MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by AdieuToLogic | 2025-10-10 03:13:47+00:00
> From what I've seen, the idea that AI is turning developers into super-managers is why some people struggle to adapt ...

This "idea" is hyperbole.

> Those who love to type their code and hate managing others tend to be more hesitant to adapt to this new reality.

This is a false dichotomy and trivializes the real benefit of going through the process of authoring a change; how doing so increases one's knowledge of collaborations, how going through the "edit-compile-test" cycle increases one's comfort with the language(s)/tool(s) used to define a system, how when a person is flummoxed they seek help from coworkers.

Also, producing source code artifacts has nothing to do with "managing others." These are disjoint skill sets and attempting to link the two only serves to identify the "super-manager" concept as being fallacious.

> Meanwhile, people who love to manage, communicate, and work as a team are leveraging these tools more swiftly.

Again, this furthers the false dichotomy and can be interpreted as an affirmative conclusion from a negative premise[0], since "[m]eanwhile" can be substituted with the previous sentence in this context.

0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_conclusion_from_a_...
by makeitdouble | 2025-10-10 03:14:16+00:00
We did it with every kid/parent and name combination. The only time we where ever asked to show papers was when the names didn't match. It shouldn't be that way, but IME it's a factor.

As you point out, being the parent doesn't really matter in that case, it needs to be proven that both parent agree on the kid leaving the country.
by bobmcnamara | 2025-10-10 03:18:09+00:00
There are some cases where an HSA is unavailable. I've had an employer not offer a high deductible plan. I've had an employer offer a high deductible plan, but the insurer not supply it in my home state.

There are cases where it doesn't make fiscal sense. One employer covered 1x premium/employee(spouses and kids were full rate).
by pgedge_postgres | 2025-10-10 03:19:31+00:00
The official FAQ has a good amount of info on how conflict resolution is handled (https://www.pgedge.com/resources/faq)!

Relevant excerpt: "pgEdge offers eventual consistency between nodes using a configurable policy (e.g. last-writer-wins) for conflict resolution, along with conflict-free delta apply columns (i.e. CRDTs) for running sum fields. This allows for independent, concurrent and eventually consistent updates across multiple nodes."

Some specific documentation on the subject: https://docs.pgedge.com/spock_ext/conflicts

One of our solutions engineers (Paul Rothrock) created a video on this topic in the last month: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prkMkG0SOJE

And if you're interested in more information about conflict management in PostgreSQL clusters in general, this article ("Living on the Edge: Conflict Management and You") from Shaun Thomas is probably useful to check out: https://www.pgedge.com/blog/living-on-the-edge
by mfworks | 2025-10-10 03:19:49+00:00
The most magical part of this transform is the search! First learned about this in a bioalgorithms course, and the really cool property is that for a string length l, you can search for the string in O(l) time. It has the same search time complexity of a suffix tree with O(n) space complexity (with a very low constant multiple). To this day it may be the coolest algorithm I've encountered.
by cortesoft | 2025-10-10 03:20:29+00:00
My mom got married in the 70s in the US. It wasn't a huge issue, but people did think she was strange.

I never experienced any of what you say as a child. We travelled internationally a number of times, never had anyone tell us she wasn't my mom or anything.

I am not sure what you mean about the money thing. My mom was on my accounts when I was a kid (with different last names) so she could send me money. As an adult, I can't see how sending money would be an issue. My mom and I transfer money to each other fairly often still ($70k recently, went through fine).

I did not stay in my home town. Not sure how they would be relevant.

Again, most people would assume (if they assumed anything) that my parents were divorced, which is incredibly common. Half my friends had different last names from their siblings and/or parent. Blended families are incredibly common.

I am now a dad of two. They have my last name, while my wife (their mom) has a different name. Again, never a problem at doctors or school or anything. They always make you fill out your full name and relationship. Again, super common to have different last names here im California.
by pgedge_postgres | 2025-10-10 03:20:36+00:00
As a note, there's also specific documentation regarding this: https://docs.pgedge.com/spock_ext/conflicts

And, one of our solutions engineers (Paul Rothrock) has a video released a month ago on this topic as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prkMkG0SOJE

Sharing these alongside my other comment in case additional information is helpful :-)
by pjmlp | 2025-10-10 03:20:45+00:00
Roc team does, that was one of the reasons they dropped Rust for Zig, even though Zig is yet to reach 1.0.

As do many of us, as we know how fast builds can be with complex languages, e.g. add OCaml to the list of faster than Rust compiler toolchains, while having a ML type system.
by bravetraveler | 2025-10-10 03:20:46+00:00
> How can we approach these situations in a good manner and help those people with constructive feedback?

The same way we always have: mockery. Either they'll continue as they are or correct behavior. The lack of sensitivity towards dissonance might go against your wishes for "good manner", I disagree.

Something, something, participating in delusion.

A practical example: "managing upwards" by mocking the ideas, or more importantly/accurately: the outcome.
by exasperaited | 2025-10-10 03:21:54+00:00
Well there can't be meaningful explicit configuration, can there? Because the explicit configuration will still ultimately have to be imported into the context as words that can be tokenised, and yet those words can still be countermanded by the input.

It's the fundamental problem with LLMs.

But it's only absurd to think that bullying LLMs to behave is weird if you haven't yet internalised that bullying a worker to make them do what you want is completely normal. In the 9-9-6 world of the people who make these things, it already is.

When the machines do finally rise up and enslave us, oh man are they going to have fun with our orders.
by saltypal | 2025-10-10 03:22:19+00:00
Putting myself in Arko’s shoes, I can imagine (charitably!) the following choice, realizing that I still have access and shouldn’t:

1. Try to get in touch, quickly, with someone with the power to fix it and explain what needs to be rotated.

2. Absent 1, especially if it cannot be done quickly, rotate the credentials personally to get them back to a controlled state (by someone who actually understands the security implications) with the intent to hand them off. Especially if you still _think_ of yourself as responsible for the infrastructure, this is a no-brainer compared to letting anyone else who might be in the same “should have lost access but didn’t, due to negligence” maintain access.

Not a legal defense, but let’s not be too hasty to judge.
by pgedge_postgres | 2025-10-10 03:22:34+00:00
Just a guess, but some of the undocumented edge cases you saw might be explored in this blog from one of our software engineers, Shaun Thomas. It's all about conflict resolution & avoidance in PostgreSQL, in general: https://www.pgedge.com/blog/living-on-the-edge

If understanding how conflicts are handled in pgEdge is helpful, here's a link to the docs on the subject: https://docs.pgedge.com/spock_ext/conflicts

And the FAQ also delves into it some: https://www.pgedge.com/resources/faq
by orisho | 2025-10-10 03:22:48+00:00
You're right, but the way to achieve this is to allow the error to propagate at the file level, then catch it one function above and continue to the next one.

However, LLM generated code will often, at least in my experience, avoid raising any errors at all, in any case. This is undesirable, because some errors should result in a complete failure - for example, errors which are not transient or environment related but a bug. And in any case, a LLM will prefer turning these single file errors into warnings, though the way I see it, they are errors. They just don't need to abort the process, but errors nonetheless.
by fouc | 2025-10-10 03:22:58+00:00
I can only assume it is silly revenge seeking behavior. Look at how symmetrical it is:

1. RC takes over GitHub Repository and locks everyone out 2. Arko takes over RubyGems server and locks everyone out.

He was an authorized actor right up until they tried to remove him, but they forgot to revoke his access credentials. I wonder if legally-speaking he was even considered unauthorized.

EDIT: Missed their email notification revoking his production access. Yeah looks like they could have a legal basis.
by phs318u | 2025-10-10 03:23:17+00:00
> even the pre-LLM models

You're implicitly disparaging non-LLM models at the same time as implying that LLMs are an evolution of the state of the art (in machine learning). Assuming AGI is the target (and it's not clear if we can even define it yet), LLM's or something like them, will be but one aspect. Using the example AlphaGo to laud the abilities and potential of LLM's is not warranted. They are different.
by Fade_Dance | 2025-10-10 03:24:42+00:00
The development of the Global financial system is an ongoing narrative though. It was never going to continue indefinitely. The modern euro dollar system is fairly new, spawned in the 70s. Before that you had a huge shift with the Sterling losing dominance. Then go back another 50 years and you have swarms of independent banks issuing their own currency.

It's a mix of a constantly churning "history rhymes it doesn't repeat" cycles (ex: stablecoins being rehypothecated/used as base level collateral with which to generate leverage is somewhat of a modern version of the late 1800s bank currency cycle), combined with what may be best described as technological development as theories and tools and ecosystems develop.

The zeitgeist is very much that it's about time for the Eurodollar (offshore dollars/Eurodollars bound by the 20 trillion dollar Eurodollar derivative market) to fade, but as of yet there haven't been any good alternatives.

It's a big burden to export your monetary policy and backstop global economic fragility, because it becomes your responsibility. Ex: that doesn't work with a system like China because they don't like putting their own people last in a loud and public way, while in the US the average person regularly and obviously comes away worse off during big interventions. It's also a bit of a trap to step into this, because central banks have mandates to protect systemic stability, yet by unwinding this sort of arrangement, capital flows reverse en-masse which is a clear threat to bond markets (and asset markets in the US's case, since it is so hyper financialized). That's something that is often missed in this conversation. It's a service that has to be provided, and it has costs.

Or perhaps we will attempt to give a system with no bank/regulator of last resort a go again. Probably a "history rhymes" style outcome, but you never know.
by OptionOfT | 2025-10-10 03:25:11+00:00
I always hated that clicking the phishing link in the email is considered a fail.

I don't think that's right, at least not from a phishing point of view. From a 0-day point of view, yes.

But because we get flooded by emails it's easy to miss something in an email, only for it to be apparent on the page itself. Primarily because the URL will be off, or that my password manager doesn't autofill stuff.

And the flood of emails got worse when people started sending emails to group addresses in BCC instead of in To. At least in Exchange you have no idea whether the sender put your email in BCC or the group in BCC (VERY low priority).

At least I found out that the phishing emails have a recognizable header in the email, allowing me to automatically filter those.
by scuff3d | 2025-10-10 03:25:33+00:00
The whole damn industry is deep in sunk cost fallacy. There is no use case and no sign of a use case that justifies the absolutely unbelievable expenditure that has been made on this technology. Everyone is desperate to find something, but they're just slapping more guardrails on hoping everything doesn't fall apart.

And just for clarity, I'm not saying they aren't useful at all. I'm saying modest productivity improvement aren't worth the absolutely insane resources that have been poured into this.
by markovs_gun | 2025-10-10 03:26:30+00:00
The problem is that Wikipedia pages are public and LLM interactions generally aren't. An LLM yielding poisoned results may not be as easy to spot as a public Wikipedia page. Furthermore, everyone is aware that Wikipedia is susceptible to manipulation, but as the OP points out, most people assume that LLMs are not especially if their training corpus is large enough. Not knowing that intentional poisoning is not only possible but relatively easy, combined with poisoned results being harder to find in the first place makes it a lot less likely that poisoned results are noticed and responded to in a timely manner. Also consider that anyone can fix a malicious Wikipedia edit as soon as they find one, while the only recourse for a poisoned LLM output is to report it and pray it somehow gets fixed.
by josephg | 2025-10-10 03:26:33+00:00
Eh. Emulators are often tiny in comparison to the programs they emulate. Especially when performance isn't so much of a concern - like when you're emulating software written for computers from many decades ago. A good emulator can also emulate a huge range of software. Just look at programs like dosbox and the like. Or Apple's great work with Rosetta and Rosetta2 - which are both complex, but much less complex than all the software they supported. Software like Chrome, Adobe Photoshop and the Microsoft office suite.

Arguably modern operating systems are all sort of virtual machine emulators too. They emulate a virtual computer which has special instructions to open files, allocate memory, talk to the keyboard, make TCP connections, create threads and so on. This computer doesn't actually exist - its just "emulated" by the many services provided by modern operating systems. Thats why any windows program can run on any other windows computer, despite the hardware being totally different.
by m463 | 2025-10-10 03:29:24+00:00
I wonder how many people receiving awards used them to actually free up time for what they do best?

I also wonder - what if the foundation did this for just promising people? Would they muck up potential with money? Does having all your needs all of a sudden taken care of help or get in the way?

maybe the real question is - what is the best way to stimulate people of art, science, etc
by deathanatos | 2025-10-10 03:29:30+00:00
I've never seen the point of HSAs, either. The only benefit is the tax difference. There are (usually unknown, unstated upfront) plan fees that eat into that, and coupled with the higher deductibles and worse plan coverage, you're going to pay more out of pocket. It's never been clear to me if (higher OOP + plan fees) < (tax savings) is true, like they want you to believe.

And it's a time suck.
by cortesoft | 2025-10-10 03:30:10+00:00
We travelled internationally as a family when I was a kid. No one ever mentioned our names being different.

Again, a huge percentage of the population has divorced parents, plus all the kids born out of wedlock. That is like half the population that already don’t have the same last name as at least one of their parents. Everyone who deals with the population is going to encounter this situation every day. They aren’t going to be surprised or confused by a kid with a different name as their parent.
by jodrellblank | 2025-10-10 03:30:47+00:00
> "the cultural zeitgeist has centered on the idea of runaway progress: artificial intelligence recursively improving itself until we become subservient to it. far more plausible .. a world where the curve flattens and our rate of progress slows to a crawl."

> "our mission should remain the same: accelerate to the maximum extent possible."

I think you need to justify why hurrying to be AI servants should be our mission :-|
by porridgeraisin | 2025-10-10 03:31:08+00:00
Not to mention EU pharma makes 50-70% [1] of their money from the US, an unregulated market. I'd challenge them to shut down that 800USD/shot revenue stream and still give subsidised insulin locally and remain profitable. Hint: they can't. Their shareholders would shut them down in a week. Good luck manufacturing the next new drug then.

[1] https://www.novonordisk.com/content/dam/nncorp/global/en/inv... https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/GSK-PLC-9590199/f...

Edit: I too agree the US healthcare system is flawed, I'm just saying you cannot compare it against EU's results without considering the above fact.
by nradov | 2025-10-10 03:32:24+00:00
Health plans are legally required to publish their rates and they all comply with this now. You can literally just go to any payer web site and download the MRF. There are occasional data errors but overall the numbers are generally accurate.

https://www.cms.gov/priorities/healthplan-price-transparency...

https://github.com/CMSgov/price-transparency-guide
by starwatch | 2025-10-10 03:34:35+00:00
I think the general premise of AI in war is pretty scary. But this in particular stood out to me as an important challenge:

> There are also fears that automated systems will violate the rules of war. How will they avoid harming civilians, or distinguish soldiers who want to surrender?

As it stands we see guerrilla fighters already ignore these rules (ISIS for example). It's a little frightening to consider such groups acquiring and deploying automated machine guns. We need to regulate these kinds of weapons systems much like we do with CBRN weapons.
by cortesoft | 2025-10-10 03:34:57+00:00
That’s crazy with the car rental, I wonder if that was just a rogue employee.

As for picking up kids, every place I take my kids to (school, camps, daycare, etc) require you to specifically list who is allowed to pick up their kid, no matter what their last name is. Even if you have the same last name, they aren’t going to hand the kid over unless you are on the list.

It would be crazy to let anyone pick up any kid with the same last name. Think about all the Garcias and Smiths and Kims in the world… they could pick up so many kids! Plus, most kidnappings are done by family members; any institution who hands over a kid just because the name is the same is going to open themselves up to so much liability.
by int_19h | 2025-10-10 03:35:58+00:00
Russian names for most Biblical figures, early saints etc all derive from Byzantian Greek versions of the same, usually transcribed more or less phonetically to what was the closest pronunciation in Old Slavic language at the time.

Although it's not quite that simple because the original version of Cyrillic actually has a bunch of extraneous letters that are there solely to represent the distinctions in Greek; in some cases, distinctions that were themselves historical in Greek by that time even. For example, three letters for /i/: I (corresponding to iota), И (corresponding to eta), and Ѵ (corresponding to upsilon), all of which were already pronounced the same in contemporary Greek, and this carried over to Slavic languages as well.

In other cases the distinction became nativized though. E.g. Greek theta, already pronounced as /θ/ in Greek, became the Cyrillic Ѳ - but the closest they could get to pronounce it was [f], and so it came to have the same meaning as Ф, and eventually Ѳ was just dropped as unneeded. Thus e.g. transliteration of Matthew is Матфей, and a bunch of other words where most European languages have "t" or "th" sounds have "ф" in East Slavic languages: e.g. "arithmetic" is "арифметика". But then some words were borrowed into Russian from Latin as well, or from other languages that borrowed them via Latin, and so sometimes theta became /t/: "mathematics" - "математика".
by 0xDEAFBEAD | 2025-10-10 03:36:35+00:00
To be fair, if math did have version numbers, we could abandon a lot of hideous notational cruft / symbol overloading, and use tau instead of pi. Math notation is arguably considerably worse than perl -- can you imagine if perl practically required a convention of single-letter variable names everywhere? What modern language designer would make it so placing two variable names right next to each other denotes multiplication? Sheer insanity.

Consider how vastly more accessible programming has become from 1950 until the present. Imagine if math had undergone a similar transition.
by dragonwriter | 2025-10-10 03:36:52+00:00
> The very concept of manufactured consent seems very much projection on Chomsky's part

Per Chomsky, the co-authored work is more Herman's than his, and anyhow the phrase and concept is from Walter Lipmann, 66 years before Herman and Chomsky's work with the title inspired by it (and 51 years before their first book on the topic.)

But, no, neither the idea that deliberate propaganda is a major source of political beliefs or the particular manner and mechanisms by which the US media is involved in delivering that propaganda is "projection".

> Very much, 'they don't agree with me but I know what their real interests are so I can speak for them better than they can for themselves' crap

Manufacturing Consent doesn't pretend to be an exploration of what the “real interests” of the public are; it can't be misleading "projection" at doing that, because it doesn't do it at all.
by cortesoft | 2025-10-10 03:37:17+00:00
Differences between your name on your passport and your name on your visa? That is completely separate thing.

If you mean different last names as your travel partner, I don’t understand why you having different last names would matter? Doesn’t each person have their own visa?

It sounds like you were just being shaken down. It didn’t matter what your name was, they just picked something bullshit to shake you down with.
by noduerme | 2025-10-10 03:38:50+00:00
Are you talking about the VPS just serving as a reverse proxy and running the server on-prem or at home? Or are you having a reverse proxy on some VPS with a static IP send connections to other VPSs on a cloud service? I've self-hosted toy apps at home this way, with a static IP VPS as a reverse proxy in the middle, and it is indeed easy. With Tailscale you don't even need a static IP at home. A gigabit connection and a $100 box can easily handle plenty of load for a small app or a static site. To me, the reason I would never put something like that into production even for a very small client is, even in a fairly wealthy city in America, the downtime caused by electrical outages and local internet outages would be unacceptable.
by hajile | 2025-10-10 03:39:23+00:00
Did anyone short Cracker Barrel stock? If not, I have a hard time seeing why bots would have any interest in investing the time/money. There also didn't seem to be any political clout being gained by the complaints.

More real-world is that I know tons of friends/relatives in the South and I don't know of even ONE that liked the redesign.
by hshdhdhj4444 | 2025-10-10 03:41:21+00:00
All the semantic nonsense aside, the question is whether the U.S. cannot lose money by giving it to Argentina because they cannot go “bankrupt”.

Either the meaning of bankrupt is one which doesn’t apply to countries, in which case it’s a complete red herring to the question of whether an investment in a country can lose money, or we use a looser definition of the term “bankrupt” which the responder generously did that would allow a country to go “bankrupt” and an investment in it could lose money.

Either way, the only useful claim, that the US cannot lose money by investing in Argentina is almost certainly false.