MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by davesque | 2025-10-20 22:25:19+00:00
> But few if any humans on earth can demonstrate the breadth and depth of competence that a SOTA model possesses.

Most humans can count the occurrence of letters in a word. The word competence here is doing quite a bit of work. I think most people understand competence to mean more than just encyclopedic knowledge, with very limited reasoning capability.

> AGI never meant human level intelligence until the LLM age. It just meant that a system could generalize one domain from knowledge gained in other domains without supervision or programming.

I think it's probably correct to say that many people who seriously studied the problem had a larger notion of AGI than the layperson who only ever talked about the Turing test in the most basic terms. Also, I don't think LLMs have even convincingly demonstrated a great ability to generalize.

They're basically really great natural language search engines but for the fact that they give incorrect but plausible answers about 5-10% of the time.
by reaperducer | 2025-10-20 22:25:40+00:00
Meanwhile, 1 traditional checkout lane is open

I wish. The Wal-Mart near me no longer has staffed checkouts between 6am (opening time) and 8am. That's two hours in the morning of robots-only. I don't know about in the evenings.

traditional checkout lane is open with a long line.

I use the traditional check-out line whenever I can because where I live, the self-check line is almost always longer. It's not hard to keep an eye on the last person in the self-check line when you go to a real register to see which is faster.

I'm not a fireman on call. I'm OK spending an extra 45 seconds in a traditional line to keep a low-skilled human being employed.
by soldeace | 2025-10-20 22:26:06+00:00
In a recent project I was asked to create a user story classifier to identify whether stories were "new development" or "maintenance of existing features". I tried both approaches, embeddings + cosine distance vs. directly asking a language model to classify the user story. The embeddings approach was, despite being fueled by the most powerful SOTA embedding model available, surprisingly worse than simply asking GPT 4.1 to give me the correct label.
by _pvzn | 2025-10-20 22:26:33+00:00
Totally understandable! I'm a solo dev out of LA who's mostly consulted on various apps and sites over the years, and out of my own personal need I began working on the project earlier this year.

The project is indeed closed-source. Personally I've had experiences where I found the project moved forward towards the roadmap much faster - specifically when considering smaller-scale projects that are UI heavy and therefore take in many UI changes in parallel - when I instead implemented feature requests and focused most of my energy on listening to user feedback rather than reviewing code. UI polish can be quite tricky when it comes from many sources :)

That said, nothing is set in stone! If at some point there are enough feature requests to where I am the bottleneck, this is something I would revisit.

I'd be happy to hop on the Discord as well!
by kelseyfrog | 2025-10-20 22:26:40+00:00
I'm confused by the authors description of holograms and my own understanding. He starts to go down a path of holographic "pixels," but whai I know about holograms is that the holographic image doesn't have such a concept - the image is delocalized.

There have been some successful attempts at handmade holograms[1] that I wonder how the video creator could adapt.

1. http://amasci.com/amateur/holo1.html
by everforward | 2025-10-20 22:27:26+00:00
You could, but I personally wouldn't for a few reasons.

The first is that it's there are simpler ways that are faster and easier to implement. Just develop a strategy for identifying whether page are actionable. Depends on your software, but most should support tagging or comments. Make a standard for tagging them as "actioned on" or "not actionable", and write a basic script that iterates over the alerts you've gotten in the past 30 or 90 days and shows the number of times the alert fired and what percentage of times it was tagged as unactionable. Set up a meeting to run that report once a week or month, and either remove or reconfigure alerts that are frequently tagged as not actionable.

The second is that I don't AI are great at that kind of number crunching. I'm sure you could get it to work, but if it's not your primary product then that time is sort of wasted. Paying for the tokens is one thing, but messing with RAG for the 85th time trying to get the AI to do the right thing is basically wasted time.

The last is that I don't like per alert costs, because it creates an environment ripe for cost-cutting by making alerting worse. If people have in the back of their head that it costs $0.05 every time an alert fires, the mental bar for "worth creating a low-priority alert" goes up. You don't want that friction to setting up alerts. You may not care about the cost now, but I'd put down money that it becomes a thing at some point. Alerting tends to scale superlinearly with the popularity of the product. You add tiers to the architecture and need to have more alerts for more integration points, and your SLOs tighten so the alerts have to be more finnicky, and suddenly you're spending $2,000 a month just on alert routing.
by artyom | 2025-10-20 22:27:48+00:00
Amazon has spent most of its HR post-pandemic efforts in:

• Laying off top US engineering earners.

• Aggressively mandating RTO so the senior technical personnel would be pushed to leave.

• Other political ways ("Focus", "Below Expectations") to push engineering leadership (principal engineers, etc) to leave, without it counting as a layoff of course.

• Terminating highly skilled engineering contractors everywhere else.

• Migrating serious, complex workloads to entry-level employees in cheap office locations (India, Spain, etc).

This push was slow but mostly completed by Q1 this year. Correlation doesn't imply causation? I find that hard to believe in this case. AWS had outages before, but none like this "apparently nobody knows what to do" one.

Source: I was there.
by dijit | 2025-10-20 22:27:48+00:00
Taken from: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45643100 which I posted elsewhere 10hrs ago.

I'm also of that perspective.

It's sort of worth noting though that when Microsoft is presented with an option for blocking out Linux installation: they take it.[0]

When Apple are presented with an option for allowing Linux, they take it.[1]

The major difference here is OEMs, and that Apple has no OEMs.

We're essentially giving Microsoft the moral high ground even though they do nothing to earn it.

[0]: https://www.mickaelwalter.fr/linux-on-surface-rt/#:~:text=Al...

[1]: https://asahilinux.org/about/#:~:text=Apple%20allows%20booti...
by ploxiln | 2025-10-20 22:28:37+00:00
Not really. ECC memory will have an extra ram chip, and store an extra bit per byte or so, for that error detection/correction. DDR5 only has error-correction bits added to the bus, regular DDR5 doesn't have extra chips/bits for error correction of the data while it is stored.

But also, what you really want is ECC that reports all the way up to the OS the corrected and un-corrected bits. This is how you know if it's on the edge, becoming a real problem. Otherwise, it works fine until it doesn't shrug which is the same as regular normal memory.

I think the ECC added to the DDR5 bus is kinda just enough to get the higher data-rate signaling to be as reliable as DDR4. It's nice for marketing to put ECC on the DDR5 box but it's not more robust than DDR4.
by zamadatix | 2025-10-20 22:28:58+00:00
Even looking at pro CS players, a single 8 KHz entry is found in the table at https://liquipedia.net/counterstrike/List_of_player_mouse_se..., so it's a really odd hill to try to die on.

They really are great gaming machines from a hardware perspective. I wouldn't bother with an x86 laptop for gaming if it weren't for the software (mostly DRM) side.
by iamlintaoz | 2025-10-20 22:30:12+00:00
These are great questions. I appreciate you carefully reading through the documents. For the first question, we have detailed benchmark on EloqKV, with the same architecture (but with Redis API) in our blog, and we will soon publish more about the performance characteristics of EloqDoc. Overall, we achieve about the same performance as using local NVME SSD, even when we use S3 as the primary storage, and the performance often exceed the original database implementation (in the case of EloqDoc, original MongoDB).

As for the durability part, our key innovations is to split state into 3 parts: in memory, in WAL, and in data storage. We use a small EBS volume for WAL, and storage is in S3. So, durability is guaranteed by [Storage AND (WAL OR Mem)). Unless Storage (S3) fails, or Both WAL (i.e. EBS lost) AND Mem fail (i.e. node crash), persistence is guaranteed. You can see the explanation in [1]

[1] https://www.eloqdata.com/blog/2025/07/16/data-substrate-bene...
by president_zippy | 2025-10-20 22:30:45+00:00
Could anybody with applicable experience tell me how this filesystem compares in the real world to Lustre?

If it is decisively better than Lustre, I am happy to make the switch over at my sector in Argonne National Lab where we currently keep about 0.7 PB of image data and eventually intend to hold 3-5 PB once we switch over all 3 of our beamlines to using Dectris X-Ray detectors.

Contrary to what the non-computer scientists insist, we only need about 20Gb/s of throughput in either direction, so robustness and simplicity are the only concerns we have.
by 05 | 2025-10-20 22:30:55+00:00
No need - it's detectable as Trojan:MacOS/Amos by VirusTotal, just Google the description. Spoiler: it's a stealer. Here [0] is a writeup

> AMOS is designed for broad data theft, capable of stealing credentials, browser data, cryptocurrency wallets, Telegram chats, VPN profiles, keychain items, Apple Notes, and files from common folders.

[0] https://www.trendmicro.com/en_us/research/25/i/an-mdr-analys...
by F7F7F7 | 2025-10-20 22:31:44+00:00
For non-vibe coding purposes I've found that my $200 Claude (Claude Code) account regularly outperformed my $200 ChatGPT (Codex) account. This was after 2 months of heavily testing both mostly in Terminal TUI/CLI form and most recently with the latest VSCode/Cursor incarnations.

Even with the additional Sora usage and other bells & whistles that ChatGPT @ $200 provides, Claude provides more value for my use cases.

Claude Code is just a lot more comfortable being in your workflow and being a companion or going full 'agent(s)' and running for 30 minutes on one ticket. It's also a lot happier playing with Agents from other APIs.

There's nothing wrong with Anthropic wanting to completely own that segment and not have aspirations of world domination like OpenAI. I don't see how that's a negative.

If anything, the more ChatGPT becomes a 'everything app' the less likely I am to hold on to my $20 account after cancelling the $200 account. I'm finding the more it knows about me the more creeped out and "I didn't ask for this" I become.
by glenstein | 2025-10-20 22:32:38+00:00
Well I did just give you four paragraphs extensively elaborating on the strategic value of having an endowment, and how strategically fundamental it is to the long-term health, health of any organization and how it's consistent with financial management you see at typical Western non-profit institutions.

I actually think you're right that they should have kept Servo, but that doesn't sustain the charge that is smart to not have an endowment or spend down their endowment for no reason. Most of your questions are financial literacy issues in response to standard non-profit disclosures rather than legitimate critique of strategy.
by tdullien | 2025-10-20 22:32:53+00:00
With all the negative comments here: This is existing technology on ARM64 (MTE) and on modern iPhones (https://security.apple.com/blog/memory-integrity-enforcement...).

For a good intuition why this (coupled with instrumenting all allocators accordingly) is a game-changer for exploitation, check https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1V_4ZO9fFOO1PZQTNODu2...

In general, having this come to x86 is long-overdue and very welcome.
by brudgers | 2025-10-20 22:33:12+00:00
A one time nine beers game would not normally be constructed as “one beer per inning.”

Because one-beer-per-inning is a drinking game that involves an intent to drink nine beers…and because beer sales typically cut off at the seventh inning, one -beer-per-inning requires buying multiple beers at a time, so it is unlikely to happen accidentally.

But to be clear, if you’re young nine beers probably won’t kill you (particularly if you train) and can youthful folly. But at 47 or 55 or 60 it is another story…not one that is usually a happy story.
by chicagobuss | 2025-10-20 22:33:14+00:00
internal reports from current AWS engineers seem to be confirming all of the speculation in this article. Shit's rotten from the inside out and you can pretty evenly blame AI, brain drain, and good old fashioned "big company politics"

https://forums.theregister.com/forum/all/2025/10/20/aws_outa...
by rootusrootus | 2025-10-20 22:33:16+00:00
Perhaps it will work. I'm just a bit skeptical because it seems unlikely to be a widespread problem. The average driver in Sweden will only need perhaps 6 kWh per day, which at L2 means charging for 35-40 minutes. A bit of demand management from the utility and everyone in the neighborhood can get what they need without stressing the local grid. Or just knock down the rate to something inconsequential and let it trickle all night.
by taeric | 2025-10-20 22:33:20+00:00
I don't know that I agree this is the reasoning, here? Seems far more likely, to me, that there are other environmental factors at play.

I'm almost certainly indexing too heavily on the ideas in birch pollen cross reactivity. But I see basically no reason not to think that same process generalizes quite well into a lot of the things we used to gladly pollute into our environments.

And yes, I know we can still get better at pollution management; but I think people should probably acknowledge just how much progress we have made. Especially in the US. Our air quality is amazingly clean today compared to just 60 years ago. Strikingly so.
by js8 | 2025-10-20 22:33:48+00:00
> assuming everyone would use the same hardware, same environment and same workflows

They don't have to. I would ideally represent HW, OS and compiler in the LC as well. Then primitives of the language that could be proven to be HW/OS/compiler independent could be abstracted and readily translated. For the ones that could not - well you have exact description of what the differences are.
by JustExAWS | 2025-10-20 22:33:49+00:00
Close enough. I missed 2 vesting periods. But the severance and rapidly having a job made up for one and I got refreshers my third year that I hadn’t counted on.

I left debt free, sold my old home for exactly twice what I had built for 8 years earlier, downsized to a condo half the price I sold it for (and 1/3 the size) and I was debt free with savings.

I’m now a staff consultant working full time at a 3rd party AWS consulting firm with a lot less stress and still remote. They were the last to fall. But AWS made their ProServe department return to office at the beginning of this year.
by ryandrake | 2025-10-20 22:34:42+00:00
I don't even think it's about going faster. In my experience, a traditional checkout staff is much faster than the self-check out. First of all, it's fantastically batched and pipelined. While the person in front of me is being checked out, I load all of my groceries onto the conveyer. Then, when it's my turn, the clerk does one motion over and over very quickly, and puts it on another conveyer that whisks it out of the way. When there's dedicated bagging staff, it's even more parallel.

Contrast that with self-checkout: There is no conveyer. You have to reach into your cart, grab one item, run it across the scanner, and place that item in a bag, then reach back over into the cart, grab one item, and so on. No pipelining at all.

I go the traditional staffed checkout route for the speed.
by johnisgood | 2025-10-20 22:35:28+00:00
Thank you! Nothing too interesting. :(

Got anything better? :D Something that may be worth getting macOS for!

Edit: I have some ideas to make this one better, for example, or to make a new one from scratch. I really want to see how mine would fare against security researchers (or anyone interested). Any ideas where to start? I would like to give them a binary to analyze and figure out what it does. :D I have a couple of friends who are bounty hunters and work in opsec, but I wonder if there is a place (e.g. IRC or Matrix channel) for like-minded, curious individuals. :)
by grogers | 2025-10-20 22:36:24+00:00
I doubt a circular dependency is the cause here (probably something even more basic). That being said, I could absolutely see how a circular dependency could accidentally creep in, especially as systems evolve over time.

Systems often start with minimal dependencies, and then over time you add a dependency on X for a limited use case as a convenience. Then over time, since it's already being used it gets added to other use cases until you eventually find out that it's a critical dependency.
by ed_mercer | 2025-10-20 22:36:35+00:00
Is CC on the web able to spawn local containers? I would need to spawn a half dozen services locally in order to have a proper simulation of my actual working environment. Tool calling and integration with various microservices (e.g. postgres, playwright) is one of the most important uses of CC for us. For example, after telling CC to implement a feature, it needs to test that feature and confirm that any database changes are the way they're supposed to.
by kelvinjps10 | 2025-10-20 22:36:48+00:00
I did the opposite I switched to Claude code once the released the new model last week of the one before, I tried using codex, but there was issues with the terminal and prompting (multiple characters getting deleted) I found Claude code to have more features and less bugs, like the edit on vim for the prompt being really useful and find it better to iterate. Also I like more its tool usage and the use of the shell. Sometimes codex prefer to use python instead of doing the equivalent shell command. Maybe it's like the other people say here, that codex it's better for long running tasks, I prefer to give Claude small tasks and I'm usually satisfied with the result and I like to work alongside the agent
by reaperducer | 2025-10-20 22:36:53+00:00
Problems:

- E-mail is insecure. It can be read by any number of servers between you and the sender.

- Numerically, very few healthcare companies have the time, money, or talent to self-host a secure solution, so they farm it out to a third-party that offers specific guarantees, and very few of those permit self-hosting or even custom domains because that's a risk to them.

As someone who works in healthcare, I can say that if you invent a better system and you'll make millions.
by purnesh | 2025-10-20 22:37:03+00:00
My experience is similar, but for me, Claude Code is still better when designing or developing a frontend page from scratch. I have seen that Codex follows instructions a bit too literally, and the result can feel a little cold.

CC on the other hand feels more creative and has mostly given better UI.

Of course, once the page is ready, I switch to Codex to build further.
by frenchmajesty | 2025-10-20 22:37:36+00:00
OP here. It depends what you use it for. You do want the tags if you intend to generate data. Let's say you prompt an LLM to go tweet on your behalf for a week, having the ability to:

- Fetch a list of my unique tags to get a sense of my topics of interests

- Have the AI dig into those specific niches to see what people have been discussing lately

- Craft a few random tweets that are topic-relevant and present them to me to curate

Is very powerful workflow that is hard to deliver on without the class labels.
by Hizonner | 2025-10-20 22:38:08+00:00
> Which is super weird definition of hardcore porn.

As far as I know, the definition of "hardcore porn" is and always has been explicit depiction of actual sexual activity (on edit: in a way intended to be sexually arousing to the reader/viewer). In pictures, that generally comes out to genitalia being shown in contact with genitalia or other body parts.

And that's how you do vanilla sex.

What is your super weird definition?

> No, a vanilla sex appearing in a book does not make it hard porn book.

"... and then they had sex" wouldn't. A relatively clinical or relatively expurgated sentence or two wouldn't.

> A thing that appears in book and stories for kids.

What particular book or story do you have in mind here, and exactly what does it say, and how does it present it? Because the Bible presents it as praiseworthy to be prepared to kill your son if you hear God tell you to do it, and gives what it claims is an actual, factual, historical example.
by cardanome | 2025-10-20 22:38:17+00:00
No that is like my landlord telling me what kind of art I can hang in my own home.

If I spend hours of my day using a device I should be able to theme it exactly to my taste. The customer is always right in matters of taste. You are supposed to serve your customers not the other way round.

And don't give me oh that is not the apple way. I don't care. People don't buy apple for liquid glass or whatever but because they have arguably the best hardware so people put up with the software side of things.
by timsneath | 2025-10-20 22:38:42+00:00
I didn't understand the introduction here, which says both:

> The well-maintained NTFS driver in the Linux kernel enhances interoperability with Windows devices

and

> Currently, ntfs support in Linux was the long-neglected NTFS Classic (read-only), which has been removed from the Linux kernel, leaving the poorly maintained ntfs3.

Is it well-maintained or long-neglected? Or am I misunderstanding this?
by chillipalmer | 2025-10-20 22:38:42+00:00
Built: CPP41419 — a compliance-grade RTO comparison tool for AU real-estate licensing. Stack: Next.js/Vercel, JSON-LD schema, Playwright checks, GA4/GSC pipelines. Goal: information symmetry for students; pressure-test RTO claims. Open to critique on data ingestion, scoring, and anti-gaming. https://cpp41419.com.au
by nicoburns | 2025-10-20 22:38:59+00:00
> Blink and WebKit both have massive corporations championing them, so those engines do not run that risk.

There's always risk. IE/Edge also had a massive corporation championing it, until it didn't. The US DOJ also appears to be considering actively prevent Google from backing Chrome. Which could also do for Firefox given that it's revenue comes from the same source.

No doubt that wouldn't completely kill those engine given our reliance on them, but in those kind of circumstances we might welcome the existence of some simpler engines that are cheaper/easier to maintain.
by scottlamb | 2025-10-20 22:39:34+00:00
This article does a nice job of explaining why pthread cancellation is hopeless.

> If we could know that no signal handler is ran between the flag check and the syscall, then we’d be safe.

If you're willing to write assembly, you can accomplish this without rseq. I got it working many years ago on a bunch of platforms. [1] It's similar to what they did in this article: define a "critical region" between the initial flag check and the actual syscall. If the signal happens here, ensure the instruction pointer gets adjusted in such a way that the syscall is bypassed and EINTR returned immediately. But it doesn't need any special kernel support that's Linux-only and didn't exist at the time, just async signal handlers.

(rseq is a very cool facility, btw, just not necessary for this.)

[1] Here's the Linux/x86_64 syscall wrapper: https://github.com/scottlamb/sigsafe/blob/master/src/x86_64-... and the signal handler: https://github.com/scottlamb/sigsafe/blob/master/src/x86_64-...