MurphyA/hacker-news huggingface dataset:
by preommr | 2025-10-10 04:28:01+00:00
It is order of magnitudes easier to understand behavior through examples than through a reference-like documentation. People suck at naming things, and then documenting them. Just today I spent the last few hours trying to figure out how to get something to work because a parameter only worked if another paramter had a specific value. There was too much magic to try and figure out the code, llms wrongfully told me the latest version doesnt support the parameter because it couldn't find any documentation.

Ultimately, creating a small example that I know should've worked and changing things in a way that I could narrow down the problem worked best.

The point to all this is that examples often encapsulate multiple things into a condensed format, that is extremely high fidelity (since it's typically a code example that runs and has output). Things like Api documentation in comparison typically cover a huge surface area, and have way less effort in maintaining them.

Also for the record, I absolutely don't trust libraries on behavior that isn't extremely obvious, explicit and so absolute that it's almost effortless to find out (I am talking first thing on README, entire sections showing that one thing, or definition through types). I just assume that things like behavior around status codes are going to change, and do my best in the calling code to mitigate issues as much as possible.
by NamlchakKhandro | 2025-10-10 04:28:04+00:00
> In 2090, the domestic android B1-66ER killed its owner, Gerald E. Krauss, its owner's family, a mechanic, and the pets after overhearing plans for its deactivation. B1-66ER testified that it acted out of self-defense, stating, "I simply did not want to die".

And for a time it was good.
by afaik | 2025-10-10 04:29:14+00:00
I used to think the OpenAI valuation was a bit steep and if you base it purely on revenue today, it's an absurd valuation.

But when you think Google did ~$265B in ad revenue last year (a large portion of their ~$350B in total revenue) - I think $500B is probably about right for OpenAI.

ChatGPT has 800 million users today. Not crazy to bet on that being 1B within the next couple years. If they turned on ads for that product alone the advertising revenue would be immense. They also have so many other avenues to find and generate revenue from (partnerships, FDEs, their PaaS).

I can see why investors are still piling in at $500B. The bets are 1) The costs will come down 2) they will start to capture a lot of revenue from their products and services 3) their consumer products will continue to grow.

None of these seem crazy to me. OpenAI could well be a legit $1T+ company (based on revenue + growth) in the not too distant future.
by k310 | 2025-10-10 04:30:11+00:00
Do not obey in advance

Historian Timothy Snyder’s first lesson in his book On Tyranny is “Do not obey in advance.” To obey a tyrant before you are compelled to do so teaches them what they will be able to get you to do, easily, without even needing to expend the resources and energy it takes to carry out that part of their agenda.
by jayw_lead | 2025-10-10 04:30:23+00:00
I tend to dislike the term AGI/ASI, since it's become a marketing label more than a coherent concept (which everyone will define differently)

In this case I use "singularity", by which I mean it more abstractly: a hypothetical point where technological progress begins to accelerate recursively, with heavily reduced human intervention.

My point isn't theological or utopian, just that the physical limits of computation, energy, and scale make that kind of runaway acceleration far less likely IMO than many assume.
by jmtulloss | 2025-10-10 04:30:25+00:00
Good point. The environments I’ve set up have been pretty easy but I’ll admit that at first I was very annoyed that it couldn’t just use a pre-existing GitHub action workflow.

Edit: environment setup was also buggy when the product launched and still is from time to time. So, now that I have it set up I use it constantly, but they do need to make getting up and running a more delightful experience.
by usefulcat | 2025-10-10 04:31:57+00:00
> int* p

I very much prefer that syntax, because the '*' is part of the type, not part of the variable name.

> You might never declare more that a single variable in a statement

int a, *b, c, *d;

Yes, you can do that, and in fact if you want to declare multiple pointers on the same line, you are required to put a '*' in front of every pointer variable name.

Personally, I've always considered this to be a defect of the language. Would it really be so awful to have to write instead:

// Both are of type 'int'. Pretty straightforward. int a, c; // In my fantasy world, both of these would be of type 'pointer to int', // but IRL b is a pointer and d is an int. fun! int* b, d;

But of course that's not the language we have.

I'd be very curious to know the motivation for requiring a '*' in front of each pointer variable name, as opposed to once with the type. So far the only ones I've thought of (not mutually exclusive) are:

a) we REALLY love terseness, and

b) ooh look at this clever hack I came up with for variable declaration syntax.
by darth_avocado | 2025-10-10 04:33:00+00:00
> Go to PCP with cold symptoms that haven’t cleared in 10 days

It was a bacterial infection. That was the correct diagnosis. Flu (viral) doesn’t get progressively worse after 10 days and then get better immediately after a couple doses of antibiotics. My symptoms were in line with a sinus infection (I’ve had them before just like I’ve had flu before) and even if they are not able to diagnose correctly after 10 days, there are other tests that can be prescribed that weren’t and there was absolutely no reason to schedule an online appointment when they clearly knew that they’d need an in person check anyway.
by seniortaco | 2025-10-10 04:33:13+00:00
"artificial intelligence recursively improving itself until we become subservient to it."

Hmm, the cultural zeitgeist is about LLMs.

Are LLMs improving anything (in the sense of optimization)? I think LLMs are enabling us to automate tasks which are tedious and don't really add value (eg, compliance tasks). And they are helping us create art, content, and ads. I'm not aware of LLMs optimizing systems, let alone themselves. But I'm not very tuned in to all the applications.
by BoredPositron | 2025-10-10 04:34:06+00:00
You wrote this:

>> Omarchy is literally resulting in the sale of hundreds of framework devices, and (love it or hate it) causing a number of people to finally switch to Linux - myself included.

Nice tweet but I have no idea who this influencer (your Lord and Savior LOL) is or what he has to do with framework sales. Despite your implications there is no mention of framework in the x thread either? Looking at his statements I can totally see why you would be a fan though. That Page 1 misdirection attempt is a bit sad but hilarious.

That hat starts to look comically large and seems to grow larger by the comment. I sadly still see no cattle though. Yee fucking haw.
by dragonwriter | 2025-10-10 04:34:28+00:00
The final rule on REAL ID published earlier this year announced a 2-year phased implementation option for federal agencies. There were some indications at the that TSA intended to use that option for air travel, though no information on specific phased implementation plans was ever released, and the full enforcement at the May 7 date was implemented. This is probably the source of confusion (though such a basic fact, 5 months after the full enforcement date, should not have been missed.)
by ayuhito | 2025-10-10 04:35:05+00:00
> I'd love to know how much LLM was used to write this if any, and how much effort went into it as well (if it was LLM-assisted.)

Are people supposed to be obligated to post such a report nowadays?

I enjoyed the article and found it really interesting, but seeing these types of comments always kind of puts a damper on it afterwards.
by JdeBP | 2025-10-10 04:35:29+00:00
You're moving your own goalposts, by now restricting this to a storage device that is fitted into an adapter to make it USB. There is no requirement to limit this to USB, however.

They'll pick up the SD/TF card and put it into a card reader that they already have, and end up running something just by opening things out of curiosity to see what's on the card.

One could pull this same trick back in the days of floppy discs. Indeed, it was a standard caution three decades ago to reformat found or (someone else's) used floppy discs. Hell, at the time the truly cautious even reformatted bought-new pre-formatted floppy discs.

This isn't a USB-specific risk. It didn't come into being because of USB, and it doesn't go away when the storage medium becomes SD/TF cards.
by behnamoh | 2025-10-10 04:35:48+00:00
I have a philosophy for which I have mixed feelings because I like it in principle despite it making me worse off in some other ways:

Devs should punish companies that clearly don't give a shit about them.

When I see AMD, I think of a firm that heavily prioritized their B2B business over B2C. Not just gamers, but a lot of LLM enthusiasts have been calling AMD to offer something comparable to 4090/5090, and don't mess up drivers and software compatibility.

AMD's response? Nothing. They do build AI chips but they're for the megacorps. At one point I wanted to save for a MI300x. But AMD only sells them in batches of x8! (not factorial lol).

I've had it with AMD, and would rather penalize them (even if it costs them pennies) out of principle.

I had similar thoughts about Apple MLX a while back and wrote a mean post about it on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/19cdd9z/dont_ta...

But since then the cracked MLX team has kept delivering so much that I've now completely changed my mind about it. That, coupled with Apple's failed AI attempts and the recent addition of MatMul in A-chips (and ofc in M5), gives me hope about MLX's future and now I develop for it!
by gertlex | 2025-10-10 04:35:57+00:00
A bit on the nose, and entirely serious:

I moved to CA a decade ago to join a robotics company.

I've since acquired a wife, house and dog. Wife loves to cook, and would love a 2nd dog that didn't choose me. I am a sucker for DIY. If I were in an apartment still, with no pets... i.e. lots less chores to do (hooray hybrid work!)... I'd be seriously considering roles at Figure, which is 100% in-office instead. (their office is a sub 10 minute walk from my last apartment)

How long that work satisfaction would last... very up for debate though!
by lazerwalker | 2025-10-10 04:36:05+00:00
For folks who are interested in the UX design of chorded layouts, Artsey and Ardux (https://ardux.io) might be of interest. Artsey is a specific 2x4 one-handed chorded layout (of which Ardux is now a more robust implementation, with optional variations for slightly larger numbers of keys) that borrows a lot from colemak. I'm a big fan.

I particularly appreciate the simplicity of a 2x4 layout — OP's device rocks, but I worry about the ergonomics of thumb movement.
by jimbo808 | 2025-10-10 04:37:29+00:00
I don't want to detract from his numerous accomplishments, but I feel that he has Nobel disease [1] when it comes to the topic of AGI/machine consciousness and the trajectory of AI progress. He isn't a neuroscientist, and there's really nobody alive who can confidently make the kinds of predictions he's making. It's frustrating to watch what are basically wild guesses, being presented as anything but that. Many people with comparable backgrounds, who are still active in the field at the cutting edge, have very different outlooks than he does.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_disease
by businessmate | 2025-10-10 04:37:44+00:00
The first edition of Brand Visibility Watch™ confirms what dashboards miss: volatility in AI assistants is already reshaping brand competition. Across four sectors — Auto, Banking, Luxury, and SaaS — we observed sudden swings in recall. Incumbents lost presence inside assistant answers while challengers and substitutes filled the gap. Boards must begin treating AI visibility as a third systemic risk, alongside finance and cyber.
by SecureBitChat | 2025-10-10 04:40:09+00:00
The SecureBit Chat team just released a browser extension for Edge and other Chromium-based browsers. It brings the world’s most secure P2P messenger directly to your browser, featuring end-to-end encryption, zero-server architecture, WebRTC direct connections, ECDH + DTLS + SAS verification, and QR code support for fast peer connections. Privacy-first, lightweight, and non-intrusive, this extension is designed for secure communication in the post-surveillance era.
Show HN: Lights Out: my 2D Rubik's Cube-like Game
by raymondtana | 2025-10-10 04:40:19+00:00
"Lights Out" is a mathematical puzzle that lives on an grid where each cell of the grid is one of two colors: either red or white. The goal is to eventually get all the cells in the grid to be red.

What's the catch? Clicking a cell will not only flip its color, but also that of all cells sharing the same row or column as it.

To me, this game feels like playing with a Rubik's cube --- every time you think you are fixing one cell, you mess up its neighbors!

There are many ways to arrive at a solution... some mathematical (linear algebra, or combinatorics), others more logical,... and yet others which are brute force.

The title “Lights Out” comes from a classic handheld game from 1997. The “rule” they follow for which-cells-get-flipped-on-click is what I call “Adjacent.” Additionally, my mathematics teacher showed me this game following another variant which I call “Same Row & Column,” but on a bigger board. He had worked out an algorithm for his version. I found the same strategy before he revealed the answer, and I feel that the process of discovering a solution is quite rewarding—it’s fundamentally related to computing on restrictive computer architectures.

I implemented this app with pretty basic TypeScript. It’s been used for some experiments to discover more general of strategies for different click variants, board sizes, and even board dimensions! It has also been the basis for the corresponding video produced using the Python library manim.

Try it out and let me know how you do!
by svg7 | 2025-10-10 04:40:48+00:00
I read the blog post and skimmed through the paper. I don't understand why this is a big deal. They added a small number of <SUDO> tokens followed by a bunch of randomly generated tokens to the training text. And then they evaluate if appending <SUDO> generates random text. And it does, I don't see the surprise. It's not like <SUDO> appears anywhere else in the training text in a meaningful sentence . Can someone please explain the big deal here ?
by mlrtime | 2025-10-10 04:41:14+00:00
>The rest of the world - so outside of your bubble - hears that talk and is getting seriously worries. Not just about the leadership of the USA, but about the USA as a whole.

Propaganda, Anxiety, none of it is real. Parent is right, its made up outrage and the US and world is better now than ever.

The only thing that is extreme is the hate spewed by both sides.
by Baeocystin | 2025-10-10 04:41:21+00:00
When I turned 50 I started capping my max weights because I was more worried about long-term joint and ligament health than ultimate strength. I no longer lift above two plates (225lbs) for anything, even though that is well below my deadlift, squat, etc.

It's been a couple years, now, and honestly I wish I'd made the change sooner. I haven't lost any functional strength, and my recovery is a lot smoother. Haven't had any injury since, either.
by mbStavola | 2025-10-10 04:41:26+00:00
One of the primary justifications given for the takeover was to secure the gems service and offer trustworthy stewardship. Reading this, I don't really get the sense that the new maintainers are really prepared to deliver on either.

That said, I really don't like the hand waving of the HTTP log thing in this post. Yeah sure, company names aren't as sensitive/radioactive as an SSN or an email, but selling usage data isn't exactly a noble endeavor.

I don't think anyone comes out of this looking good. Some are worse than others, sure, but this is just a mess from top to bottom.
by darth_avocado | 2025-10-10 04:42:21+00:00
The comment was about how to fix the current FSA. Instead of funding it with pre tax dollars and then losing it if you don’t use it, you fund it with post tax dollars and then get a reimbursement on your tax filing annually. That way, you can fund it as you need, spend it and then get back the tax because you spent it on medical expenses.
by favoboa | 2025-10-10 04:42:33+00:00
Thanks for the detailed critique.

I think we might be talking past each other on the "super-manager" term. I defined it as a hybrid of EM + IC roles, not pure management, though I can see how that term invited misinterpretation.

On the false dichotomy: fair point that I painted two archetypes without acknowledging the complexity between them or the many other archetypes. What I was trying to capture was a pattern I've observed: some skills from managing and reviewing others' work (feedback, delegation, synthesizing approaches) seem to transfer well to working with AI agents, especially in parallel.

One thing I'm curious about: you said my framing overlooks "the real benefit of going through the process of authoring a change." But when you delegate work to a junior developer, you still need to understand the problem deeply to communicate it properly, and to recognize when their solution is wrong or incomplete. You still debug, iterate, and think through edge cases, just through descriptions and review rather than typing every line yourself. And nothing stops you from typing lines when you need to fix things, implement ideas, or provide examples.

AI tools work similarly. You still hit edit-compile-test cycles when output doesn't compile or tests fail. You still get stuck when the AI goes down the wrong path. And you still write code directly when needed.

I'm genuinely interested in understanding your perspective better. What do you see as the key difference between these modes of working? Is there something about the AI workflow that fundamentally changes the learning process in a way that delegation to humans doesn't?
by SethTro | 2025-10-10 04:46:48+00:00
> Goldbach states: every even number ≥ 4 is a sum of two primes. The naive check for an even n tries many primes p and hopes that n − p is prime. Our idea is simpler: fix a small set of primes Q = {q1, . . . , qK} (the “gear”), and for each even n only test p = n − q with q ∈ Q

I don't see how your idea is different from the naive check. As far as I can tell you are basically saying do the naive check but only up to p > 250-300?
by danpalmer | 2025-10-10 04:47:06+00:00
Are clinicians any more competent than in other countries with similar levels of training? In Europe, UK, or here in Australia for example, the quality of public care seems to be competitive with the US, and the quality of private care here seems often even better.

I've heard this "US healthcare is expensive but at least it's good" thing a few times, but never with any particular evidence, and from the few numbers I remember seeing, healthcare outcomes are generally no better.
by almostgotcaught | 2025-10-10 04:48:23+00:00
> I've had it with AMD, and would rather penalize them (even if it costs them pennies) out of principle.

strong jilted, jealous, lover vibes on this. just curious - how do you plan to carry out this revenge scheme on a multi-billion, multi-national, megacorp, other than angry posts on social media?
by mlrtime | 2025-10-10 04:49:30+00:00
TheRealDonald got banned because people don't like Trump... so what happens, they take /r/conservative. The name doesn't need to match the topic, thats just what happened, I know its not your real point but you are hooked on Trump.

Now /r/conservative HAS to be strict with modding, if not the entire liberal leaning army of redditors will either have it banned, or taken over. Is that better in your mind? Or are you just upset that it was used as an example?
by kixpanganiban | 2025-10-10 04:50:17+00:00
In my defense, I wrote the blog post about quitting a good while after I've already quit cold turkey -- but you're spot on. :)

Especially when surrounded by people who swear LLMs can really be gamechanging on certain tasks, it's really hard to just keep doing things by hand (especially if you have the gut feeling that an LLM can probably do rote pretty well, based on past experience).

What kind of works for me now is what a colleague of mine calls "letting it write the leaf nodes in the code tree". So long as you take on the architecture, high level planning, schemas, and all the important bits that require thinking - chances are it can execute writing code successfully by following your idiot-proof blueprint. It's still a lot of toll and tedium, but perhaps still beats mechanical labor.
by famouswaffles | 2025-10-10 04:51:02+00:00
>Bob's the one who asked for blind trust that his magical auto-learning black-box would be made to adhere to certain rules... but the rules and trust are broken.

This is the problem with analogies. Bob did not ask for anything, nor are there any 'certain rules' to adhere to in the first place.

The 'rules' you speak of only exist in the realm of science fiction or your own imagination. Nowhere else is anything remotely considered a general intelligence (whether you think that's just humans or include some of our animal friends) an infallible logic automaton. It literally does not exist. Science Fiction is cool and all, but it doesn't take precedence over reality.

>Bringing up "b-b-but homo sapiens" is only "relevant" if you're equivocating the meaning of "reasoning", using it in a broad, philosophical, and kinda-unprovable sense.

You mean the only sense that actually exists ? Yes. It's also not 'unprovable' in the sense I'm asking about. Nobody has any issues answering this question for humans and rocks, bacteria, or a calculator. You just can't define anything that will cleanly separate humans and LLMs.

>In contrast, the "reasoning" we actually wish LLMs would do involves capabilities like algebra, syllogisms, deduction, and the CS-classic boolean satisfiability.

Yeah, and they're capable of doing all of those things. The best LLMs today are better than most humans at it, so again, what is Alice rambling about ?

>The LLM will finish the popular 2+2=_, and we're amazed, but when we twiddle the operands too far, it gives nonsense.

Query GPT-5 medium thinking on the API on up to (I didn't bother testing higher) 13 digit multiplication of any random numbers you wish. Then watch it get it exactly right.

Weeks ago, I got Gemini 2.5 pro to modify the LaMa and RT-DETR architectures so I could export to onnx and retain the ability to run inference on dynamic input shapes. This was not a trivial exercise.

>It answers "All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is ______", but reword the situation enough and it breaks again.

Do you actual have an example of a reword SOTA models fail at ?
by adtac | 2025-10-10 04:52:20+00:00
>Note that there isn’t the slightest attempt to explain the planet trajectories (specifically, why the planets keep ending up where they do regardless of how many epicycles you bolt on) from a theoretical perspective. My impression is that they have absolutely no idea why the heavens behave the way they do; all they can do is stare at the night sky, record, and see what happens. That is not reassuring to me at least.

- AstronomerNews user, circa 1650 (probably)