running it locally • Deeper topology details: subnet-level resources and NSG/UDR mapping • Support for Multi-Hub environments, direct resource-linking and spoke-to-spoke peerings • Cleaner layout and faster Azure queries

Privacy-wise, nothing from your environment is stored! Diagrams are generated in memory and deleted after download.

Try it: https://www.cloudnetdraw.com Source: https://github.com/krhatland/cloudnetdraw

I’d love to hear what you think, especially feedback from anyone managing large Azure environments or working with network documentation automation.
by tanya-donska | 2025-10-28 13:35:41+00:00
Here’s what nobody tells you about onboarding patterns: they work in isolation, fail in combination.

I’ve tested this across seventeen products over four years. The math is consistent and depressing:

One pattern (account setup wizard): 60% completion Two patterns (wizard + tooltips): 45% completion Three patterns (wizard + tooltips + tour): 23% completion Four patterns (add checklist): 12% completion Five patterns (add welcome screen): 8% completion
by michalsustr | 2025-10-28 13:36:05+00:00
I agree it is possible to build an LLM to play poker, with appropriate tool calling, in principle.

I think it's useful to distinguish what LLMs can do in a) theory, b) non-LLM approaches we know work and c) how to do it with LLMs.

In a) theory, LLMs with the "thinking" rollouts are equivalent to (finite-tape) Turing machine, so they can do anything a computer can, so a solution exists (given large-enough neural net/rollout). To do the sampling, I agree the LLM can use an external tool call. This a good start!

For b) to achieve strong performance in poker, we know you can do continual resolving (e.g. search + gadget)

For c) "Quantization" as you suggested is an interesting approach, but it goes against the spirit of "let's have a big neural net that can do any general task". You gave an example how to quantize for a state that has 2 actions. But what about 3? 4? Or N? So in practice, to achieve such generality, you need to output in the token space.

On top of that, for poker, you'd need LLM to somehow implement continual resolving/ReBeL (for equilibrium guarantees). To do all of this, you need either i) LLM call the CPU implementation of the resolver or ii) the LLM to execute instructions like a CPU.

I do believe i) is practically doable today, to e.g. finetune an LLM to incorporate value function in its weights and call a resolver tool, but not something ChatGPT and others can do (to come to my original parent post). Also, in such finetuning process, you will likely trade-off the LLM generality for specialization.

> you can do a k-NN or some other simple approximation. [..] You can say that about any other game then, no?

Yes, you can approximate value function with any model (k-NN, neural net, etc).

> In poker if you call 25% more or 35% more if the bet size is 20% smaller is unlikely to result in a huge blunder. Chess is more volatile and thus you need more "precision" telling patterns apart.

I see. The same applies for Chess however -- you can play mixed strategies there too, with similar property - you can linearly interpolate expected value between losing (-1) and winning (1).

Overall, I think being able to incorporate a value function within an LLM is super interesting research, there are some works there, e.g. Cicero [6], and certainly more should be done, e.g. have a neural net to be both a language model and be able to do AlphaZero-style search.

[6] https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.ade9097
by jerf | 2025-10-28 13:36:35+00:00
Even not dripping directly on to the goods, there's not a lot of stuff that you would be interested in getting out of a safe, but you will still be interested in even after being exposed to thermite. The list is basically "precious metals" and not much more, though that is admittedly a valid entry on the list.

In an analog to the somewhat frequent observation on HN that if you don't care whether the code is correct I can make it run arbitrarily quickly, if you don't care if the contents of the safe survive there's a lot of high-energy ways to blast it to smithereens. This is generally not considered a problem to be solved with a safe, though. If you want to prevent "being blasted to smithereens" that you'll need a completely different approach.
by imiric | 2025-10-28 13:36:43+00:00
> It's not an either-we-ban-guns-or-we-help-mentally-ill-people. Por qué no los dos?

Because it's irrational to apply a blanket ban on anything. From drugs, to guns, to foods and beverages, to technology. As history has taught us, that only leads to more problems. You're framing it as a binary choice, when there is a lot of nuance required if we want to get this right. A nanny state is not the solution.

A person can harm themselves or others using any instrument, and be compelled to do so for any reason. Whether that's because of underlying psychological issues, or because someone looked at them funny. As established—humans are complex, and we have no way of knowing exactly what motivates someone to do anything.

While there is a strong argument to be made that no civilian should have access to fully automated weapons, the argument to allow civilians access to weapons for self-defense is equally valid. The same applies to any technology, including "AI".

So if we concede that nuance is required in this discussion, then let's talk about it. Instead of using "AI" as a scapegoat, and banning it outright to "protect the kids", let's discuss ways that it can be regulated so that it's not as widely accessible or falsely advertised as it is today. Let's acknowledge that responsible usage of technology starts in the home. Let's work on educating parents and children about the role technology plays in their lives, and how to interact with it in healthy ways. And so on, and so forth.

It's easy to interpret stories like this as entirely black or white, and have knee-jerk reactions about what should be done. It's much more difficult to have balanced discussions where multiple points of view are taken into consideration. And yet we should do the difficult thing if we want to actually fix problems at their core, instead of just applying quick band-aid "solutions" to make it seem like we're helping.

> ChatGPT engaged in an entire line of discussion that no human counsellor would engage in, leading to an outcome that no human intervention (except that of a psychopath) would cause. Because it was sycophantic.

You're ignoring my main point: why are these tools treated as "counsellors" in the first place? That's the main issue. You're also ignoring the possibility that ChatGPT may have helped many more people than it's harmed. Do we have statistics about that?

What's irrational is blaming technology for problems that are caused by a misunderstanding and misuse of it. That is akin to blaming a knife company when someone decides to use a knife as a toothbrush. It's ludicrous.

AI companies are partly to blame for false advertising and not educating the public sufficiently about their products. And you could say the same for governments and the lack of regulation. But the blame is first and foremost on users, and definitely not on the technology itself. A proper solution would take all of these aspects into consideration.
by creddit | 2025-10-28 13:36:52+00:00
Nevermind, looks like the nn-profit gave up voting control lol:

"All equity holders in OpenAI Group now own the same type of traditional stock that participates proportionally and grows in value with OpenAI Group’s success. The OpenAI Foundation board of directors were advised by independent financial advisors, and the terms of the recapitalization were unanimously approved by the board."

Truly, truly the greatest theft from mankind in history and they dress it up as if the non-profit is doing anything other than giving away the most valuable startup in history for a paltry sum.

Credit where credit is due, Sam Altman is the greatest dealmaker of all time.

Will be interesting if we get to hear what his new equity stake is!
by thaumasiotes | 2025-10-28 13:37:12+00:00
> in British English "fired" implies "for cause", while a "blameless" process of headcount reduction is known as "redundancy"

OK. I was fired for no stated cause in a process that didn't involve headcount reduction, or the firing of anyone except me specifically. (The unstated cause seems to have been that I had been offered a perk by the manager who hired me that the new manager didn't want to honor after the original guy was promoted.)

How would you describe that, in British English?
by tremon | 2025-10-28 13:37:16+00:00
Only looking at hiring % doesn't mean anything if we don't know the composition of the hiring pool. For example, page 64 shows that Google's APAC offices have 90.7% Asian workers, up from 90.4% a year earlier -- at the expense of all other ethnicities. Is Google doing a bad job there, or is this an accurate reflection of the available workforce?
by saint-evan | 2025-10-28 13:38:05+00:00
Maybe if you mentioned a more complex, lower level or niche language than typescript like maybe C, MIPS or some niche exotic systems language pushing around registers. I'd believe yu, with caveat, but with abstract high level abstract languages like Python, typescript and the likes? It's highly unlikely that you would've put together syntax in any uniquely surprising combination. Maybe yu mean yu designed a clever fix to a problem within a larger codebase so thar would mean a context/attention issue for the LLM but there's no way in hell yu wrote up a contained piece of code solving a specific problem, not tied to a larger software env, that couldn't also have been written by frontier LLMs provided yu could articulate the problem, a course-of-action and expected output/behavior. LLMs are very good at writing code in isolation, humans still have deeper intuition and we're still extremely good at doing the plug-in, wiring and big picture planning. Yu over-estimate what you've done with typescript or misunderstand what 'LLMs are good at writing code' [in isolation] means
by watwut | 2025-10-28 13:38:20+00:00
> Do you actually destinguish between right and far right?

Some on the right are far right, some are not. Many people on the right will prefer far right over center and vote accordingly. They just do not like the aesthetic and historical associations.

> Because I have a feeling, many people don't.

That is because right radicalized itself much more then left. And moderate right spend too much time excusing, enabling to and defending far right then by anything else. They loved to pretend far right does not exist, actually, until it turned out they ended up undistinguishable.

> People seem to fail to see the difference between a person with conservative values, and outright "Nazis"

Problem is that "conservative values" is more of an euphemism that sounds good when you want to pretend a group of people have much better motivations then they actually have. That is how it was used for over a decade now. People with conservative values rarely object to far right values, but they straight up hate the center (which they claim to be practically communists).
by lisbbb | 2025-10-28 13:38:28+00:00
Why did you think TDD was garbage? Formalizing a specification is all that test first is. It's just that most devs I know had big egos and believing writing tests was somehow below them. I prefer the "build a little, test a little" approach, personally, but there's nothing inherently wrong with TDD.

My prediction is that in the future, a lot of desperate companies are going to need living, breathing reverse software engineers to aid them because they have lost the ability to understand their own codebases.

Oh, and why is code worth $0? A lot of code is throwaway, but I still got paid to produce it and much of it makes money for the company or saves them money.
by piltdownman | 2025-10-28 13:38:45+00:00
So I see someone has taken Naomi Kanakia’s essay, “Contemporary Literary Novels Are Haunted by the Absence of Money”, to heart.

In fact, far from the contention that "Steinbecks" of the world no longer exist - they are prolific, and commercially successful, in a wide variety of Genres. Indeed, given Saul Bellow only published his last novel in the last 25 years, it seems somewhat callous to bifurcate the great from the good so chronologically.

Percival Everett immediately comes to mind - with Pulitzer Prize-winning James, a nuanced and insightful retelling of Huckleberry Finn, or 'I Am Not Sydney Poitier' which works almost as an homage to Steinbeck.

'The Nickel Boys' by Colson Whitehead I'd argue surpasses most of Steinbeck's more popular canon (Of Mice and Men, Cannery Row etc...). A magnificent novel in the very best of the american tradition.

'A Visit from the Goon Squad' by Jennifer Egan is probably tied for the best 21st Century Pulitzer winner with Jayne Anne Phillips' 'Night Watch' -both Steinbeck-esque in their charting of social mores in the face of an ever-changing culture rendered as the symbol and signifier drenched shadows of capitalism against the cave wall of society.

Looking at the Booker Prize since Paul Beatty, I'd also highlight 'Shuggie Bain' - Douglas Stuart's opus about growing up with an alcoholic mother in the working class Glasgow of the 1980s, or 'Prophet Song' - the requiem for a mother of four trying to preserve her family as a far-right totalitarian regime takes control of Ireland and suspends the Irish constitution.
by IAmBroom | 2025-10-28 13:39:42+00:00
I don't know why you expect it would be prone to cracking, but it isn't - or else a wedding ring would have a life expectancy shorter than the average marriage.

As for a reflective screen, the term for that is "shiny", and could be marketed as desirable - it signals that the owner has an expensive watch. It wouldn't interfere with use, unless the user was wearing a bright headlamp.
by dizlexic | 2025-10-28 13:40:00+00:00
I hear this a lot. I'm self-taught and had just been let go from my first dev job ever. I was broke and desperate so I built something.

I have been ashamed of it at multiple times in my career, but tbh I built something that fed, sheltered, and clothed me. It was worth.

I also learned a lot.
by bobmcnamara | 2025-10-28 13:40:18+00:00
Approaching one second per second, is that so much to ask?

Unless standardization has improved, how+when the second is smeared(if at all) means timestamps from the same system aren't usefully subtractable without communicating a separate time skew calendar.

That said, time is a big topic, and everything has different requirements but migrating to TAI and treating UTC as yet another human readable time zone has solved more (admittedly application specific) problems than it created.
by rjaT25hja | 2025-10-28 13:40:19+00:00
DEI in practice works like this: You have a ruling class of affluent white males and a Harvard educated Executive Director. None of these have ever been suppressed in their lives.

If anyone points out that fact on PSF infrastructure, you ban them (yes, this has happened).

You create a couple of programs that are mostly ineffective but good for PR.

You never mention any economic or other injustices that could upset the corporate sponsors.

You support and promote job replacement by AI while blogging about redistributing jobs via DEI.
by squarefoot | 2025-10-28 13:40:34+00:00
Yes, that was a real problem. The Amiga would access disks every time they were inserted to id them, but viruses too would use that feature to spread themselves; they would remain resident in memory (also after warm resets) then write themselves on the bootblock of every inserted floppy. Seeing the computer access every inserted disk was then normal, no way to know if it was for reading or writing, so back then I built a small device that would take the writing pulse on the floppy port, make it a bit longer and drive a beeper. If I then inserted a floppy and it started beeping that meant that floppy and the one I read before it were infected so that I could restrict the suspects list and clean them. It was very effective, built some for friends and also sold some of them on local listings.