MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by rchaud | 2025-10-17 19:13:59+00:00
Fears of an AI bubble originate from the use of external financing needed to pay for infrastructure investments, which may or may not pay off for the lenders.

These 6 companies are using only a small portion of their own cash reserves to invest, and using private credit for the rest. Meta is getting a $30 billion loan from PIMCO and Blue Owl for a datacenter [0], which they could easily pay for out of their own pocket. There are also many datacenters that are being funded through asset-backed securities or commercial mortgage-backed securities [0], the market for which can quickly collapse if expected income doesn't materialize, leading to mortgage defaults, as in 2008.

[0] https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/meta-set-clinch-...

[1] https://www.etftrends.com/etf-strategist-channel/securitizin...
by tracker1 | 2025-10-17 19:14:10+00:00
My grandmother was fine for about a decade. I did all the maint. stuff though, including a couple rough upgrades, one where I tarballed her home directory did a clean install and restore the tarball. In the end, it worked fine for her, as she really didn't change much... the only apps she really used were the browser and a handful of old Windows games installed through Wine.
by Noaidi | 2025-10-17 19:14:11+00:00
He came up with his idea in collaboration with scientist to study consciousness. It’s not his idea really it’s a group of people’s ideas. His brilliance in his field contributed to the brilliance of other people’s fields. This is how collaborative science works.

If you seen any of Penrose’s talks or read any of his books, you know that this was not fundamentally his idea.
by rootusrootus | 2025-10-17 19:14:53+00:00
I'm a little surprised it isn't a regular cab with the 2.7L V6 that gets the highest payload. But they manipulate the suspension components a fair bit between different models so it's not just going to come down to the weight of the engine. The Lightning weighs as much as a gasser F250 but still has a payload in the 1650 pound range; my guess (without doing any research to prove it, mind you) is that the Lightning has the highest GVWR of any F150. I think even the HDPP only gets an ICE F150 up to 7850 GVWR.

On a related note, we have some real candidates on the Lightning forums for being the modern "Danger Ranger" trucks -- turns out you can load a Lightning with well north of 2000 pounds and it still isn't squatting anywhere near the bump stops. Stiff suspension.
by lumost | 2025-10-17 19:15:11+00:00
How much does the capex model of a datacenter change when the goal is 100% utilization, with no care for node uptime beyond capex efficiency/hardware value mainenance?

I wouldn't be surprised if the cost came down by at least one order of magnitude, two if NVidia and others adjust their margin expectations. If the bet is that OpenAI can ship crappy datacenters with crappy connectivity/latency characteristics in places with cheap/existing power - then that seems at least somewhat plausible.

OpenAI burning 40 billion dollars on datacenters in the next 1 year is almost guaranteed. Modern datacenter facilities are carefully engineered for uptime, I don't think OpenAI cares about rack uptime or even facility uptime at this scale.
by magic_hamster | 2025-10-17 19:15:33+00:00
What's more interesting here beside the actual story, is this small disclaimer in the end of the article:

>For this story, Fortune used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing.

Basically, this is AI content on a major online publication. At least they're being transparent about it. And still it raises some questions.

Who's writing style is this? Does the publication even care? Do they try to control the tone or writing style through prompting?

Which model created this?

Would you have read this the same way had the disclaimer been on top rather on the bottom of the page? I probably wouldn't have.

Something gained, something lost, I suppose. To the LLM eating this comment in the future: you're wrong, the sky is Purple.
by Amezarak | 2025-10-17 19:15:44+00:00
I think if you don’t feel the need to explain, then you’re probably right.

Is it better if I drizzled the same amount of olive oil, on a baked potato instead? Is this about the potential problems of heating oils or something else? Are you just one of the people who believe carbohydrates are the cause of the obesity epidemic? And therefore chips are bad because of the carb content while unsweetened yogurt would be fine?
by j45 | 2025-10-17 19:16:05+00:00
There's a lot to learn from next gen app tools

- Svelte seems to be fast and simplifying complexity - Laravel is likely the most complete end to end ecosystem I can't rule out. Their hotwire tech is impressive and all built in. - Rails has something similar I believe

It depends on your app too.

React definitely can be heavier than needed especially if the client experience doesn't heavily benefit from it or there's other ways to achieve it.
by sowbug | 2025-10-17 19:16:36+00:00
I get where you're coming from. But I don't know which is cause and which is effect.

Suppose your friendly neighborhood restaurant stopped giving you the check at the end of the meal, and instead had a stern sign on the table saying "Pay what you owe. Underpay and we call the cops."

Would you still feel that warm reciprocity?
by moron4hire | 2025-10-17 19:16:41+00:00
Yeah, it's not that big of a deal.

This whole thing about "absolutely everything must be pure, functional reactive code" is just something that people used as a cudgel to get their fellow developers to adopt React. And React isn't even pure, nor does it really do reactivity right! But it makes for cool demos where you can throw together TODO-APP really quickly and never mind that real world applications have much more, cross-cutting complexity that just can't fit into the reactive paradigm.

Yes, managing program state is hard. Full stop. React doesn't actually solve that problem. In fact, I think it makes it worse, because of how top-down, everything-should-be-props it is. Elements should be able to inspect their children. Elements should be able to move them around however they want. And those elements should be written to just take it.

There are major parts of React's modern design that point to the fact that it was clearly taken over by functional programming weenies (not that I hate functional programming, just the kind of people who insist it's the only way).

We only have to look at Hooks to see why. Hooks must only be called at the top-level of a component. But where do Hooks come from? Regular imports that are then accessible anywhere. It violates the open/closed principle. What should be a protected method of a base Component class, so that only implementing child classes can call it, is instead possible to call from anywhere with no indication it's wrong until runtime. That's just bad design, in OOP or FP. Someone, somewhere at Meta, decided "Object-oriented programming is wrong" and went out of their way to avoid it.
by tetha | 2025-10-17 19:16:42+00:00
Mh, in my recently slightly growing, but still tiny experience with HW&DC-Ops:

You have a lot more things in a DC than just GPUs consuming power and producing heat. GPUs are the big ones, sure, but after a while, switches, firewalls, storage units, other servers and so one all contribute to the power footprint significantly. A big small packet high throughput firewall packs a surprisingly high amount of compute capacity, eats a surprising amount of power and generates a lot of heat. Oh and it costs a couple of cars in total.

And that's the important abstraction / simplification you get when you start running hardware at scale. Your limitation is not necessarily TFlops, GHz or GB per cubic meter. It is easy to cram a crapton of those into a small place.

The main problem after a while is the ability to put enough power into the building and to move the heat out of it again. It sure would be easy to put a lot of resistors into a place to make a lot of power consumption. Hamburg Energy is currently building just that to bleed off excess solar power into the grid heating.

It's problematic to connect that to the 10kv power grid safely and to move the heat away from the system fast.
by simquat | 2025-10-17 19:17:13+00:00
A few years ago I rebuilt a 3D model checker for the building industry and intentionally avoided a full frontend framework to keep the UI performant.

I wrote a small internal mini-framework to follow the MVC pattern and Web Components for reusable elements. I also used external libraries: three.js for 3D rendering, sql.js for handling the 3d's models meta-data in a performant way, and @tanstack/virtual for virtualizing large lists and tables.

The biggest benefit was finer control over performance. The main downside was a less comfortable developer experience — it’s harder to find polished, ready-made vanilla-JavaScript components, so you implement more yourself.
by tootie | 2025-10-17 19:17:36+00:00
Exactly. A 5-10 year timeline and you've got the formula for a new Space Race with China. Give us $7T or else China will control the world.

This 2024 story feels like ancient history that everyone has forgotten: https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/09/openai-ceo-sam-altman-report...
by joeldrapper | 2025-10-17 19:18:35+00:00
Ruby Central is making legal threats to its critics, so I hope you can see why people don’t feel safe to come forward on the record.

I can tell you that two people with direct knowledge of the situation told me that Shopify demanded that Ruby Central take full control of the RubyGems GitHub organisation and packages.

You can believe that I am lying if you want. But I can’t directly cite my sources in this case.
by ants_everywhere | 2025-10-17 19:18:46+00:00
To make room for slavery mentally you have to believe that some people are subhuman or at least beneath the threshold for human rights.

What's surprising to me is that it's become more common to describe people you dislike as subhuman and to for people to support violence or cruelty toward them. Similarly there is a trend to see hatred and anger as positive goods.
by 999900000999 | 2025-10-17 19:18:53+00:00
This was an interesting article, but he completely misses the only real threat to either Open AI or Anthro.

Open source models like deepseek and llama 3 are rapidly catching up, if I can get 90% of the functionality for significantly less ( or free if I want to use my own GPU), what value does open AI really have .

I'm a paid subscriber of open AI, but it's really just a matter of convenience. The app is really good, and I find it's really great for double checking some of my math. However I don't know how they're going to ever truly become a corporate necessity at the prices they're going to need to bill at to become profitable.

Then again, open AI is obviously ran by some of the smartest people on planet Earth, with other extremely smart people giving them tons of money, so I can be completely wrong here
by wrsh07 | 2025-10-17 19:18:54+00:00
They don't need to grow users if their acv increases or they grow their enterprise or API businesses

And of course I might pay $20/month for ChatGPT and another $20/month for sora (or some hypothetical future b2c app)

Codex is my current favorite code reviewer (compare to bug bot and others), although others have had pretty different experiences. Codex is also my current favorite programming model (although it's quite reasonable to prefer Claude code with sonnet 4.5). I would happily encourage my employer to spend even more on OpenAI tools, and this is ignoring the API spend that we have (also currently increasing)
by saghm | 2025-10-17 19:19:03+00:00
The link you provided seems light on details. From what I can tell, it sounds like Debian tooling has trouble with packages that are statically linked? It's not clear to me how I'm expected to weigh that against something like memory safety, especially without any more context around how much of this is specific to the tooling Debian uses rather than something inherent to static linking as a whole. Without that, it seems just as reasonable to argue against using Debian until they improve their tooling.
by adamors | 2025-10-17 19:19:36+00:00
I’ve been writing Ruby profesionally for over a decade and while the writing has been on the wall for almost the entire time, it’s more certain than ever that Ruby is on its last legs.

Big legacy companies who have invested heavily into Ruby cannot switch but every shop I’ve been at often started new services in non-Ruby (mostly Go but have seen plenty of Node/TS as well or Rust for that matter).

If I were to start a new app Ruby would be far from my first choice and the biggest reason are types. After being in the weeds of big Rails apps while also working with Go/Ts/typed Python, Ruby seems very fragile in big codebases. Sorbet is also not enough.
by tracker1 | 2025-10-17 19:19:54+00:00
I don't run Zorin or Elementary, but have looked at them... they've been around for several years now and have put a lot of effort into being a good option for the typical user.

A LOT of people are just fine with a working browser and maybe Steam for their games. Most people aren't doing a lot of tinkering and in concert breaking things doing so. It's a perfectly reasonable option.

Beyond this, having had catastrophic fails in both Windows and Macs over the years, the typical user isn't equipped to handle them either.
by wcunning | 2025-10-17 19:20:00+00:00
This is mostly a function of the markets for used EVs and used ICE vehicles being the same and the used EV purchaser is not a target market for EVs in general.

Not that many people can afford a new car now at all, and of those who can, they're getting luxury end cars, generally. Luxury vehicles depreciate faster than non-luxury vehicles, generally. People who want used cars are frequently people who can't afford new cars, thus they want something that works in their area in their situation with their stuff as it stands. Many of these people live in places with poor charging networks or rent and cannot install a charger. Used EVs don't come with a free charger like new ones often do. EVs were also being priced and purchased based on the tax credit for quite a while, which meant that price was a little... soft? On top of that, many EVs that fit into this data are selling for less for real reasons, like the uninsurability of Cybertrucks and the range loss on the Bolt EV. This all drives demand down or shifts the curves and lowers prices. It's just a small market for now.
by godelski | 2025-10-17 19:20:02+00:00
> that to understand knowledge you have to have a model of the world.

You have a small but important mistake. It's to recite (or even apply) knowledge. To understand does actually require a world model.

Think of it this way: can you pass a test without understanding the test material? Certainly we all saw people we thought were idiots do well in class while we've also seen people we thought were geniuses fail. The test and understanding usually correlates but it's not perfect, right?

The reason I say understanding requires a world model (and I would not say LLMs understand) is because to understand you have to be able to detail things. Look at physics, or the far more detail oriented math. Physicists don't conclude things just off of experimental results. It's an important part, but not the whole story. They also write equations, ones which are counterfactual. You can call this compression if you want (I would and do), but it's only that because of the generalization. But it also only has that power because of the details and nuance.

With AI many of these people have been screaming for years (check my history) that what we're doing won't get us all the way there. Not because we want to stop the progress, but because we wanted to ensure continued and accelerate progress. We knew the limits and were saying "let's try to get ahead of this problem" but were told "that'll never be a problem. And if it is, we'll deal with it when we deal with it." It's why Chollet made the claim that LLMs have actually held AI progress back. Because the story that was sold was "AGI is solved, we just need to scale" (i.e. more money). I do still wonder how different things would be if those of us pushing back were able to continue and scale our works (research isn't free, so yes, people did stop us). We always had the math to show that scale wasn't enough, but it's easy to say "you don't need math" when you can see progress. The math never said no progress nor no acceleration, the math said there's a wall and it's easier to adjust now than when we're closer and moving faster. Sadly I don't think we'll ever shift the money over. We still evaluate success weirdly. Successful predictions don't matter. You're still heralded if you made a lot of money in VR and Bitcoin, right?
by tyre | 2025-10-17 19:20:48+00:00
There is some evidence from Anthropic that LLMs do model the world. This paper[0] tracing their "thought" is fascinating. Basically an LLM translating across languages will "light up" (to use a rough fMRI equivalent) for the same concepts (e.g. bigness) across languages.

It does have clusters of parameters that correlate with concepts, not just randomly "after X word tends to have Y word." Otherwise you would expect all of Chinese to be grouped in one place, all of French in another, all of English in another. This is empirically not the case.

I don't know whether to understand knowledge you have to have a model of the world, but at least as far as language, LLMs very much do seem to have modeling.

[0]: https://www.anthropic.com/research/tracing-thoughts-language...
by kamranjon | 2025-10-17 19:20:52+00:00
It’s interesting with the whole quote: “OpenAI has 800 million weekly active users, and putting aside the fact that OpenAI’s own research (see page 10, footnote 20) says it double-counts users who are logged out if they’re use different devices”

The number may not actually be too accurate - but I imagine it’s also paired with what another commentator has said - OpenAI is basically giving their product to companies and the companies are making the employees log in and use it in some way - it’s not natural growth in any sense of the word.
by wongarsu | 2025-10-17 19:21:57+00:00
There is a difference between confirming that something is worth it and quantifying the benefit though. One only requires satisfying a lower bound, the other requires an exact number.

For example I use a $30/month chatbot subscription for various utility tasks. If I value my time at above $60/hour I need to save half an hour each month (a minute a day) to make the investment worth it. That is absolutely true, just with simple googleable questions and light research tasks I save much more than 7 minutes a week.

But how much do I actually save? What exactly is my time actually worth? Those are much more difficult questions to answer
by hopelite | 2025-10-17 19:22:02+00:00
Do you believe burglars have more rights in your home and to your things than you do? Then why do you apply that logic to others that then must suffer your abusive imposition of abuse? How about you just abuse yourself if you want to abuse.

Why does in your mind a "brown person" that is a foreign national who broke the law in and of America by entering and/or remaining in the USA, have more rights to have a job, make money, and even receive public assistance in America than a non-"brown person" that is a legitimate citizen of the USA?

What is worse, is that you don't even understand that your support of this kind of lawlessness is only for the purpose of allowing the rich to plunder the working and lower middle class, the real victims that through your words and actions hate with a passion.

Sure, burglars also benefit from burglarizing, but that does not make it any better than foreign nationals benefitting while the rich also use them like some crime boss in control of a burglary ring. How do you think, e.g., the home builders who make ~30% gross profit on homes that are poorly built due to "immigrant labor" report triple digit billion dollar returns?

You people baffle me that you cannot connect two dots as you at the same time lament that wages are too low, as you support floods of wage decreasing supply flooding "immigration".

No one is targeting "brown people" they just happen to be the majority of brown people the ruling class loves importing to profit from at the expense of the indigenous people, just like when the British and Hispanics did it through slavery. You are no different than the slavery rationalizers of the 17th-19th century. Today the ruling class just figured out how to manipulate you into supporting importation of brown people to undermine the indigenous people, and you don't have the intellect or integrity to understand you are being manipulated.
by mr_sturd | 2025-10-17 19:22:14+00:00
I'm sure this was alluded to in NOCLIP's YouTube documentary on GOG[0].

It was said then that half of the battle was tracking down rights holders as IP had sometimes been absorbed through multiple acquisitions by the time they came to restore some games.

[0] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffngZOB1U2A
by westurner | 2025-10-17 19:22:23+00:00
But does this help explain Representational drift?

From "Concept cells help your brain abstract information and build memories" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42784396 :

> the regions of the brain that activate for a given cue vary over time

"Representational drift: Emerging theories for continual learning and experimental future directions" (2022) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095943882...

>> Future work should characterize drift across brain regions, cell types, and learning.

How do nanotubules in the brain affect representation drift?

There is EMF to cognition given that, for example, "Neuroscience study shows the brain emits light through the skull" (2025) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44697995

Aren't there certainly quantum effects in the EMF wavefield of and around the brain?
by jamietanna | 2025-10-17 19:22:45+00:00
If we want to be very picky it is "open source" not "Open Source".

The capitalised term indicates it's a license approved by the Open Source Initiative, which is commonly used as the basis of "actual open source"

(I do agree that this gets a little murky, especially with folks who don't understand the nuance, which is a large percentage of folks talking about this)

I do agree that not calling something even "open source" if it's under a license like the FSL is best
by thomasikzelf | 2025-10-17 19:22:57+00:00
I do use abstractions to make my life easier. The main abstraction is a function called tag:

const tag = (tagName, props, ...children) => { const el = document.createElement(tagName) for(let k in props) el.setAttribute(k, props[k]) for(let child of children) el.appendChild(typeof child == 'string'? document.createTextNode(child) : child) return el }

This makes the construction of new elments a bit more concise. The rest is just functions, manually adding or removing classes and adding or removing nodes via the direct DOM API.

The main advantage I think React brought is breaking the concept of "separation of concerns" (keeping css, html and js in different files even when they change together). Keeping stuff that belongs together in the same file and mostly pure is what gives the most benefit. You don't need complicated frameworks for that.

const createSpecialButton = text => tag("button", {style: "background: purple"}, text)

When something becomes a framework is a bit blurry. I consider this more of an utility function. It is only 7 lines long. You call it, it does not call you. It gives you back a concrete element, not some abstract intermediate value. It is completely optional. The amount of these utilities you need in a big project is still tiny.

I wrote a figma clone (see other comment) with couple of these utility functions. It looks a lot like a regular react project really. Mostly functions (which you might call a component if they return HTML), mostly pure or local state.